I’m in two minds about this:

A major review of the military’s role in British society says that encouraging more state secondary school pupils to join the cadet corps would improve discipline among teenagers while helping to improve the public perception of the army, navy and air force.

Improve discipline among teenagers? If you think teenagers fighting in pubs is bad now, wait until they’ve had some military training. Pub brawling seems such a factor in army life, one wonders if they teach it in boot camp. Why do you think people are warned not to start trouble in pubs in Hereford?

The review was conducted by MP Quentin Davies who gave an example of loyalty and honour himself when he defected from the Tories to New Labour without calling a by-election.

Davies believe[s] the virtues of discipline, physical exercise and team spirit outweigh any concerns over the use of firearms.

Yes, Quentin, tell us about physical exercise, discipline and team spirit, do.

Davies wants secondary school pupils to receive basic military training as a means of developing greater affiliation with the armed forces.

That’s a redundant requirement when you think about it. New Labour, with its flagrant disregard for the armed forces - sending them to war without the proper kit, failing to look after them properly when they’re injured, botching their inquests when they’re killed - has done great things for ‘developing greater affiliation’ with the military.

Public support and sympathy for the military must be at an all time high. If only the government equivalents were. When the anti-military crowd are wringing their hands over the treatment of soldiers you know that no further pro-military propaganda is required.

Cadet training will have its advantages, mind. It’ll pinch off the flow of whining liberals within a generation. It’ll ease prison over-crowding as well. Getting young people to shoot foreigners abroad instead of Britons at home should take the burden off the criminal justice system.

As the solider says in Monty Python’s Meaning of Life:

Here is better than home, eh, sir? I mean, at home if you kill someone they arrest you, here they’ll give you a gun and show you what to do, sir. I mean, I killed fifteen of those buggers. Now, at home they’d hang me, here they’ll give me a fucking medal, sir.

It all makes perfect sense. We need to stamp out violence and gun crime on our streets by teaching kids about fighting and guns.

I never understood the thinking behind attempting to price people out of drinking. For example, Chancellor Alistair Darling in his recent budget put four pence on a pint of beer.

Now, a lot of people seem to be upset about this but I wonder how many of them stand at the bar thinking, ‘Hmmmm, it’s £2.54 for a pint now instead of £2.50. You know, I think I’ll leave it and get an early night’.

This morning, the Daily Mail are reporting that the government are looking to impose a minimum price on alcohol in supermarkets in another attempt to beat binge drinking.

Will it work? I’d argue the committed drinker will either downshift to a cheaper grog, brew his own or spend less money on other things to make sure he still gets his beer.

If the government were really serious about tackling problem drinking why aren’t they investigating the underlying causes of why a large section of the population look to getting shitfaced at every opportunity?

Probably because that would require an admission that life in general in Britain isn’t as rosey as painted in the nationalistic propaganda we still like to revel in. Some people get drunk because they like to. Some people get drunk because they feel they have to.

Gordon Brown is never going to stand in front of a camera and admit to an underlying misery, hopelessness and disenfranchisement that makes us reach for a drink. That would take some bottle.

The government’s Promoting Prosperity website for the Progressive Governance Summit is up with an introduction from the man himself:

‘By logging onto this website you have a chance to put forward your ideas on how to tackle some of the biggest challenges of our times. I urge you to add your voice to the debate. We are listening.’

Finally, a chance to be heard. A chance to speak. No more pissing in the wind or whistling in the dark.

Except.

When you click to go to the discussion page…

Oh dear. He is listening, honest. You’ll just have to shout.

(It should be noted that the Progressive Governance Summit is this weekend.)

Update 4/4: The site’s now down. Does anyone have the password?

In related news, Iain Dale does concentration camp jokes. That’s where Ken Livingstone went wrong when he called that Evening Standard reporter a concentration camp guard. If only he’d joked about the whole organisation being Nazis it would have been much funnier.

