Peerless

"I regret what I’ve done and shall be seeking to make amends by speaking to the accountants.” - Lord Clarke of Hampstead.

The Chancellor might be able to recommend one. If not, ask Saint Dennis of Skinner.

GUARDIAN EXCLUSIVE: Bear shit found in woods - Cameron terrified.

The Guardian's behaviour is exactly on schedule, just as predicted. Sweet, really.

Labour is living on the eve of destruction and Cameron is going to be Prime Minister in a matter of months - possibly weeks.

All stops must be pulled out, every stone turned over, in the desperate search for something - anything - to avert the vast Tory majority which is solidifying before their burning eyes despite all the dirt-digging, the hurling of foul imprecations and even the flaming sacrifice to the electoral gods of several Labour MPs.

Aiee! Aiee! O dear Lord of all the Pollys! Sweet Mother Gaia! O all ye dark spirits of the political wasteland! Will you not come to our aid before it is too late, before all is lost? Do you not see? Gordon has lead us all to perdition! The end is nigh! The ghosts of Peel, Churchill and Thatcher are arisen! The dread Tories are riding back with their hero, the glorious Young David, at their head! O, Numi! Have you abandoned us? Is there to be no mercy? Will you not inspire us before it is too late?

Waah! Got it! O thank you, thank you, thank you!

Europe! A Europhile split!

Hold the front page, girls! Dig out those old headlines!

Sigh. And who do they turn up? Well, let's see now. No laughing at the back.

• Three retired European Commissioners from the Thatcher/Major era and before, men for whom the Grauniad had nothing but bitter contempt when they were in office, all of whom are in receipt of substantial EU pensions but only if they continue to advocate the EU and all its works without exception or demur.

• Two former FO mandarins whose entire careers were devoted to forging ever-closer Union regardless of changes of Britain's elected government, from anti-EU Labour through pro-EU Labour through pro-EU Tory to anti-EU Tory. Sir Humphrey and friends were always pro-EU and sod the electorate. True Europeans.

• John Major's Europe Minister, long out of politics. Bet you can't remember his name.

Impressive, what? Cameron must be shaking. With laughter. Well, I am.

I am already working on the music list for the Castle Prodicus General Election Night Party. The Tannheuser overture and Roll Out The Barrel spring to mind. Happy Days Are Here Again? The Ride of the Valkyrie? This will be fun.

Next job, the music list for the Guardian's GE Night party. Don't It Make My Brown Eyes Blue? Polly Put The Kettle On doesn't seem right somehow. All Over Now might work... Road To Hell... Needs work.

Spanish practices - part 4

Ever since Moscow's recruiting sergeants duped some bards into joining Stalin’s foreign legion in 1930s Spain, the Left has been keen to make its face attractive and disarming. The stupid, the hate-filled, the failures, the inadequate, the inveterate bandwagon joiners and the cynical (who will apply for jobs as camp guards when the time comes) have been delighted to join up and help.

It’s paid off for a quite a few of them. They have become quite rich which, amusingly, may give them a bit of an image problem when their Blood Red Revolution finally comes. If it does. Some of them are quietly postponing it so that they may enjoy a quiet and comfortable retirement. Let the next generation take up the cudgels...

The Left offers you both entertainment and fellowship (‘comradeship’) with Romantics like Working Class Bloke-in-Chief and Everyman-Songster Billy Bragg, witty turns like Eddie Izzard, very funny hate-merchants like Jeremy Hardy and Poet in Residence at both the BBC and Chateau Scargill, Ian Macmillan. At the drop of a hat, any of them will song you a song about the Spanish Civil War along the lines of that unbelievable Times leader.

The Left (and now the Times) offers you the virtuous glow of feeling benevolent alongside ‘humanitarians’ like incompetent failure (and rich) Jimmy Carter, and in our own country the ridiculous (and rich) Monbiot, the gross (and rich) tribune Prescott, and those crowning glories of the British Left, the (rich) Kinnocks, now ennobled despite devoting their whole lives to enriching themselves through inflicting their opinions on you at your expense and now millionaire pensioners, thanks to you.

Most egregious of the lot is that vast watermelon, the (exceedingly rich) Al ‘Convenient Untruth’ Gore. He carries on collecting box office takings for corrupting global politics despite knowing that his proposition is a confection of lies and bent data; despite knowing that the past century has seen less global warming than the three before it and that the world has cooled since coal-and-oil-based industrialisation. But why spoil The Plan with facts?

‘That is just a blip. Whatever the facts, I and my associates WILL control you. We are adaptable. We will continuously amend the terms of our proposition to ensure our ascendancy. We no longer say ‘global warming’. The approved term is now ‘climate change’. You didn't notice that, fools? Good. You were not supposed to.

We are not worried about scientific fact because you are too ignorant to use it against us, and anyway we are dismissing from their posts all scientists who challenge us. The approved term for these Fascists is Climate Change Deniers. They are to being denounced and eliminated wherever they are, if they dare to speak against us.

Soon, there will be no objective science which can undermine our mission to control you.

Whether you like it or not, we are now taking control of the politics of every nation on the planet. You will be forced to hand over to our people whatever we demand from your earnings, whenever we say so. You will have no choice. We are the masters now. Democracy? Fuck you and fuck your pathetic definition of democracy. It is We who will say what democracy is. We are the new democracy.

Now get out of our way.’

Some of the Left’s greatest murderers started life as your friendly ‘neighbourhood workers’ aka ‘community organisers’ aka agitprop cadres. I don't know that he has actually murdered anyone, but the agitprop leader par excellence must be Danny Cohn-Bendit, the 'hero' of Paris 1968 and leader of the Greens in the European Parliament. He is the fighter for your democracy who, standing in the Presidential palace in Prague, snarled into the face of the elected Czech President, then the President of the soi-disant democratic European Union: ‘We don’t care what you think! Your opinion does not count!'

President Klaus is not of the Left and therefore, of course, is a ‘Fascist’. The Enemy. Worse, he challenges the new Red-Green Marxist religion of climate change and is therefore worse than a Holocaust denier. Cohn-Bendit, on the other hand, is a garlanded servant of Democracy as defined by the Left.

Prior to the launch of the compulsory New Druidism, Communist leaders and foot soldiers used to start their careers by cultivating a reputation for solidarity (ha) with normal people like you and me around the neighbourhood. Jokes in the pub and all that. Now, in the age of You Tube and 24 hour TV, the stupid, lazy and otherwise unemployable go into politics (Prescott, Brown, Jacquboot) while the smartest of them become famous propagandists for Leftist thinking on TV as well-loved comedians, performance poets, singers, novelists...

