Coventry kids

As an voluntarily exiled Coventry kid I was curious to watch this evenings Panorama on the beeb, even though it includes Jeremy Whine. The subject was the child protection social workers at Coventry City Council. After getting over the fact that no one spoke with a Cuventry accent- am I the only one left?- I became engrossed in the programme just as some are drawn to watching horror films. But although, fortunately, there were no explicitly grisly horrors, the apparent every day story of Coventry City folk, and their kids, was well deserving an X rating. The social workers, with not a Citroen 2Cv between them, were each faced with as many as three times the recommended maximum case load and each case representing at least one child in danger, another potential "Baby P".

My good friend Passmore Edwards wrote, in 1850, that child delinquency was caused by lack of home life. Do they have homes that are homes, he asked? No, was his answer, they have places where they stay at night, eat, get scolded and whipped. Fifty years later, when looking back over his life, he said that the economic and moral waste produced by the neglect, disease, and death of children is incalculable. We should as a nation, either prevent or at least materially diminish the vast waste of child life in our midst, or say less about our national virtues.

We might have prevented the child killing diseases but it does not appear that we have made much headway on tackling neglect. The children we saw, or heard of on the Panorama programme were not the rowdy out of control hooligans so much in the news, just apparently ordinary little children let down by our society.

You've got to larf

Having drafted out and sensibly deleted several missives recently on the state of the nation and all that is wrong with the world I thought that I should, as an alternative, write something funny, or at least vaguely amusing. The thought of vast numbers of my shy, anonymous followers silently chuckling over an out pouring of original wit based on everyday events gave me an enthusiastic rush not experienced since I dropped a mug of hot coffee in my lap. But just what to write about?

Should I write about the young lad stopped from buying a packet of wine gums because he was under age? Or the woman who was allowed to buy a greetings card that showed a bottle of wine and two glasses, once it was clear that she was over 25?

Then again it could be a story about a school that banned football in the playground because it was too dangerous. I expect they had sold off the school playing field to pay the pensions of all the teachers that had gone off sick with stress.

I was tempted to write about a certain court case involving a east European chappie who refused to attend Court where he was to be tried for mass, and I do mean mass, murder. He did look like he was having a bad hair day but the same excuse was not allowed Sadam who reluctantly, i am sure, went clanging to his day of reckoning.

I was further inspired by TV News coverage of Newquay police trying to change the image gained by that town of drunken revelry which showed tottering tottie and loudmouthed laddettes sprawling around the town's streets at throwing up time. This reminded me that I had been told some months ago that adult education teachers were being advised not to use the term "ladies" as it could be considered offensive. Any comparison to these ladies of the night out would indeed be offensive.

Perhaps I'll just leave it for now, and try to think of something amusing for another time.

Lib Dem Hopes or pipe dreams

Nick Clegg is playing a dangerous game, ditching the unwritten alliance with the labour party and making a bid for the official opposition seat if not the dispatch box itself. Is this a brave move or a juvenile prank? Whilst he denounces both the Tories and Labour for not telling the truth about the extent of the countries deficit he is in danger of loosing votes by dropping the pledge to remove tuition fees. Can he afford to upset any sector of voters if he is really serious about his party's claim to be the a contender for Government. A qualifier that a review of tuition fees and entry into higher education with a pledge to cap existing levels of tuition fees until that review was complete would have sounded better than just the honest statement that neither the Tories or Lib Dems could say exactly how they would get us out of this whole until after they have had an opportunity to examine the books in detail, after the election. And the Labour Government wouldn't even admit to just how large this hole is even if they were re-elected, or if they did the blame would be cast on someone else who had been digging away whilst the Government's back was turned.

In the Liberal Moment references are made to the Gladstone Government and the huge reforms brought about by a Liberal Government. I don't know whether we are again at such a moment but there is little chance that the Labour party can win another term of office and can we be any more confident that the Conservatives under Cameron will be any more successful in bringing about the changes that are so urgently needed. The Tories may have sorted out many of the labour problems we were experiencing in the 60s and 70s but they squandered our oil revenue and sold off the family silver to do so. Apart from removing the Bank of England from Government control, the Labour Government has followed the Tory line of deregulation of the money markets but have regulated, for the sake of it, just about everything else.