I think I’ve probably said this before somewhere but the most depressing thing about New Labour’s national identity monkeyshines isn’t just the implied authoritarian paternalism, but the sheer small time, low rent tinpottery of it all.

Read the rest

It seems to me that Lord Goldsmith’s idea about an oath of allegiance for school leavers summons up the spirit of the age as ushered in by New Labour. Namely, cheap talk and empty promises.

I ….. swear by Almighty God that I will be faithful and bear true allegiance to Her Majesty Queen Elizabeth, her heirs and successors, according to law. So help me God.

I’m making sure my kids believe in neither God nor Monarchy, so on a strictly rhetorical basis and if I’m honest, I’d have no problem with them making a pledge like this. You might as well ask them to swear by Mumm-ra the Ever-living to be faithful to Queen Galadriel of Lothlorien.

Come the day, they’ll gabble the words and be back outside bumming fags and consorting with unsuitable boys before the echo of their hollow vow has died away. And I doubt they’ll be the only ones.

Still, like rolling out ID cards to students, this will be a useful pilot scheme. We can then roll it out to the rest of the population. It’ll make for easy identification of dissidents and the politically-challenged in need of correction. Don’t want an ID card? You’re a trouble-maker. Don’t want to swear allegiance to the head of a family of pampered chancers? You’re a traitor.

I’ve been giving some thought as to what gives us a sense of belonging in Britain today (’patriotism’ doesn’t seem to have been mentioned in the course of this debate). Or, rather England and Wales, with Northern Ireland and Scotland being exempt from Goldsmith’s kite-flying. If you freeze Britain in a second of time, what catches the eye in that snapshot?

Is it our sanguine acceptance of war criminals as our leaders, their corruption and contempt? Is it our willingness to be banged roughly from behind by businessmen and not even expect to be paid for the pleasure? Is it our worship of topless models, lip-syncers and wife-beaters over writers, artists and scientists?

Is it out veneration of a ruling family who have earned their position via no more effort than the fortunate convergence of sperm and ovum? Is it our refusal to take care of the sick, the elderly and the disabled properly?

You see, I’ve nothing really against patriots as such. I just don’t like seeing them anywhere near the levers of power. It’s just that, if they love their country so much, why are they happy (or at least acquiescent) in seeing it languishing as a fifth-rate mediocrity? Us athiests, republicans and so-called fifth-columnists show more love for Britain.

Update: Lord Goldsmith speaks on Radion 4:

There has been a diminution in national pride.

Yes, thanks to the likes of you, you war-rubber-stamping bastard.

And get a hold of this:

John Humphreys: You could see a republican swearing an oath of allegiance to the institution that they want to get rid of?

Lord Goldsmith: Well, I don’t see why you shouldn’t do that.

I mean, what? What? This man is one of Britain’s foremost legal minds, for crying out loud. Another reason to be patriotic, I suppose, allowing verifiable idiots to run our legal system.

Is it any wonder that Iraq is a smoking ruin? Christ, was Lionel Hutz busy or something?

In the fight against youth crime, manifest yobbery, entrenched scallywaggery and incipient hooliganism, it seems there is a growing consensus that we have to out-tough the toughs.

There’s two separate pieces of evidence to back this up this morning. The Sun have recruited prizefighter Ricky Hatton to their ‘SUN JUSTICE’ campaign. Because a man who gets punched in the head for a living is just the kind of figure you need to consult on the complex issues that surround youth crime.

‘I don’t think a slap on the wrist is enough,’ is Ricky’s considered opinion. I thought punishments for assault, murder etc were stiffer than that but Ricky must know better, he’s in The Sun and everything. Thanks, Ricky. Let’s keep beating the shit out of another human being in the ring where it belongs, eh?

Next up is the Centre for Policy Studies who suggest ‘former soldiers should be retrained as teachers and used to bring military style discipline to tough inner city schools’. Somebody obviously watched Dangerous Minds with Michelle Pfeiffer and thought, ‘That’s a good idea’.

A report by think tanks says the fact that ex-soldiers had a macho image could help engender respect - particularly among boys.