Well, lookee here - we’re back at the Spanish Civil War. All that's changed since 1930 is that the Left has discovered Gaia and decided to pimp her as their latest pin-up girl. Olá!

Spanish practices - part 3

By their calculated, mendacious appropriation and inversion of the meaning of words like 'democracy' and 'freedom' and their equally mendacious and facile use of the condemnation ‘Fascist’ of all who oppose them, the Left, even the most seemingly innocent and charming among them, perpetuate the sort of thinking which led to the vileness of the 1930s betrayal of both democracy and freedom in Spain and (earlier and later) elsewhere. The dishonest use of language which is cultivated and preserved by the modern Left begins with ‘fairness’. Then ‘reform’, which morphs so easily into ‘revolution’ and ends with ‘denunciation’ and ‘elimination’. Such language when adopted in common coin shapes public debate and thought, eliminating alternative and opposing ideas even before they are fully formed. The Communist progression through its arsenal of weapons, from the language of 'fairness' and 'democracy' to fire and the bayonet, was seen in all its gory, heartless reality in 1930s Spain. Beware. The story of Spain in the 1930s, were we allowed by the Left establishment which controls our education and our public discourse to acknowledge it, would demonstrate how the possibility of ‘bloody (sic) revolution’ is an ever-present danger and can happen in the most unlikely places, even perhaps on the peaceful streets of democratic nations like Britain. All that is needed is for people to fail to notice the twisting of their own language. They find themselves using it in new ways, with different definitions, until they unconsciously and automatically accept the inversion of meaning and therefore of truth by those in control. Read, slowly and carefully, a Gordon Brown Budget Speech to see the twisting of language so characteristic of the Left. Sometimes even Brown does not know he is doing it, it is so ingrained in this PhD historian of the Left. Eventually, people will accept the Left’s calculated twisting of words and will forget what their own words originally meant. When the dangers are finally clear and present they will find that their words have died and they have no others with which to oppose the bloody revolutionaries. They will already have elected them as their warriors for ‘fairness’ and ‘reform’ and there is no going back. (Communist democracy: one man, one vote, once.) The most striking present-day example of this is Castro’s Cuba, where 'poverty' means 'dignity', 'isolated' means 'liberated' and 'totalitarianism' means 'freedom'. A relic of 1930s Spanish practices, one might say. Words mean what those in control of the language say they mean. Learn your language, take control of it, speak out against its betrayers and abusers, and teach it to your children. Or someone else will steal your language from you and use it to control and oppress you and to take over your children’s minds. And yes, I am talking about the National Union of Teachers and Ed Balls, who would close down your village Church school because it is not about teaching children how the Gospel shows then that they should love their neighbours and be Good Samaritans but is a 'faith school' (faith indeterminate... could be anything...) and therefore, obviously, a 'hate speech indoctrination centre'. See? It's working. Not all revolutions are bloody. The bloodless ones are always and everywhere called 'corrections' to redress 'imbalances' or if you're Gordon Brown, 'reforms' in the name of 'fairness'. To be continued.

Spanish practices - part 2

The British Left should be denounced (a chilling Communist expression with which they will be familiar) for their unbroken tradition of sentimental lies in support of one of the 20th century's most appalling episodes of mass murder and persecution in the name of a malign, inhuman creed: the bloody revolution in Spain in the 1930s. They should be made to wear sackcloth and ashes and pelted with garbage on their way to the stocks, there to be abused by the descendants and the ghosts of the innocent, ordinary people including helpless children, the ill and the old, whom their heroes terrorised without mercy and murdered in cold blood, often gleefully, because they were the opposition, even if entirely uninvolved, as in the case of cloistered contemplatives nuns who had not left their monasteries, let alone had civil or political connections, for forty years. Today's Leftists, from the former Young Liberal Leader, Peter Hain, and Gordon Brown, chronicler of the Scottish Hard Left, to Cohn-Bendit, the French Marxist leader of the European Greens, and the Portuguese Maoist Barroso, all proudly hymn their 'heroes' of the ‘righteous’ side in Spain’s tragic civil war. In claiming to inherit their 'glory', they also inherit their guilt. They voluntarily and knowingly associate themselves with those who, in order to destroy democracy in the name of their chosen replacement of it, perpetrated the vilest acts of abuse and murder. They excuse all this because unlike the Nazis, the Spanish revolutionaries were approved, funded and manned by Moscow and the Socialist International. They were therefore ‘anti-Fascists’ to whom no crime may be attributed and who may be excused ANY atrocity in the ONLY approved cause: the furtherance of the aims of the Left, properly ‘Communism’ but now to be called ‘Socialism’. Remember, too, that throughout the 1930s, 40s, 50s, and 60s, Communists were ORDERED by Moscow to leave the Communist Party, deny their former belief in Communism (in public) and, in Britain, to join the Labour Party. Enquire, too, if you have the time, how many leading Greens (around the world) are former Communists. You‘d be amazed. There are more ways than one to skin a cat, eh? To be continued.

Spanish practices

Over at ConHome, Arty McBain serves up a coruscating history of the Spanish Civil War. He is quite rightly outraged at the Times for publishing this 'deranged leader'. What, yawning? Bored already? Nip over to ConHome and have a read. I promise you will not be bored. McBain transposes the events of 1930s Spain to 1970s and 80s Britain. I am sick of hearing about (and indeed, from) the romantic idiots who set off for Spain one summer morning in the Thirties, at the bidding of Moscow’s hard men in British cities, who conned them into leaving Depression Europe for the parched hills of Spain and life in Stalin’s international infantry. They thought themselves noble. They were dupes. They were told they were fighting ‘Fascism’. They weren’t, of course. (The term was not used in that place at that time. Read the ConHome article.) That was what Uncle Joe’s hard men told them. They were in fact joining Uncle Joe’s murder squads and their job was to enlarge his empire. To be continued.

A poem

By Private Ballsdrick.

'The economic cycle' 'Boom, Boom, Boom, Boom. Boom,Boom, Boom - BOOM, BOOM, BOOM, BOOM, Boom, boom, Bust.

Neat.

Bugger off, Heffer. Haselhurst gets my vote.

Sir Alan Haselhurst is my MP.

In the list of MP expenses claimants, he is number 582 out of 646. The bastard Heffer wants him out, to which I say, bugger off and stop being an attention-seeking git, Heffer.

Sir Alan has issued a brief statement to the press, but to his constituents he has issued a lengthy statement which, in his defence, I reproduce below in full with some parts emphasised by me. Click here to see the original as a PDF.