It is time for a real change and I for one am prepared to give the Lib Dems a chance. At least we would have a competent Chancellor in Vince Cable and whilst I am not a supporter of the un-elected Ministers that we have seen multiply under Labour, I would be prepared to see Shirley Williams brought into the Cabinet to give support to what would admittedly be an untested Cabinet. She would not wish to remain there any longer than necessary and would be a great asset to the Country.

Lance Corporal Joshua Bernard

No one would want to see photos of their children lying dying in the mud. I am therefore very sorry that the family of Lance Corporal Bernard, who died last month in Afghanistan have had to witness such a scene. But before we criticise the journalists for releasing the photo just think about how many sons and daughters we see almost daily as victims of military or terrorist action. If the death of Joshua Bernard is to be of any value to us then let it be the moment that either serious thought is given for removing western troops from Afghanistan or the Arab world steps in to support the people of Afghanistan against the Taliban. Unfortunately, the latter course of action is even less likely than the first.

Alan Duncan and others we can do without

The fact that we have a prime minister that we didn't vote for and a significant number of ministers that nobody voted for does question just how democratic our parliamentary system is. Given the choice a few weeks ago the population would as one would have said "sack the lot of them", but of course we weren't given the choice to say that so the Right Honourable and the dishonourable just kept their heads down knowing that either an unusual summer weather pattern, test cricket or some other item would come along to take the public's mind off their expenses scams. All that is except Alan Duncan who complained that the poor MPs were being unjustly chastised by the public at large. There were many, like me that were thinking of voting for this Cameron chap next year but were uneasy about voting for anyone who would give Alan Duncan a job in a future Government. Well the same has obviously crossed the mind of young Dave as well since we now hear that AD is to be replaced. As yet we don't know by whom. We do, however, know who will be replacing Sir Terry of Woganshire when he steps down from his "job" on BBC2. He will, I understand, be replaced by Chris Evans. Sir Tel has been reported as saying that retiring from his breakfast show was the hardest thing he had ever done. Well, yes, it is difficult to give up a cushy little number like that. By cushy little number i am not referring to the reportedly £800K he is paid but the fact that he seems to be able to take a week off whenever he wants and has delivered the same show for the past 3 or 4 decades. Or at least it seems that way. many a day since he used to deliver the morning show on his tod, and a pretty neat little job he made of it. We all remember the motorway cones and the Northampton lighthouse, don't we, and he managed to talk to the listeners. But over recent years he has had to be accompanied by a crowd of gabbling hangers on. And i don't expect that Mr W was meeting the bill out these out of his fat wallet. the whole lot of them now spend most of the programme talking to each other, the listener just providing a few lines of the script. But as tired as the format had become, I do not think that i will be tuning in to listen to the new lad. Chris Evans is certainly one I can do without. Now, whenever BBC finds its self in trouble for swearing before nineoclock or something of that ilk, the spokesperson will come out with the excuse that of course the BBc must be at the cutting edge, challenging something or other, or some other lame excuse. Well moving Chris Evans onto the breakfast slot for BBC2 is as challenging as two weetabix. He will be loud, squeeky and rude and the music will be dire, and not straits. Just how much we are to pay him for spoiling our breakfast is not yet leaked but no doubt will be. Now if the BBC chiefs had asked me who should replace Wogan, which of course they wouldn't as I would have told them for nothing and left them with a huge surplus in their expenses budget, but if they had, I would have said Jamie lee grace. Now there's a presenter to put some life back into the beeb.

The Rhythm of Life

When I was in the land of work I discovered a strange phenomena on which I would welcome some feedback. Like many people who work in an office situation I occasionally found that ball point pens, and I include these new fangled gel pens in this, seemed to be attracted to me. On getting home in the evening I would find that there would be at least a couple in my jacket or trouser pockets, that were not there in the morning and which were then placed in the kitchen drawer, in case of need. At work I would find that a collection of pens would build up on my desk, filling to over flowing the little sliding thingy that was in the top drawer of the "gusunder" and piling up behind the pc. The dressing table drawer became stuffed with pens, the desk in my study littered with them. Even the car was not immune to the hordes of pens that seemed to appear out of nowhere, taking over the money tray, getting down the back of the seats and falling on the floor, to become trapped under the accelerator pedal. Where ever I went, pens seemed to find their way into my pocket, even from places I had never been to myself. London Hotel chains, banks, shopping outlets, charities that I don't normally subscribe to. Their give away ball points miraculously found their way into my possession. And then, again almost as miraculously, they started to leave. Drawers emptied, pockets cleared, desk tops were deserted. When you needed a pen urgently to make a note of a phone message, there were none. Gradually, of course, pens would reappear, perhaps just one or two, usually ones that didn't work all that well, and for maybe days, or sometimes even weeks things seemed to be normal. There may not be a pen at hand just when you needed it, but one could be coaxed out of the bottom of the drawer if one looked hard enough. Then, without warning it would start all over again.