So how does this work then? Does sniper turned geography teacher Mr Deadeye regale morning assembly with tales of how he once slotted a towelhead from two klicks away? It remains unclear how ex-soldiers will be more equipped to enforce discipline any better than any other teacher. Unless the Department of Education employs those lads who made a greasy puddle of Baha Mousa and give them carte blanche on some kind school-based covert op.

They could become a kind of latter-day bogieman, I suppose - ‘behave yourself or the boys from the Duke of Lancaster regiment will get you’. It’d be cheaper than organising a full-blown Battle Royale in any case.

Don’t get me wrong, I’m not against soldiers entering the teaching profession. I just wonder if an ability to strut about the place looking hard would be enough. I’d argue you’re just introducing an additional challenge for unruly pupils to escalate their bombardment. Imagine the sense of achievement they’d feel by reducing an ex-marine to tears.

Instead of responding to, and trying to outdo, the machismo of Johnny Knobhead and his spotty mates, we should be preying on it. Put pussification on the national curriculum. Recruit former drag artists as teachers. Make the boys in the class wear filly aprons in Home Economics, take photos of them and put the pictures on the school website.

Get ‘Four Poofs and a Piano’ to teach music. Make So Macho by Sinita the official school song and enforce its singing before registration every day. Don’t chase truants, instead start disgusting but plausible rumours about them in their absence. Put a truant’s mobile number along with a promise of lewd acts on the boys’ toilet wall. No one will dare skip school again.

Make the boys do games in their pants. Employ a flamboyant, overly-energetic gay man as the games teacher who makes lewd jokes about soap when his class are taking a shower. Start compulsory drama classes and make the first production a Shakespeare play performed in the traditional style where all the female parts must be played by males. Make the hardest nut play Juliet. With passion.

Slowly reduce the humiliation and sexual unease as behaviour improves. I’d put good money on the Ofsted inspections being spectacular.

Update: Jamie:

My uncle was thirty years in the army (admittedly in the Army Education Corps), rising to major at retirement rank, then went off to teach in a not too bad school… where the kids made fucking mincemeat out of him.

Some people really need to get out more:

Government plans to give the home secretary powers to remove juries from some inquests are “astonishing”, an influential group of MPs says.

A little-noticed clause in the Counter Terrorism Bill would also enable the home secretary to change the coroner if deemed to be in the national interest.

‘Astonishing’? Have they not been reading the papers since September 12 2001? I imagine less-sensitive and easily startled souls greeted this news with merely another weary shake of the head.

That these MPs should astonished is the astonishing bit. I mean, is there a legal process that government ministers aren’t able to subvert on a whim? Habeas Corpus, corruption inquiries, the Nuremberg Principles. Rules were made to be broken after all, I suppose.

Why the Home Secretary is taking a political hit over this is anybody’s guess. I suppose somebody somewhere is still impressed by such inane posturing. It’s a show of strength and mock heroic cloak and dagger bullshit for someone or other.

The thing is, there’s an easier way of doing it than explicitly derailing the legal process. Just carry on what they’re doing already - underfunding the inquest system to such an extent that it grinds to a halt. It hardly ever gets reported on and nobody gives a stuff apart from a few greiving relatives and they’re all against The War Against Terror anyway. Sorted.

New Labour’s one woman ideas machine, Hazel Blears comes up with another cracker - information packs for the ill-mannered dusky hordes flocking to our shores. She’d like to teach the world to queue in perfect harmony:

The guidance is intended to illustrate the information local authorities could include such as details on how to access local provision like English language classes, waste and recycling services and employment services; practical information on rights and responsibilities including national laws and rules around paying taxes alongside background on social norms such not littering, not spitting and queuing in shops.

Sounds great. It’s like a finishing school in patronising paper form. When’s it being rolled out to the indigenous population then? The pack could also include chapters about not letting your dog shit in the street and not hitting your kids in Tesco. Thinking twice about your choice of tattoo. When it’s acceptable to use depleted uranium munitions. When you think about it, the bloody thing’s going to be six inches thick.