____________________________

In view of the strong feelings which have been exposed about MPs’ pay and allowances I feel that I should provide you with some detailed information about my own distinct circumstances. I offer first some clarification. I do not have a country estate. I own a family home in the constituency. It has no swimming pool as alleged in the Daily Mail and no helipad as some local reporters seem to imagine. I do not own any other property. My flat in London is rented. I have even been asked how much income I derive from being a director of a family business. The answer is none. Do I as Member for Saffron Walden need two homes? Yes. First, I gave a commitment at the time of my selection in 1977 that I would buy a property in the constituency. Secondly, the hours of work for an MP at Westminster have been and are quite unlike those of other people who may be up very early in the morning and/or home late at night. Thirdly, for much of my years as your MP, the House of Commons would sit well beyond the time of the last train from Liverpool Street and on many occasions through the night. This did not obviate the need to be present early the next day to ensure that a quorum was maintained in any committees of which you were a member. My own circumstances altered in 1997 when I became Deputy Speaker. This has involved a much greater commitment to be on the premises at Westminster. When the proceedings of the House of Commons depend absolutely and without the option on your being in the Chair, you simply cannot afford to turn up late pleading that there was congestion on the M11 or a train failure at Harlow Town. I am frequently in the Chair until the very last word is spoken and this rules out my catching the last train back. As the employer, the House of Commons has long recognised that MPs do not now come exclusively from the ranks of the wealthy. There is a substantial extra cost in maintaining two homes. So an Additional Costs Allowance was introduced specifically to help Members defray this cost. Its availability has always been a matter of public record. The categories in respect of which claims could be made were as follows:- food, utilities, rent, council tax, telephone, cleaning, services, security, insurance, repairs and maintenance. Between 1977 and 1997 I made claims wholly and exclusively in respect of my London flat which I have rented (not owned) for 36 years.However, in 1997 when I was appointed as Deputy Speaker I was instructed by the House of Commons that I was then the equivalent of a Minister and accordingly my main home was deemed to be in London. It is important to stress that I had no choice in the matter. Any future claims on the Additional Costs Allowance had to relate to my home in the constituency. I made no claim without approval and then only to meet costs genuinely incurred. Obviously the type of cost involved in maintaining a home in the country differed from the costs of maintaining a flat in London. Throughout the period of my claims in respect of my home in the constituency I have, of course, met the full costs of my flat out of my net taxed income. The item in my recent claims which has attracted most attention and most criticism is gardening expenditure. The improvements to my garden over the years have naturally been paid for out of my own pocket. Where I have needed help during the period in which I have spent long hours in London is with some of the heavier maintenance work. I have had gardening help for eight hours per week. If I am charged that I should have paid this too out of my own pocket, the same could logically be said of every other item for which I have claimed. But that is to imply that Parliament should provide no assistance whatsoever with the additional costs of a second home. The business in question was my father’s pharmacy, which he sold on retirement a quarter of a century ago. Both my father and my mother died in 1989. My only recordable outside interest is income from my cricket novels, which sell only in hundreds and not millions. [ P: He has repaid the total sum concerned: £12,000. See the PDF, page 2 .] This raises a much wider question about the remuneration package of MPs. What I have claimed for is my responsibility. There are many items for which I have not claimed which it seems were no more and no less legitimate than those for which I have. It is not for me to comment on the composition of claims submitted by my colleagues, but I notice that most of them, including David Cameron and Nick Clegg, have been paid the maximum or near-maximum A.C.A. The more extreme matters which have been exposed, quite apart from those things which were within rules which are now viewed with distaste, have impugned Parliament as an institution. As my late mother would have said, we have brought our pigs to a fine market. The system must alter. Simplicity and transparency are needed. In my view the public should be asked to accept that the remuneration of MPs should be confined to an appropriate level of salary on which we would be taxed and accountable to Her Majesty’s Revenue and Customs. For thirty years successive Governments have been obsessed with keeping down the headline figure of an MP’s salary whilst permitting the A.C.A. to increase. This is what has contributed to the present mess. With agreement from the Leaders of all the political parties, the Speaker has announced new measures to control and curb the allowances system. We are now committed to implementing reforms which meet the tests of increased transparency and accountability and reduced cost for the taxpayer. Beyond this the Committee on Standards in Public Life under the chairmanship of Sir Christopher Kelly has been asked to produce more far-reaching recommendations and we expect to have a report by the autumn. Ultimately regulation within the House of Commons will be replaced by regulation by an independent body. That is the present intention. I have served this constituency for over 30 years not for profit, but to be an effective advocate for the interests of the people I represent. In the process I have helped many thousands of my constituents. Published figures show that in fact in respect of all parliamentary allowances I have ranked 582nd out of 646 MPs in the year 2007/08 and was in a similar position in the three previous years. Overall I am far from being an expensive claimant. Following the publication of new rules earlier this year which give me freedom to determine which to treat as my main home I took the decision five weeks ago to revert to having my London flat as my additional accommodation. Thus in future my only claims will be for those items which have been agreed by the Party Leaders and announced in the Speaker’s Statement on 19th May. As to the past David Cameron has established a Scrutiny Commission to examine the claims of all Conservative MPs. There will also be a thorough external review embracing all Members. I shall naturally abide by whatever conclusions emerge from these reviews. I hope that I have been able to outline adequately the process. However, I recognise that this situation is not just about process. It is about public perception and anger. The headlines in the local press have not only distressed me and my family, but they must also have affected you as one of my constituents. For that I can only apologise. A great many constituents have given me tremendous support for over 30 years and I can assure you that I will continue to serve you all assiduously and strive to address this current problem. If there are further concerns which you would like to discuss with me, I will be glad to talk with you. Alan Haselhurst

________________________ To do this honourable and faithful MP down for his modest and necessary claims would seem to me to smack of hysteria. It would also mean that only wealthy men like Heffer could stand in his place, God forbid. If even half the 646 were as honourable and diligent as Alan Haselhurst, Parliament would be a far healthier place.

Let's not go to ANY French parties from now on

Hat tip to Donal Blaney for reminding me of this:

Charles De Gaulle, that inadequate personification of French jealousy and cowardice, once told US President Lyndon Johnson that he wanted all Americans off French soil. "Does that include those buried in it?", Johnson rightly enquired. Perhaps the French need reminding of who was prepared to help them in one of their many hours of need?