I never did understand just what was the cause of these "Birorythms". Was it related to my moods, my stars, performance reviews, or my sex life, I just don't know. Since deciding that I had spent a sufficiently long percentage of my life expectancy in paid employment, I find that, although there is some notable variation in the number of ball points to be found at any one moment, the ebb and flow is nothing like that of previous years.

If you have a similar experience, then do let me know, and if you have a silver "Parker", with my name on it, I would appreciate it back one day.

Sooo Sorry

Did Gordon Brown sound like a Prime Minister or a lovesick teenager when he pleaded with his MPs to be allowed to stay at the party? Does the fact that he is willing to learn from his mistakes fill you with confidence? or despair! Neil Kinnock, not wishing to keep the title of the worse leader that the Labour party has ever had, has spoken out in his defence. That should have sent enough fears through the Labour back benchers to have dumped this wee timid beastie. Of course Neil's wife has just landed herself a job in the cabinet, unelected, of course, and a seat in the House of Lords, so he wouldn't be wanting to step on her toes, would he? 

The facts are, and Gordon knows it, if he stood down then there would be little chance of holding out until next year for a General election. With the current state of the economy and the MPs greed still fresh in the publics mind there is every chance that the labour party would be banished to the fringes of political life from which it would take at least a generation to recover. And who, of the hopeful leaders to be would want to lead the party into the wilderness? Certainly not Alan Johnson. He sees himself as the next leader of the Labour party, but not until after the next election. He knows that labour can't win the next election, whenever it is called, but at least he would be able to start afresh and leave the blame at Gordon's feet.

From all reports it has been the night of the long knives, but in reverse, with the bully boys threatening the back benchers of isolation from the party machine if they continue to demand that GB steps down. Well, I would have thought that might be a good idea, to isolate yourself from the party machine just at the moment. at least Hazel Blears thinks so. Off she goes to reconnect with her roots. The last thing she wants at the moment is to have either GB or one of his new second rate Ministers coming along to remind her constituents just what she has been part of for the last few years.

It is common knowledge that Brown is indecisive. It appears that he cannot even decide to go home back to Scotland now that the party is over. He is hanging about waiting for the music to stop, offering to help tidy up, with the hope that he will remain on the guest list. 

I have some advice for those labour MPs that think he should go. Start your own party. David Cameron seems to be making a good show of holding a shadow government together. I would suggest that the cabinet Ministers that have resigned of late form their own little shadow cabinet. Forget GB, let him fret and sulk. Tell the public what needs to be done to get both the country and the labour party out of the mess they have got us into. Support the back benchers in their Constituencies. Ask the type of questions at PMQT that will make Gordon squirm. Formulate policy and declare it to the world. At the worse Gordon will copy your ideas, at the best he will be seen as the lost leader that he is, with a public recognition that labour might be worth voting for next time round, with another leader of course.

In touch with her public

So Hazel Blears thinks that "ordinary people are capable of extraordinary things" Well, she has certainly proved that one right. In fact that is her only saving grace. It is a fact that many of the great british public that are calling for her blood, are angry because she has managed to get away, until now, with something that they would have gladly taken a piece of if it had been offered. And they are angry as  much for being  been found out as for being on the take in the first place. In fact Hazel Blears represents a great number of English people today. I say English because I do not want to insult a great number of non English British citizens, of which I know even less than i know about Ms Blears.  I was about to write " we have become" but now question whether it is a recent change in character. But to continue in the original vein, We have become a nation of selfish  wasters. I expect that there will be many that didn't even know who Hazel Blears was until her name came up in the Daily Telegraph league of Parliamentary Adventurers. Her smug smile doesn't help her case a bit but, other than being found out, she hasn't done anything worse that many others, given the chance.  