Like ID cards, surely this information pack is just an initial pilot scheme with immigrants being the guinea pigs. The plan must be to have compulsory good manners for everybody in Britain by 2012 or so, please? Then once we’ve cracked it at home, we can start exporting our good manners to foreign markets. It’ll kick start a whole new knowledge-based economy. Imagine Gordon Brown declaiming that Britain is at the forefront of the battle against beastliness.

Let’s bomb Helmand Province with copies of ‘The Blears Complete Miscellany of Refined Deportment’. The whole shooting match will be all over in a week.

The government’s plans for super ‘Titan’ jails holding up to 2,500 prisoners haven’t gone down well, it seems. Ann Owers, Chief Inspector of Prisons, said:

[I]f we look across the Channel we see the French who built one of these kinds of prisons in the 1980s and have never done so again.

Jack Straw dithered, Gordon Brown didn’t.

It occurs to me that the next step would be to wall in a town like they do in Escape From New York. Look out for it being announced soon as the parties try to outdo each other in the run up to the next general election.

One of the concerns about Titan jails is that all the money is spent on building the things and funding for other programmes could be lost. Programmes to cut the unbelievably high levels of re-offending for example.

In his interview on Radio 4 the other morning, Justice Minister Jack Straw had this to say (8 minutes 30 seconds in) about re-offending:

There’s a serious problem about prisoners who are sent to prison for less than 12 months because they’re not given the supervision they need and we wan to try and change that when we’ve got the resources.

Well, it seems, after 48 hours of will-they-won’t headlines about Titan jails, he’s found the resources:

The justice secretary has said fresh prison reforms will cut reoffending rates, reduce drug use in jails and give more skills to offenders.

Very good, and a welcome and useful sop to liberals and Chief Inspectors of Prisons everywhere. In his written statement to Parliament, Straw says:

The announcements I am making today signal a major drive to overcome some of the barriers to the rehabilitation of offenders. Our primary aim in doing so is further to aid the work we are already doing on cutting reoffending. These measures are focused on tackling drug use among offenders and providing opportunities for offenders to learn the new skills which might help them to a life away from crime outside prison.

Like I said, all very welcome. There’s no mention if prisoner serving less than 12 months will be included in the programmes, or indeed, who will be included specifically.

It’s also odd that Straw didn’t brag about these new resources and measures on the radio when he was being slapped about by John Humphreys on the subject of re-offending rates. Was he anxious not to alienate the hang ‘em/flog ‘em mob that forms so large a slice of New Labour’s constituency these days? Or is the ink on this idea still wet?

Let’s hope this isn’t a simple reannouncement of an existing policy (it wouldn’t be the first time under this lot). Let’s also hope that Straw’s ‘fresh’ prison reforms are different and more successful than ones announced in the past.

So yes, good idea Jack. Well done. But that’s all it is at this stage, an idea. And it’s a shame you slipped this out in a written statement to Parliament when a brave man, proud of his new idea, would have toured the radio and television studios boasting of how this new measure is going to make the country safer, save the taxpayer a bundle and fire the erogeoneous zones of liberals. Done right, this is a crowd-pleaser and no mistake.

But then, Jack’s be-nimble approach is only to be expected when policy on such emotive issues has to be formulated with one eye on the tabloid press. It wouldn’t do for a Justice Minister to flash a soft heart at those looking for red meat.

Update: How are current rehabilitation services and access to them going? Erm…

Jack Straw acted unlawfully by failing to provide some prisoners with access to courses to show they were safe for release, appeal judges have ruled.

The Court of Appeal said because the justice secretary had not given those on indeterminate sentences such access, their human rights were violated.

Labour MP Tom Watson’s been promoted to the Cabinet Office in the recent reshuffle. He has some responsibility for government technology projects and is canvassing for ideas on his blog. Who knows if he’ll listen but the forum’s there, on the record.