De Gaulle was a bastard and an ingrate. His countrymen have been bastards and ingrates for a thousand years. They have long despised my country and my fellow countrymen for our world-renowned military superiority, for having the political sophistication to effect constitutional reform without making the streets of our cities run with blood, for baling them out whenever their own stubborn and cowardly crudeness (they think themselves so terribly, terribly polished... but just look at them) gets them into deep shit and for generally beating them at, oh, pretty much everything. And for English becoming the world's common language. Oh boy, they really, REALLY hate that. They may rest assured that the contempt is mutual and will remain so as long as they expect the whole wide world to accept their appalling manners and as long as they insist upon having as their national mascot a series of very arrogant, very small men with very small penises, and covering their national embarrassment about their pathetic political, military and sexual inadequacies with risible adolescent lies about being the world's greatest lovers -- and cooks. Mwahahahaha. (That noise you hear in the background is Mrs Prodicus sniggering... but she says she is prepared to accept the part about the cooking.) Next time the French find themselves invaded by heavily-armed people with more balls than themselves they can forget about the Entente Cordiale. They will find that the neighbours across the English Channel will be sorting out their sock drawers that night, and that includes our Head of State. Meanwhile, about the D-Day memorial services, I hear Gordon Brown's going. Perfect. One fucking insult deserves another, after all.

Cameron: The Great Reform Bill of 2010?

In a massively important speech today, David Cameron is proposing nothing less than what amounts to a Great Reform Bill. He scotches the absurd theory of proportional representation on the correct ground that it is anti-democratic. He is discussing the pros and cons for fixed term parliaments, with no facile answers as there are political/democratic difficulties either way. He has said he will hold a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty. He will take away power from the judges and the parliamentary whips. He will reduce the numbers of MPs and make all constituencies equivalent in size 'in each nation of the UK'. He will abolish the automatic guillotines on parliamentary bills and the power of the Commons to debate Bills at length and challenge the executive properly, as pre-Blair. He will have Select Committees elected, not stuffed with government placemen. He will massively transfer power and autonomy from central to local government. He will have all government expenditure at all levels over £25000 on the web for open scrutiny along with all elected politicians and public servants owing over £100,000 a year. (Figure needs a double check as I missed it). More mayors, referenda. And much more. A massive redistribution of power away from politicians and away from the centre. Yes, yes. yes. Brown has no mandate for political reform. None. If all this is in Cameron's manifesto, as he promises today, he will have that mandate and just do it. This could be as important as 1832.

Barf of the Century

It is hard to know where to begin, and which extreme expressions to select from the Devil's Kitchen Dictionary of Abuse, in describing Gordon Brown's colossal, unbelievable, sickening hypocrisy and sheer downright effrontery in having one of his henchmen call for 'three cheers for Gordon Brown' from the poor bloody Gurkhas to round off his entry for the Most Nauseating Speech of 2009 competition, consisting of a string of barf-worthy platitudes, all including the word 'privilege', with which this deluded, immoral, increasingly confused and castrated political thug had the bloated brass (instead of flesh) balls to congratulate the Lumley Light Infantry on winning their fight against, er, himself.

Is he quite right in the head, Doctor?

Light blogging for the next few days. Real life interferes, yet again.

But I am still watching you, Brown, you ugly, unconscionable bastard.

A patronising Righteous git defines 'Justice'

Richard Reeves is the director of Demos, the BBC's favourite pinko-thinko-tanko.

I'm waiting for them to give a similar platform to the Adam Smith Institute but I'm not holding my breath.

Mr Reeves gave a short talk on Radio 4 tonight in which he addressed himself to the 18th century proto-socialist, radical republican pamphleteer, Mary Wollstonecraft.

He opened with a short paean of praise addressed directly to the lady's spirit, or perhaps her corpse, in which he unburdened himself of this gem of Righteous presumptuousness:

"Your name is on the lips of all who have Justice in their hearts."

No, it isn't, Mr Reeves. No, it bloody well isn't.

You are a cheeky sod, Mr Reeves. You presume to decide what Justice is. You say that it involves sharing or at least admiring the political philosophy of Miss Wollstonecraft. Any who do not share the lady's politics, which coincide so closely with your own, you deem not to have Justice in their hearts.

Do you expect these people whom you have so lazily insulted to enter into civilised dialogue with you about how, together, you might organise living together in a peaceful society? But surely you cannot wish to converse with people who do not even have justice in their hearts, not being republicans?

Presumably your fine moral sense obliges you, in Justice, to despise or at least to pity such people, and to exclude them from public and political discourse. Are these not dangerous people, who do not have republicanism and therefore no not have Justice in their hearts? Surely the opinions of people without Justice in their hearts are inimical to the public good?

Do you admit no possibility whatsoever that your concept of Justice might be partial? Or provisional? Or erroneous, or even flawed? Do you really claim an objectively higher morality than those who disagree with you in good conscience, and a superior understanding of what Justice is than all the philosophers who have preceded you over the centuries and who, despite lives of scholarly endeavour, hesitated to claim that they knew what Justice is? Are you a prophet, Mr Reeves?

But what am I saying? You do not say that you know what Justice is, do you? You say that you know what Justice is not. And what Justice is not, is whatever anyone says it is who disagrees with you.

Mr Reeves, you are arrogant. You are the epitome of the sanctimonious, the bigoted, the arrogant. And you are essentially unjust.

I diskard you.

“He reacted extremely violently"

Hard to credit that the speaker described is Mr Speaker.

Not bloody good enough, regardless of the provocation which on the occasion in question, allegedly, was receiving advice that his claiming the second home allowance while being the non-paying tenant of the best grace-and-favour residence in London (his third home) would 'not look good'.

Doesn't look good, either, that he personally blue-pencilled and in effect designed the rules at the heart of the current unpleasantness. Nor that he went to the High Court to get MPs exempted from the Freedom of Information Act which, we are told by its progenitor, Lord Falconer, was expressly intended to make the activities of MPs as transparent to the citizen as those of public officials of every other kind.

Not looking good, either, that three senior law enforcement officers and his own senior official report that his account of the Damian Green case is simply untrue.

So this servant of the House and of the British people refused to reform the rules but instead engineered an even more corrupt system of payment to MPs, colluded with police to infringe the sovereignty of Parliament and have a senior MP of his opponents' party arrested, lied about it (by inference, on Oath) to the House and to the people, suppressed information to which the public were entitled by law, tried to suppress it permanently (his submission was refused by the judges as contrary to law), terrorised his staff and dismissed those he disliked. Allegedly.

While a scapegoat is not a particularly good idea at this juncture, I really don't think we need the assistance of this appalling man to clear up our difficulties, do we?

Times.

'The Secret People' by G. K. Chesterton

Some lines that strike the eye...