I'll give you a minute to jot down the names of all those in the news recently who haven't been in the news because of their bad behaviour. I don't expect that the list will be too long. because no one is interested in anyone who hasn't misbehaved. The TV is crammed with shows about people who misbehave, whether in real life or or fiction and the newspapers likewise. Even the Has BGT show is getting in the news over the treatment of Susan Boyle rather than the dancing of the winning group. I happened to pick up the daily mail today, whilst in the Library, and glanced through an article on Peaches Geldof.  Now , there are two things I know about her. One her dad's Bob G and two she is a badly behaved little girl who should be told to go and sit on the naughty step until she can behave herself. But if you type her name into Google you will get 1,100,000 hits. More than twice the number for Hazel Blears. I admit that Miss G is physically more attractive than Ms B, not that this should make any different in our equality minded world, but you can't deny the fact that Ms Blears has tried to do some good for society, whilst Ms G appears hot to care a fig for anyone other than herself. Ms Blears appears to have used the rules to benefit from thousand of pounds tax free profit from house sales: Miss Geldof, we learn earned £25K by tipping off a photographer just where she might be seen slipping out of her top on the beach. The only difference is that Hazel Blears was in a public position where she was making the rules under which we are supposed to live and so her real crime is hypocrisy. Miss Geldof, on the other hand,  well I have given her more publicity than she deserves, so I'll end now.

Move over darling

The fact that Alistair Darling still has a job can only put down to the fact that Gordon Brown is known for being a ditherer. Plus of course he is running out of candidates for his top jobs. Hazel Blears is already on the list to go at the next reshuffle and there can't be many cards left in poor Gordon's hand. Ed Balls is muted for a move to No 11 but if he had any decency he would be packing his bags and going home, if he can remember just where that is these days. When it comes to it there aren't a great number of names that you can think of that might be suitable for a cabinet position that aren't destined for the naughty seat rather than the front bench. Although if they were put on the front bench, where we can keep an eye on their behaviour we might not have so much scandal in the house.

Of course, after hosting this greed fuelled party, poor old Gordon wants to stay behind and help pick up the pieces and put it all back together again before the police turn up. He will, of course, be thinking that if he doesn't then it will be a long time before he is invited to the party again.

When MPs want to sidle off to the Opera rather than attend a boring old debate about the nations economic problems they find a likely candidate from the opposition to pair off with. Perhaps the Holy Trinity, Gordon, David and young Nick can do a deal over the expenses fiasco in a similar way. Cameron could send home one of his number, Nick Clegg one of his and Gordon can do likewise. No waiting to pass go at the next election and collect £30,000 payoffs, though. Just a warm farewell and a free course at the local Tech on home economics. If Cameron, brown and Clegg don't like this idea then I have another. i am assuming that the "Has Briton got talent" set is still in one piece. well. just line up the errant MPs and give them 3 minutes to tell their story and plead for forgiveness. Brown, Cameron and Clegg can take the place of the judging panel and 2 Xs and they are off the stage. The great british public could then be given the opportunity to vote for those that they want to see sent packing and who they want to stay. I expect that the number of votes cast at the usual telephone charge for this type of programme could pay off the National debt and ensure that the whole lot are handed over to the Revenue officers and hopefully not heard from again.

The Great Stink

Never has Parliament been in such a disarray since the Great Stink of 1858. Then it was the over powering smell of the river Thames and the open sewers that discharged into it that caused MPs to abandon Westminster. Today it is the stink of corruption, greed and self satisfying hypocrisy that at the heart of Parliament's problems. But the revelations of the Daily telegraph over the last two weeks  are only a reflection of life in Britain today and there will be many MPs that will consider keeping their mouths shut for just a little longer until the fuss has died down and the great British public is more interested in celebrating the reunion of Jordan and Pete or criticising the judges on "Has Britain Got talent", to worry about some MP getting away with claiming for benefits they were not entitled to. In any case whilst the papers are slaying the MPs it takes the limelight off the thousands of others that are claiming benefits to which they are not entitled, or for which they are entitled but if they got their fat arse out of bed a bit more often they wouldn't need. 

As much as there is a need for political reform, to make the MPs more accountable to the voters, there is also a need for a wider social reform.  Whether there is the will to make the changes necessary i don't know but until we either find the will, or are led kicking and screaming back to reality, we shall continue on this downward spiral. 

Many blame immigration for our troubles but the one factor that binds the vast majority of immigrants is that they come here for a better life and are willing to work hard to get it. Working hard doesn't seem to be the English way anymore though, its more a case of take what there is and p*** it up against the wall. 