If it were down to me I’d pretty much scrap nearly all government websites and start again. The Hansard site, for instance, is a disgrace, considering it’s the central repository for the record of our democracy. Have you tried using its advance search feature? It’s unbelievably awful and next to useless. TheyWorkForYou shows how it should be done.

In the meantime, there are plenty of tweaks that the existing sites could be given to at least give the visitor a little more confidence. At the minute, as I said in a piece for Liberal Conspiracy a little while back, the casual browser is very likely being put off at the outset and the serious information seeker needs tenacity bordering on monomania.

Not good for a government paying lip service to greater public engagement in the political process.

The cabinet will begin by being weighed and photographed in underwear for one of those cruelly lit “before” photos, which will be placed on a website. There must be video clips, naturally, so perhaps Trinny and Susannah and their satanic 360-degree mirror could be drafted in at this stage. “Come on Des, you’ve got great boobs, but that neck bulge must be swaddled at all times!” All ministers will submit to a diet and exercise regime, and keep meticulous food diaries. Each week everything they have consumed will be laid out on a trestle table, and Gillian McKeith drafted in to sneer at it. “Oh Jacqui, you disgust me, you really do. How can you be snacking on a kebab at 5pm? Why not try my reasonably priced seed munch?”

Read the rest

You know, I’m dead keen on improving political engagement, it’s just that I’m not sure this is the way to go about it:

Why does he keep smiling, seemingly at random? Why don’t the old ways of engaging with people - public speeches, leaflets, and going to doors and talking to people - work any more? And isn’t that the sound of someone shooting themselves at the 55 second mark?

Right here:

Millions of pounds of taxpayers’ money is being wasted by officials who overpay private firms to do the simplest tasks like installing a new electric socket or replacing a lock, the National Audit Office reveals today.

An investigation into £180m of public money spent renegotiating private finance initiative contracts to build and run hospitals, schools, prisons and courts in 2006 reveals 10-fold differences in payments for similar tasks. With PFI being Gordon Brown’s favourite way to fund new public projects - it now accounts for £44bn of public spending - the NAO is calling for much tighter controls over any changes to the contracts, which often run for 30 years or more.

The report cites Royal Blackburn Hospital as the best and worst example of saving and wasting public money. It qualifies for the cheapest and most expensive cost for replacing a key - £4.26 to £47.48. It also qualifies for the most expensive bill to fit a data point - £398.30 - and the most expensive lock change - £486.54. The cheapest lock fitting was in Calderdale Royal Hospital in Halifax at £30.81. The cost of supplying and fitting electric sockets varied from £302.30 in schools in the Wirral to £30.81 in schools in Kirklees.

‘We spend more on cows than the poor.’[1]

[1]Gordon Brown

Has anybody else read this comment piece in the Guardian by Andy Burnham, chief secretary to the Treasury and former ID card salesman?

He likes his metaphors and uses them liberally. He writes of ‘a hard road’, ‘tinkering with the wiring’ and ‘the green light’. I’m very fond of metaphors as well. Thinking up new ones is one of the vestigial pleasures of blogging. Here’s one.

I’ve skated up and down Burnham’s article several times now but I can’t see through the ice to his underlying meaning. I’ve struck the permafrost prose forcefully but it’s proving impenetrable.

I suspect the piece is couched in so many euphemisms that Burnham is addressing a very esoteric audience indeed, one party to forbidden knowledge. I’ve spotted ‘public sector reform’ and ‘the voluntary sector’ at least. I’ve yet to pin down their true meanings but I doubt Burnham could give a pithy - or honest - summation either.

When Burnham exhorts ‘commissioners of local services’ not to ‘wait for ever for an “evidence base”‘, it occurs to me that he’s advocating an even more cavalier use of public money. Public spending based on hunches and ‘common sense’*. But then I think, this government? Nah.

So, who is this piece directed at and what does it mean?

* ‘…a slogan of anti-intellectual conservatism’ (Steven Poole).