... Only you do not know us. For we have not spoken yet. ... And some were pure and some were vile; but none took heed of us. They have given us into the hand of new unhappy lords, Lords without anger or honour, who dare not carry their swords. They fight by shuffling papers; they have bright dead alien eyes; They look at our labour and laughter as a tired man looks at flies. And the load of their loveless pity is worse than the ancient wrongs, Their doors are shut in the evening; and they know no songs. We hear men speaking for us of new laws strong and sweet, Yet is there no man speaketh as we speak in the street. It may be we shall rise the last as Frenchmen rose the first, Our wrath come after Russia's wrath and our wrath be the worst. It may be we are meant to mark with our riot and our rest God's scorn for all men governing. It may be beer is best. But we are the people of England; and we have not spoken yet. Smile at us, pay us, pass us. But do not quite forget.

There will be blood. And fireworks.

CoffeeHouse thinks Brown is in danger of scoring a point if he can out-bark Cameron over exes on Monday.

There is muttering that Labour sinners will be de-selected. Oh, will they, indeed?

Brown may have his work cut out. Shahid Malik's constituency committee were all on their hind legs on TV last night declaring solidarity with their man. 'Stand by your man' was playing in the background.

The remoteness of Galactic Headquarters from local Party workers' reality is legendary - but very real.The response to Brown's diktats (and this applies to Cameron, too) will vary from place to place, MP to MP.

Party workers who despise their sitting MP (plenty of those in all parties) will be delighted if he or she is handed the Black Spot by party chiefs.

There are others, though, who actually like their MP and whose default response to outside control is Go fuck yourself. They will stuff the Black Spot into a small firework and let it off in the general direction of Westminster.

In others, there will be civil war. There is nothing so vicious as infighting in constituency political committees, regardless of party.

Everywhere, local soundings will be taken as to the voters' feelings about the incumbent, before a decision is made. Success at the forthcoming general election is the key, and 'round 'ere we know better what our chances are than those ponces up there on the effing Battlestar'.

Leaders propose, local parties dispose. Mostly. Sometimes. We'll see.

This isn't over by a long chalk.

Incurable, unfortunately

Dizzy reports that a 'comedian' is promoting a mass write-in to the Queen in connection with what he hopes will be national celebrations (balloons, fireworks, etc.) to mark the death, when it comes, of Lady Thatcher.

This strikes Iain Dale as sick. This blog agrees and sought expert clinical opinion.

__________________________________

A doctor writes:

This is a classic case of the syndrome known as Raging Leftism: infantilism combined with transference of self-hatred. It is commonly traceable to a problematic relationship with Mother and can present as an obsession with females in high office such as Lady Thatcher or the Queen.

Symptoms. Raging Leftist Syndrome includes a tendency to violence which fortunately is usually confined to speech/shouting/written equivalent.

Examples. Gordon Brown, a fairly mild case, is what happens if sufferers gain political power. Joseph Stalin exhibited the condition in its most virulent form but that was before modern treatments were developed.

Treatment. Sufferers should never be elected to anything but must be ‘contained’. Behavioural outlets for the patient's anger are useful. Think of it as putting hammer-pegs and a tin drum in the play-pen. For post-adolescent patients (we avoid the use of the word 'adult' in such cases) we prescribe 'tin drum equivalents' such as a career in stand-up comedy, a Guardian column, appearance on the News Quiz (to be used sparingly) or some late-night TV spots on BBC/Channel 4. Extreme care is required: a limited audience is recommended but over-exposure can exacerbate symptoms. Never think of sufferers as adults (avoid intellectual discussions) although it is essential to pretend that one does in face-to-face encounters. Care must be taken lest the repressed tendency to violence convert from the purely verbal/written to the physical: shouting, arm-waving, placard-carrying, 'anti-globalisation' demonstrations, etc.

Results. Sadly, we have found that Raging Leftism is resistant to treatment in some cases. These unfortunates face a lifetime of annoying the immune population, and provoking general contempt. Most sufferers, though, grow out of it after one or two final outbursts during what we call the 'undergraduate' stage. Symptoms rapidly abate if the patient can move into the immune (‘adult’) community and get a proper job. It is vital that the patient abandons student politics promptly because prolonged association with fellow sufferers can make the condition permanent, as in the case you have referred to us on this occasion.

Conclusions. This case is irremediable.

Recommendations. Contain the patient using treatment as above, otherwise ignore.

It is written. Brown's political epitaph.

"He is weak because he is political. Labour comes before anything else, at a time when all else must come before Labour."

An unnamed MP in an excellent analysis of Gordon Brown's position in the expenses saga, by Benedict Brogan.

Sleaze quote of the week

To think that you could accuse me of behaving like a journalist shocks me.

Nice one, Nad.

He's back!

BNP: the anti-sleaze party

This man wrote the book on anti-sleaze campaigning. There was no sleaze once his Party came to power. The hunting ban upset the toffs, too. Smoking was banned - nice clean air... except for the smoke from some ovens.

Everyone was very disciplined. Definitely no sleaze. Unfortunately, there was no anything much after a few years. Once the nettles were all eaten up, the only food left was the odd dead rat found in the rubble. Among the bodies.

Not a black, Paki, queer or Jew in sight, though. Nice white country. No sleaze.

Job done.

Brown's Labour Justice Minister is a liar (as well)

But a true Brownite.

Caught out on a nice little earner with a Rachmanite landlord friend, he screams 'It's a stitch up!' and goes for the top Tory.

"Cameron," yells Malik, "Claims the same second home allowance as me! Why does the Telegraph single me out and leave him alone? What is the reason? There must be a reason!" etc. etc. Sub-text? What could you possibly mean?

Nope.

Cameron's second home claim is 406th down the list.

In stark contrast, Mr Malik's second home claim is top of the list. First. Numero uno. The biggest. Two years running.

Want to retract that smear, Mr Straight As A Die Malik?

Oh, and Shahid - Cameron pays his council tax.

****BREAKING NEWS ****

Fired.

It doesn't WORK, you racist bastards

Wearing a BNP badge or rosette defines you as having the IQ of a very small turnip, the historical understanding of a pie and the political sophistication of a whoopee cushion.

The BNP is a wussy version of the Nazis of 1930s Germany. NAZI is short for NAtionalSoZIalistische Deutsche Arbeiterpartei - national socialist workers' party. National (like the BNP). Socialist (like the BNP?). Workers (like the BNP). Party like the beer's on expenses.

Although everyone attacks the BNP's national bit and Labour worries about the workers bit, nobody mentions the socialist bit even though it's central to the BNP's economically (and historically and politically) illiterate proposition.

But the BNP are quite happy simply to appear as your friendly neighbourhood racists. After all, the voters they're after can readily understand an offer to chuck the Muslims and assorted darkies out of their streets whereas, like the BNP's candidates, they have to cram their intensive study of economic theory and political history into the commercial breaks on Setanta.