Get rid of the erring MPs by all means, all of them if need be, society expects it, and the laws of justice demand it. But lets see a similar sweep through both public and private life exposing the tax fiddles, the benefit fraud, the wasters and the workshy, whether they be sitting in the House of Lords or the Red Lion bar. As a start we can stop using the expression Great Britain, until we can say that we have earned the title, and stop saying the United Kingdom until we are truly united in producing a fair and just community in which everyone contributes up to the limit of their capabilities. Until then, as in Victorian London, the great stink will return on a regular basis.

Yeah But...

There's been so much written about the MPs expenses scandal, what's the point of adding to it? Well, because i am angry, and I hope that you are angry too, and keep being angry! A number of the MPs will be hoping that now Speaker Martin has been removed, if they keep their heads down for a couple of weeks it will all blow over and, whilst they may loose a few perks, they will still be in a job, that pays a decent wage with a very good pension. Well lets not let them keep their heads down, unless it is with shame. 

Don't let them get away with yeah but .. it was within the rules. If they had any judgement at all they knew that it was wrong. But did anyone really try to get things changed. Even David Cameron, who has taken advantage of the situation to demonstrate a few leadership skills, he must have known that you could ride a coach and horses through the allowances scheme, and get the tax payer to pay for the horses. Yet it was not until the cover was blown that there was a lot of huffing and puffing about the need to change the rules.

If any MP that feels that the daily Telegraph has questioned their integrity, then let him, or her, stand down and ask the electorate for their opinion. 

And if the MPs won't stand down, then let us all do what they have done to Speaker Martin. Let us all, shout out as loud and as often as it takes to get them to resign.

 Its clear that Gordon Brown is not going to call an election one moment before he has to, so the only way get a real change is for the electorate to tell them to go, and to go now. 

Although we have had reports on the TV and in the papers about just how angry the public are about the revelations I don't think that it has been displayed as much as an eviction, or non eviction from Big Brother. 

Write to the paper, phone the local radio station, email and write to your MP and tell him to resign so that we can have an election.  Tell them not to pass Go, not to collect another £200 but to go, go now, and we may not shout too loudly if they don't go directly to Jail.

The Last Straw

Jack Straw, the Uk JUSTICE SECRETARY over-claims on his expenses for 4 years and says that he has done nothing wrong. He adds that accountancy is not his strongest suit. Well if he can't add up and he is not honest, and how do you explain such repetitive errors other than dishonesty, or perhaps, incompetence, what does he bring to the cabinet table? 

Alistair Darling does not appear to know whether he is coming or going, after repeatingly changing his mind over the the location of his "second home", each time, surprisingly, to his advantage in being able to claim more and more to feather this "nest". He even claimed for the cost of running his home in his Scottish constituency when living at our expense at No 11, long after the parliamentary commissioner told the Government, of which, remember, our darling friend is a member that this was "wrong".

Hazel Blears, responsible for housing policy, also had this inability to decide just where she lives, claiming for expenses at several homes, and the costs of furnishing them, in a short period of time. Her claims, we are told, are within the pound to the maximum permissible under the rules. Perhaps she can give the Justice Secretary a hand with his accounts. 

Even Gordon Brown has been in on the act, both when he was Chancellor and since becoming Prime Minister.  He appears to have paid for little of his own living costs since moving into No 10 on becoming Prime Minister nearly two years ago. 

The culture secretary says that he has "under claimed" by more than £40K, but what does that say about the "culture" by which his dishonourable colleagues appear to live? MPs have been in the privileged position to set down the rules by which they can be reimbursed, the costs of working in more than one geographical area, their constituency and Westminister. Their belief, in setting the current rules, that these were fair, reasonable and decent can only reflect on the morals by which they live. 

According to the Daily Telegraph, the list goes on. We have only had the first batch of these revelations leaked to us. No doubt over the coming days and weeks we will receive more stories of greed concerning other members of this House of Wastes. 

"Good lord" Mandelson, we are told, went on to claim expenses on his home even after giving his resignation, so we can expect a flurry of claims from at least the Government benches during the next few months as they must all, surely, question their position after the next election. 

Perhaps the next Prime Minister should be looking to employ Gordon Brown's cleaner to clean up the mess that the present Government has left us with, but no doubt it will be us that will be paying the bill.

Owe no man anything

These were the words of James Martineau, taken from Romans, ch xiii, v8, in a lecture on Christian morals given at Hope Street Chapel, in Liverpool. in 1856. Do they have any relevance to our position today?