Sunday just keeps getting better and better for Muslims:

In an attempt to stop young Muslims being seduced by Al-Qaeda, women will be sent on training courses designed for FTSE 100 managers to give them the skills and confidence to confront fanatics.

(The comments under this news story are a joy, by the way.)

You’ll never guess whose ideas this is. Go on, have a guess. Oh, all right then…

Amid fears that extremists are becoming more sophisticated in their recruitment, Hazel Blears, the communities secretary, has concluded that a key way to stop extremist ideas further permeating Muslim communities is to give “the silent majority” a stronger voice.

It’s an excellent idea, fully thought through - naturally - and right up there with chain gang uniforms and ethnic rebranding. Although the article fails to mention it, no doubt there will first be sessions for those Muslim men reluctant to let their wives, sisters and daughters attend these courses with ‘business leaders and top athletes’.

So why Muslim women? Well, the squeakiest wheel gets the grease, as they say. And Muslims are the squeakiest of all wheels when you’re a weakening government with a right-wing vote to court.

The thing is, the groaning machinery of UK Plc has so many, many squeaky wheels. So, I’m sure we can be confident that, once this pilot is deemed successful, it will be rolled out to the rest of Britain’s women:

In an attempt to stop young men being seduced by violence, women will be sent on training courses designed for FTSE 100 managers to give them the skills and confidence to confront wife-beaters.

The possibilities are endless…

In an attempt to stop young men being seduced by alcohol, women will be sent on training courses designed for FTSE 100 managers to give them the skills and confidence to confront public drunkenness.

And how about…

In an attempt to stop young men being seduced by speeding, women will be sent on training courses designed for FTSE 100 managers to give them the skills and confidence to confront Jeremy Clarkson.

What better way to combat the pernicious, evil multiculturalism that Michael Nazir-Ali, Bishop of Rochester and many others say threatens to sweep us all away on a tide of hatred? We don’t want to entrench multicultural attitudes by exclusively singling out Muslim women. Let’s spread this horseshit around some.

Last week I wrote this piece for Liberal Conspiracy about how government websites aren’t exactly built to facilitate the new era of positive political engagement with the public we’re told our masters want.

Specifically, I highlighted Lord Goldsmith’s citizenship review, it’s call for the views of the public, and how if you don’t have the resources to print the review’s PDF pamphlets from the website, you are asked to contact the review team.

So, I did. On November 6. I asked how I obtain a hard copy of the pamphlet ‘The Future of Citizenship Ceremonies‘.

Still no reply a week later.

(Cross-posted at Liberal Conspiracy)

For teachers, pupils and parents at five successful schools across the length of England, the news that Gordon Brown was to single them out by name in his first major education speech was a welcome recognition of their dedication and hard work.

Local newspaper headlines on the morning of the speech last Wednesday suggested that the Prime Minister was to praise these institutions as beacons of excellence whose initiatives and ideas should be replicated across the education world.

But today The Times can reveal that Mr Brown never praised the schools in the speech and that at least five local communities may have been the victims of a sophisticated government spin operation.

read the rest

(via Political Betting)

Cor, look at Gordon, our great nation’s flag resplendent behind him as he looks towards the broad horizons of the future.

The flag in these instances, is the ultimate rhetorical weapon. For Gordon, the flag is like the only sand-free and dry towel on the beach. He’s ripped it from the hands of that thick-necked gentleman with the disturbing tattoos and he’s wrapping himself in it so nobody else can have it. To keep it safe and him warm.

As he begins this new chapter in ‘British’ liberty (as opposed that filthy foreign liberty) in the broad, non-specific strokes of a truly great leader, let us see what a newly liberated Britain holds in store for us. Fifty-six days detention without trial. ID cards. Four and a half million people on the DNA database. What could be more British than that?

Of course, part of the point of Gordon writing a new chapter in ‘British’ liberty is so that all these ideas can be incorporated into our way of life. Soon, saying ‘as British as being fined for leaving the house without your ID card’ will be as much a cliche as ‘as British as fish and chips’. Occam’s Razor, experience and weary cynicism all suggest that those with the clearest views of what constitutes liberty will be kept the furthest away from the debate.