(Or maybe Setanta doesn't have ad breaks? I wouldn't know, and this blog cannot afford a fact-checker. I make it all up myself, you know.)

The BNP should be called the Angry Party. That is how increasing numbers of angry people think of them as they search for a way to express their frustration, after decades of being told to shut the fuck up by mainstream politicians when they did not take kindly to the massive cultural and economic changes forced upon them without so much as a by-you-leave by Righteous people living far away from BNP-land in whites-only-except-for-Arab-and-Indian-millionaires Primrose Hill and Highgate Hill. Maybe the altitude on top of those salubrious Hills accounts for their lofty thinking... oxygen starvation?...

The Righteous, though they did not know it at the time (it's dawning on some of them now), were playing Russian Roulette with immigration statistics -- among their other political crimes. By refusing to listen to voters, by denying them any legitimate means of expressing their views, by suppressing dissent with abuse, by passing hate laws with which to enforce their own world view, the Righteous have created the BNP.

Well done the purblind, hill-people of the political elite. BNP? They owe it all to you.

But what about that socialism thing with the BNP?

No-one is telling the angry people that the Angry Party's stupid economic ideas finished off the crippled pre-war German economy and so made both internal lethal oppression and expansionist total war inevitable.

Hitler decided to stick two fingers up to nasty foreigners and go it alone. ** ('German jobs for German workers!') Germany closed its borders to other people and their goods, just as the BNP recommends. Unfortunately, Germany soon found that it could not feed itself.

Oops! What's Plan B? Ah, yes. Take someone else's food. Let's take some more living space for us nice, white, non-Jewish Germans where we can grow all the food we need. Simples!

So as the saying goes, if goods like food cannot cross borders, armies will.

The desperation arising from sheer need which is always caused by economic dreamers and illiterates, coupled with the power of an angry mob, automatically involves the nationalist socialism of the Nazis and the BNP being both cruel and racist.

National socialists cannot feed their people so they deflect the rage of hungry people on to scapegoats. It's a good wheeze to select them in advance, so that everyone is primed as to who to blame when the lights go out, services collapse, hunger begins to stroll the streets and someone else's tanks are firing at you from just over the border. Look! A Jew! A Muslim! Bastards!

That's what you get, in just a few years, when a party like the BNP gets sufficient votes to give them some power. And all you wanted was to kick Labour up the arse and get a nice white neighbourhood.

Still. Look on the bright side. Successful BNP candidates, besides being both nasty racists and unbelievably thick, are also disinclined to exercise the power their voters gave them. Their record of turning up to meetings and actually, er, doing anything, is woeful. So, chin up.

_________________________

** Spookily, the name Sinn Fein means 'Ourselves Alone'. Very appropriate since they are another hard-line NATIONAL SOCIALIST party. Didn't anyone mention that? Bags of money room in the EU for them, though, so they've gone soft. On the outside.

And did you know that Sinn Fein is Europe's wealthiest political party? Cameron, eat yer heart out. Thank you, Senator Kennedy and the good people of NYC and Boston, Mass.

Run that past me one more time

Why is Malik so swiftly and ruthlessly dispensed with, but not Double-flipper Darling, Triple-Flipper Balls, Rip-off Smith, Hoon Hoon... ?

It must be something in the small print that I haven't spotted yet.

It couldn't possibly be a little something for those thinking of voting BNP, could it?

You are an unscrupulous bastard, Brown. You deserve everything you are going to get from all sides in Malik's constituency. The BNP will make hay and voters whose heritage is of the colonial tendency will either vote Tory (because Cameron acted before you did) or NOTA.

You're not just a very nasty man, Brown. You are a nasty, insensate loser.

Sigh. Dear Mark Thompson,

Why, three hours after the Telegraph exposed the gross overclaiming of Shahid Malik MP, and two hours after the story appeared on all other papers' websites except the Guardian, is the BBC News website carrying no mention whatever of this story?

Is your website no longer 'updated every minute'? if it is, why do you omit Mr Malik from your otherwise comprehensive coverage of MPs implicated in this national scandal?

Yours, etc., expecting no explanation,

Prodicus of Ceos.

More auto-garble from the usurper

Gordon Brown's 'statement' today about Morley bore about as a close a relation to the English language as Pidgin. Not one of his sentences was an actual sentence.

Apart from a talent for political thuggery, what is this appalling man good at?

He cannot govern, he cannot run an economy, he cannot tell the truth, he cannot distinguish right from wrong, and now he cannot even speak clearly.

He usurped his predecessor's office and proceeded to finish the long term job of wrecking the economy, bloated the state payroll out of all proportion to its usefulness, stealth-taxed us to buggery, wasted much of the money, put us all in hock for the foreseeable future, appointed unpleasant thugs like Balls and McBride as his closest advisers and incompetents like David Milliband to offices in which they upset our allies overseas and lock up innocent citizens while letting violent criminals go free, betrayed and insulted our armed services in time of war, and signed away our sovereign independence in defiance of our wishes. And that's just for starters.

Why are we employing him?

What use is he?

Teach Yourself The New Language Of Politics

Chapter One: 'Pick yer windae, yer leavin.' Jeff again.

Mandy is fragrant by comparison.

Bit of a shock, typing that. Nice, one, Jeff.

Hitherto, reports of mortgage wrongdoing were usually linked to Peter Mandelson, who omitted to say on his application form that he had secretly borrowed money from Geoffrey Robinson, another Labour MP. But at least Lord Mandelson had the decency to have a mortgage.

What's the American for 'bloody Norah!'

-- Donal Blaney, earlier today.

Our intrepid reporter asks some hair-raising questions of this man:

Proud of your Cabinet, Gordon?

Thus David Hughes in the Telegraph on Gordon's big Euro launch today.

Ladies and gentlemen, I give you the British Labour Government.

Gordon Brown stood up and was forced to tell an expectant audience that he was withdrawing the party whip from a senior member of the party who had "inadvertently" claimed £16,000 in taxpayer's cash to pay for a mortgage that did not exist.

Then up pops Alistair Darling, the Chancellor, [Secretary of State for Finance] who we now know "flipped" his residence four times in four years to maximise the amount he could claim in allowances. As I've noted before, if only Darling had shown such enterprise in his handling of the public finances.

Then we had Ed Balls, [Secretary of State for Education and Children] whose claims were subject to an investigation by the Parliamentary Standards Commissioner, who cleared him of wrong doing.

Following Ed was Jacqui Smith, [Secretary of State for Home Affairs] whose decision to designate a spare room in her sister's London home as her main residence set this latest sleaze ball rolling.

And then we had Hazel Blears [Secretary of State for Communities] in her first public outing since writing out a cheque for £13,000 in capital gains tax owing on her taxpayer-funded property transactions.