For a process that claims to be seeking a reinvigoration of British politics, it seems remarkably exclusive. Take, for instance, the green paper ‘The Governance of Britain’, the consultation document that outlines the government’s position. It’s available online in a 63 page PDF document or in print from the parliamentary stationery office at a charge of £13.50 (’This publication is printed to order in black and white - colour diagrams may not be reproduced well.’).

How many people do you think - if they even have the resources to do so - will print it off and read it let alone go out and buy the thing? Or are even aware the thing exists. The cynic in me says that this could very well be the plan. Where will be the more diverse voices that might otherwise dilute vested interest and decisions that may or may not have been already made on this issue by the government? What about the pensioner with decades of experience, the teenager with those years ahead, and the thousands in between who know that something needs fixing and are looking for a way to express that?

We’re attempting to usher in a new age of British politics using the old, failed methods. Trying to engage by using the unengaging. Newly fangled citizen juries already have the smell of New Labour orchestration about them and they seems to be the only new tool in the box. Is it beyond a television production company to package this in an interactive prime time television series? It can be done in a serious manner away from talent shows. This is vital stuff and should be reaching as many people as possible. You’ll have to forgive me if I sense a fix in the making.

Who says this government is lacking in new ideas? Here’s a stunning piece of innovative thinking from the Prime Minister on the subject of the much-hated ID card scheme.

[T]he PM was concerned enough about introducing such a huge multi-billion pound scheme to insist that the technology must work before it is introduced.

Sound thinking and it’s only taken ten years of a Labour government to come up with the plan. Makes you wonder if government ministers have been weeing before undoing their flies all this time as well.

This new initiative, however, is what’s known in the trade as putting the cart after the horse. And shutting the gate before the horse has bolted. It’s a tried and tested part of everyday life, making sure things work before you use them, else we’d still be living in caves or extinct. But it’s a new and bold step apparently in the development of government computer systems.

It does, however, prompt this thought. We’re up to our necks in schemes has the PM been unconcerned enough about introducing to not insist that the technology must work before it is introduced. Sure, some brave mavericks have taken risks in the furtherance of human understanding but at least they were only risking their own necks. And the likes of Orville and Wilbur Wright didn’t take the attitude of, ’sod it, it’s only got one wing but let’s try it anyway’.

Still no word on when Gordon Brown is going to get Aung San Suu Kyi out of jail, him being so admiring of her courage and everything during his Labour Party leadership bid:

For me, Suu Kyi defines the meaning of courage. Once courage was seen chiefly as a battlefield virtue. In most accounts the emphasis is on the physical - physical risk, physical vulnerability or physical triumph. It has been seen as an almost exclusively male, physical attribute: courage as daring and bravado, even recklessness; indeed, in many languages, the word for courage is derived from the word for ‘man’. But Suu Kyi represents the power not of the powerful but of the powerless: a woman, a prisoner of conscience up against a state with one of the worst human-rights violation records in the world; a country of only 20 million people with 1,000 political prisoners, 500,000 political refugees, children as young as four in prison, and poets and journalists tortured just for speaking out.

So what, if anything is being done, by our doughty defender of human rights, bravely speaking out in print, and his government? According to the Burma Campaign UK (via Ten Per Cent), not an awful lot:

With tight restrictions inside the country, organisations and projects promoting human rights and democracy have to be based in exile, and work through underground networks in Burma. Despite the International Development Committee reccomending funding for these organisations, D[epartment] f[or] I[nternational] D[evelopment] is still refusing to fund such projects. Many of these organisations played a crucial role in getting news and images out of Burma during the recent protests and crackdown.

‘This is not joined up government,’ said Mark Farmaner. ‘The government isn’t putting its money where its mouth is. The Prime Minister and Foreign Secretary have been leading the international community in supporting Burma’s democrats, but DFID seems to be going in a different direction, only prepared to deliver aid to people and projects that the Burmese dictatorship agrees to.’