Every single one of them has had their fingers in the till -- and got caught. Every one of them.

Oh - except Gordon. I am told. Of course. He was too busy looking after Gorbals Mick and overseeing the perdition of the United Kingdom in pursuit of his place in history, to have time for...

Oh, fuck 'em.

Not long now.

More! More! they cry

Obo wants Cameron to order executions this day. Erm... Legals, legals. Morley is of interest to Knacker and had to go, stat. Mackay is not. Yet. And there's not a vulnerable MP in Westminster going about without a lawyer. As with any party leader taking a new direction, Cameron is fighting his own backbenches. There's a civil war on, there: new broom versus old guard... who still have the power to destabilise him (and would like to, for lots of reasons) although their grip is weakening by the day, and will continue to do so as long as his stature outside the party continues to grow. Cameron has to win this, but nothing is inevitable. He has shown cojones. I'm not rushing to judgement.

'We know no spectacle so ridiculous...

... as the British public in one of its periodical fits of morality.'

So wrote Macaulay in an essay in the Edinburgh Review in 1843.

No doubt Olympians like Michael White and Simon Heffer are even now considering, over their aperitifs, whether to drop the old Baron's bon mot into their own lofty commentary on the present unpleasantness.

They probably will. If not them, Rod Liddle or Matthew Parris. One of the usual suspects will, anyway, if they haven't already. I should like to offer an contrary view, in defence of our periodical fits of morality. Foreigners quite often believe that the British, and particularly our public servants, have probity coursing through their veins instead of blood.

They are watching us closely this week and there is much gasping, in Italy for example, on finding that this is not universally true.

On the other hand, they behold our disgust and they see that it is genuine. They hear the gnashing of teeth and our wailing that the sky is falling on our shocked heads. They see almost the whole population, on discovering these horrid malefactions, rising up in protest and uttering murderous threats.

And all because, as some of them see it, some not awfully well paid MPs (by some standards) over-claimed a 'mere' (they may say) £5,000 a year, or even £15,000, to which they were not entitled and naturally enough, they may say, tried to conceal the fact.

"So little? Not millions? Only ONE extra house? No yachts? No major contract backhanders? We should be so lucky! Our mayors, our ministers, our premiers, they all take so much in a month, not a year or - pff! - a period of years. Peh. You British. Your politicians are amateurs. Be grateful for that. Be thankful that they steal so little from you compared with what ours steal from us. They rob us blind... but, eh, still we re-elect them because... meh... that is the way of the world. And so, you are going to throw your bad boys out, are you? All of them? And then what will you do? Ai-ai-ai, you British are such puritani."

Yes, Signore, we are indeed. And a little hypocrisy here and there, a moment of looking ridiculous to the successors of Lord Macaulay once in a while, does not alter that fundamental fact about us. And we're rather proud of it. It's what stops our barons from becoming robber barons -- for most of the time. We have lifted a precious old rock, one of those on which our country stands, and we do like what we have found beneath it. We are having a clear-out.

Some people will observe the uproar among our citizens, the political earthquakes, the parliamentary resignations and sackings -- which are only just beginning -- the involvement of the police, the tectonic electoral movements, the imminent defenestration of the Speaker and even possibly of the government, and they may conclude that the totality of the national furore speaks rather well of the British people.

And the Bloggery Oscar goes to...

Leg-Iron, for this title.

Quite.

Isn't it interesting that the only political party website from the three main parties that even makes a mention of expenses and the "cost of politics" is the Tory one?

What's that noise? Ah yes. Silence.

Strangely silent, all those former ministers and MPs, now enjoying their Parliamentary pensions and/or their directorships in industries they ruled when in office.

Ah yes, life down at the beach house, or down on the farm (paid for how, exactly?) is tranquil. I bet none of them would swap it for life in Westminster, now that scrutiny is the order of the day in the Mother of Parliaments.

Wouldn't it be fun, though, to hear lofty criticism of the likes of Morley and Mackay from someone like, say, the Kinnocks?

Here's the man

Richard Shepherd MP was a contender when Martin got the Speaker's Chair. He should have had it and would have but for Labour's whips and old boys forcing their man Gorbals Mick on a protesting House at Brown's insistence. Shepherd has just made a stonking good speech on the World at One, saying that his day as a contender has passed but he is now campaigning reluctantly but vigorously against Speaker Martin because Parliament itself, 'our only democratic institution', is in grave danger and much of it is Martin's fault. He thinks it's urgent. Shepherd voted very strongly for a transparent Parliament. After his remarks today, and the dignified manner in which he made them, I think he should be dragged to the Chair as soon as possible. And Gordon Brown can go and do the other thing. He has already been plucked, stuffed and trussed. He is merely awaiting humane slaughter.

Stop him. Please.

Every TV news clip of Gordon Brown out and about yesterday and today shows him smiling manically.

This morning, he was walking among schoolgirls, smiling non-stop like... like... in a most unnatural way.

Everyone knows why he is doing it and only he is stupid enough, emotionally retarded and disconnected enough, to think it looks good. It does not. He believes, being thick, that he will achieve some political end by it. He won't. It's making everything worse for him.

It is grotesque. It is nauseating. It is not authentic. It is unnerving. It is disturbing.

Stop him doing it, someone.

Un-Parliamentary language down at the old Bull & Bush

I hear our betters the ladies and gentlemen of the press and Parliament asking, ‘Is the public really bothered about the arcane details of the Speaker’s role in all this? Do they understand?’

Our correspondent in the Bull & Bush replies in the affirmative to both questions. He has much to report:

When the Sky Sports fans drinking in the Bull & Bush turn their eyes to the Ten O'clock News, with mouths agape between swigs, they discover in themselves an unaccustomed close interest in the position and the person of the Speaker of the House of Commons...

- and when these quaffers-by-the-quart of IPA and Stella grasp that the historic and present purpose of the high office of Speaker is to uphold standards in their Parliament and so protect them from abuse by the mighty, if necessary at the cost of his own life and that the incumbent has not done so, to put it mildly;

- and when they spontaneously curse the Speaker for attacking a national treasure (above Party labels) like the sweet football fan-patron, Kate Hoey who merely said what they think;

- and when they hear that the Speaker is 'responsible' for the corrupt 'expenses system';

- and when they find out that the Speaker, more than anyone else, did everything in the power of his office, from procrastination and obfuscation to (unsuccessful) High Court action against journalists to suppress information by preventing them revealing systemic and extra-systemic abuse of their trust and theft of their money;

- and when they learn, now being closely interested in the gentleman’s career, that he sacked conscientious officials who tried to prevent the abuses;

- and when they discover that the Speaker has spent years busily feathering his nest at their expense, at a level on a par with the worst of the miscreants, and that he has threatened with the law anyone criticising him for it;

- and when the trade unionists at the bar in the old Bull & Bush hear reports of his having said ‘I have been a trade unionist all my life. I did not come into politics not to take what is owed to me’;

- and when they hear that the Speaker’s universally admired predecessor is ’appalled’ by her successor’s behaviour;

- and when, staring at a mountain of facts so appalling as to make their eyes bleed and which were carefully kept from them by the convention of not criticising the Speaker...

- they opine that the man is an out-and-out ****ing **** and chorus: 'The troughing ****er had better **** off out of it before I get hold of him.'

But Speaker Martin is not the only one at the receiving end of un-Parliamentary language down at the old Bull & Bush.

When the blokes at the bar can be heard avidly and angrily discussing Parliamentary arcana such as successive Labour Prime Ministers abusing their power in order to have a Speaker who was 'one of their own' despite his being widely regarded as inadequate to the task;

- and when they learn that these two Labour Prime Ministers forced his appointment through the House of Commons in contravention of the custom that successive Speakers are from different parties and appointed by all-party acclamation, not government fiat, and that they did so in defiance of the legitimate objections of all other parties;

- and when they learn that this Labour Prime Minister, under the pretext of defending the impartiality of the office of Speaker, has stolidly defended his Party placeman against much legitimate criticism of both his many errors of judgement and his many actions inimical to the wellbeing of people and Parliament;

- and when they remember that the Labour Home Secretary defended the Speaker when he encouraged the police to arrest and intimidate an MP from the Opposition party and then in the face of widespread outrage in the House, took the cowardly way out of blaming his subordinate, an unqualified person whom he had appointed to replace an experienced official to whom he had taken a dislike, deeming him 'a toff' - and sacked him;

- and when they remember that the Labour Prime Minister said that police invading Parliament and arresting an MP was not a matter for him but for the Speaker and that the arrested MP was at fault;

- and when they recall that the same Labour Prime Minister, when in opposition, had bragged about receiving leaks of precisely the sort which caused the Labour Home Secretary to approve the arrest of the MP in question, and that the leaks were about demeanours in her department;

- and when they learn that the Labour Prime Minister, two of his Party's Deputy Leaders (Cabinet Ministers) and his Ministers have conspired with the Speaker against the public interest (a) to perpetuate the obviously corrupt ‘expenses’ system (b) to change existing law and enact new laws, using their Commons majority and 'payroll vote', to exempt MPs from the civil and criminal laws which everyone else must obey (c) to protect even some of most egregious miscreants from public discovery and justice because they are the Labour Prime Minister’s appointees to his Cabinet;

- and when they learn that the Labour Prime Minister and the Speaker have worked together to bring Parliament into disrepute;

... then the Labour Prime Minister and his Labour government are condemned, at the bar of the Bull & Bush, in even stronger terms than those in which they condemn the Speaker.

Oh, troughing Tory toffs will have to sit in the stocks and take very rough punishment for a long while. But they are not the government. And the Tory Leader is leading the move for reform in the teeth of the Labour Prime Minister's hectoring, his risible defence of the indefensible until the enormity of it all and its consequences for him engulfed him, and his bumbling, cowardly inaction since.

The Labour Party is the worst possible case because, unlike individual Tory robber barons who were not in government office, Labour Prime Ministers, Ministers and Members of Parliament grossly abused the vast power of the governing Party to their own corrupt benefit, against the public interest.

It is clear, even to the village idiot, muttering into his pint over there in the corner of the Bull & Bush, that successive Labour Prime Ministers corruptly appointed and protected Michael Martin, the incompetent Speaker who, for eight years, has presided over, and acted vigorously to perpetuate, corruption in our Parliament, and to protect, in particular, Labour Cabinet Ministers...

Justice Secretary Straw

Home Secretary Smith

Communities Secretary Blears

former Defence Secretary and now Transport Secretary Hoon

Chancellor Darling

and other ministers (Morley, McNulty and others) and MPs.

Ministers in the Labour government are the most egregious of all the miscreants who have robbed and insulted the patrons of the Bull & Bush.

The entire Labour government should slink away before they have to face the Bull & Bush jury who consider their offences worthy not only of lamp posts, but of certain unpleasant, spike-related preliminaries before any merciful coups de grace.

Of course, the Bull & Bush is in England. Speaker Martin and Prime Minister Brown are Scots, as are many ministers in this Labour Cabinet and government. The comments of the ale drinkers at the bar regarding that coincidence are too forthright for the eyes of sensitive souls like yourself, dear reader. Suffice it to say that, certain strong opinions having been expressed, the ale and gin drinkers are now in one bar and the lager and malt drinkers in another, although they are united in their rage against their less-than-hon. and right-on abusers.

The ale drinkers are mutinous. The lager drinkers are mutinous and ashamed. All are angry. All want redress. Some want revenge. Those who have drunk a spot more than usual want actual blood.

Members of Parliament of all parties should avoid the Bull & Bush for the moment, order their beverage of choice on-line and drink it at home. In time, the anger will abate and the regulars' other business will need attending to... there will be a collective shrug. The damage to the British Parliament and Constitution may be considerable, but only time will reveal to what extent. Down in the old Bull & Bush, the normal recipients of abuse will be reinstated: Man Utd and Chelsea, Rangers and Celtic, the Australians and the French.

And Speaker Martin? He is advised to give up appearing in public altogether, as soon as possible. He should acquire a cow and some hens, retire to a croft in the Outer Hebrides and grow his own vegetables. Perhaps a mainland supermarket can arrange occasional air-drops of beverage supplies.

Flu: latest predictions from China

2007 - Chinese year of the Chicken - Bird Flu... 2008 - Chinese year of the Horse - Equine Influenza... It gets worse. Much worse.

The tragedy of the doomed Chipmunk

The sight of Blears sitting beside Brown tonight, wittering hysterically about 'our Ministers', desperate fixed grin in place, was ghastly.

Brown's thunderous, contemptuous face, not even looking in her direction as she prattled perkily, body language pleading with him for a glance, just a glance, clearly desperate (or perhaps drugged, the only other possibility) conveyed more eloquently than any words:

'Talk all you like, bitch. I am not listening. Look at my Not Listening face. Your desperation is useless. Ingratiation is pointless. It is too late. It is over for you. You are at this table only because it not yet your time. I know the time. You will have to suffer in ignorance until then. When you leave this room today, you should start making arrangements for your next career. Have you finished making that noise? Good. Can we get on with my agenda? Thank you.'

There's no hope, Iain. Sorry.