Still, look at it this way, Aung San Suu Kyi and Burma might be no closer to freedom after 120 days of her great admirer being in power, but at least they’re no further from it either. And isn’t that the very essence of our courageous Prime Minister? No boom, no bust, just steady-as-she-goes. Sometimes it takes courage to do absolutely sod all.

It’s been 90 days since Gordon Brown became Prime Minister, and over 100 since he captured her in print and selflessly brought her plight to a wider audience.

But there’s still no word on how Gordon plans to spring Aung San Suu Kyi from her less metaphorical prison. Maybe it’s his October Surprise to woo the activists after he’s called the election.

Good to see David Cameron running with the Blair baton: every time it gets tough at home, he jumps on a plane and sods off abroad.

The death of a significant figure such as a pope or a former prime minister, or a major sporting occasion, provides good cover. The last day of parliament before recess can be an excellent opportunity to slip out an unfortunate statistic or embarrassing report. Then there’s the “late on Fridays” trick, when political journalists are desperate to get home. It doesn’t always work, as Gordon Brown discovered last month when the Treasury released details of his 1997 decision to launch a £5bn-a-year raid on pension funds on a Friday evening. But who knows how many times it has worked? The public certainly doesn’t.

So imagine what ministers could do if they had a whole month or more in which to bury bad news.

read the rest

One’s a massively over-rated show-off, seemingly willing to do anything to recoup their previous, mystifyingly huge, popularity. And don’t get me started on that Tony Blair either.

To be taken on an empty stomach.

Beau has more.

‘Come in and sit down, Mr Britain,’ the doctor said sympathetically. ‘What can I do for you today?’

‘Well…’ Mr Britain began and proceeded to list his ailments.

It’s true what they say, the doctor thought as he listened, getting old is a cruel and miserable business. He had many elderly patients, but whenever one of them sadly admonished him with ‘don’t ever get old, doctor’, it would never fail to chill his heart by another degree of disquiet.

Just look at old Mr Britain, for example. He was a small, still dapper man, despite the air of a slight threadbareness about him. He’d been a prize fighter in his day, punching above his weight, and there was hardly anywhere in the world he hadn’t visited. He’d done it all. But now the trophies were long dusty and the memories sepia.

‘…and then there’s sex, doctor,’ said the old man.

‘I’m sorry?’ said the doctor, startled from his thoughts.

‘You know,’ said Mr Britain, without a hint of embarrassment. ‘Fucking.’

Here we go again, the doctor thought. The only way to deal with Mr Britain when he was in this mood was to be as equally brazen.

‘Fucking,’ replied the doctor, evenly. ‘We’ve been through this before, haven’t we, Mr Britain. You might have given that German woman a good seeing to but that was a long time ago now, wasn’t it?’

‘Well, yes…’ said the old man, his voice trailing off. He knew what was coming next.

‘The only other woman I can recall you expressing an interest in fucking was that Russian lady and the last time you mentioned her was in about 1989. And then it was all about some bizarre threesome with your American friend. I seem to recall the poor Russian woman had some kind of breakdown. Fell to pieces, you could say.’

‘But this Trident you have me on,’ said Britain, ‘it’s helped my performance up until now but I’m not sure it’s working any more. Haven’t you got anything else?’

‘Well, there is a new version in development. Mr Britain. But to be frank with you, if I were to prescribe it to you, who do you have to fuck with? And please don’t say those Middle Eastern ladies you say you’ve been chasing all over the place.’

‘Well, you never know when you might meet somebody,’ Mr Britain said hopefully.

‘I’m very sorry, Mr Britain.’ said the doctor, ‘Don’t you think your Casanova days are behind you? And you have other conditions that require more urgent treatment. What about your violent mood swings and your terrible diet?’

Mr Britain clenched his fists and closed his eyes.

Elsewhere, the sun was setting.

(First published in this week’s edition of The Friday Thing. Go and subscribe, it’s really good.)