What would be the result, Martineau asked, if there was to be a universal winding up, every property to go home to its owner, every engagement to be pressed into realisation, every fictitious footing to be destroyed. How many that are first, would find that they are now last.

Not that Martineau was against borrowing and lending, arguing that if were left to the possessors of wealth alone progress of society would be scant. Commerce relied on credit whilst credit is essentially a reliance upon character.

He quotes the old saying "A man must earn for himself before he has a right to borrow from another and must mortgage what he has for the use of what he has not" and that it is wrong to take on trust more than we can give in pledge.

How much better off we would all be if we could but follow this way of life.

My mother said

I am not generally known for quoting my late mother, except to use an unexplainable saying "That's a daddy that is" when failing to find something she had lost. But this week's budget does call to mind something my mother said when I was a teenager and thought I knew it all. When, briefly speaking about some socialist idea I then had heard from elsewhere, there were few "discussions" in our house, my mother replied " God help us if Labour get in. They will bankrupt the Country if they do.  They did it last time and they will do it again." My mother has long since crossed over. Her education was that of living for nearly ninety years and through 2 world wars, bringing up 3 children, all born before the welfare state began. With hospital treatment as it was then she suffered from a thrombosis giving birth to me and was left with leg problems that led to leg ulcers that troubled her for the rest of her life. My father, having a serious knee injury when a young man had what was known as a "stiff leg", being unable to bend it at all. This did not prevent him one bit from carrying out his trade as a general builder, still hopping up ladders and on to the roof when 80 years of age. Nor did it stop him from riding a bicycle, with only one pedal and no free wheel, so he could pedal with just the one leg. 

Dad didn't earn very much and was not the best person to manage his finances. There were many nights when we sat with just a candle after the electricity had been cut off, the bill being left just a little too long after the red reminder, and days when it was a case of emptying out the drawers and many tins and pots to find enough coins to "nip up to the shop" for something for tea. But we were brought up with the knowledge that you had to earn your own living and, as important, "if you made your bed you had to lie on it".

I have to admit that I voted for the fresh faced Tony Blair back in when ever it was. But the Loony Left of the 60s has been replaced by the Loony Centre of the 00s, the fat cat Tories replaced by the fat cat Labour cronies. the age of equality has meant a dumbing down of just about everything that we once held in high regard and we are "as good as Dammit is to swearing" bankrupt. Sorry Mum.

Right and Wrong

So the right dishonourable Mr Hoon believes that it is perfectly right to live in a house provided for by the tax payer, rent out his "main residence" and then claim expenses for running another "home" in Derbyshire. This, surely, brings into question whether our Transport Secretary has any understanding about the meaning of right and wrong. To say that he was acting within the rules is as lame an excuse as "I was only carrying out orders". It would appear that Mr Hoon, Mrs Smith and McNulty have all financially benefited from claiming expenses for second homes. It would appear that they have all received more from the tax payer than it has cost them. Does Mr Hoon and his chums not think that this is basically wrong, even if it may be within the Parliamentary Rules. And if they think that it is wrong, as Mr McNulty now declares, just why has he been doing it?

No wonder we hear about loop holes in the laws that let tax dodgers, rapists and other criminals escape justice if those that we pay to enable the legislation can not even come up with a system of repaying themselves for the reasonable additional costs of doing their job.

If the Government has a number of empty grace and favour homes because Ministers would sooner sleep in their sisters spare bedroom, then perhaps they should be converted in to a number of smaller apartments to be allocated to MPs that need to reside in London during the week. Alternatively, if any MP does claim an allowance for a 2nd home then the costs of running both homes should be submitted and the taxpayer charged for only the lesser of the two. 

Perhaps, also, where the second home is shared by partner/spouse or other consenting adult, the costs of maintaining this home should be split equally between the two of them.

To have and to Hold

The world, it is said, is divided into those that have and those that have not. The events of the last few months with what was originally described as the "Credit Crunch" but has now turned into the biggest financial disaster in living memory, has reminded us that for many the divide between being a "have" and a "have not"is very thin. Many folk in the UK and the US, who would a year ago have been blissfully going about their business of buying and buying, have suddenly found themselves out of work and homeless. Photos on the TV show scenes of camps in the US very much like the refugee camps we have been used to seeing in the under developed countries. Even in the developed world a large percentage of the population are only a couple of pay packets away from destitution. Here in the UK with its often criticised benefit system, there are many who will be holding their heads in their hands and wondering what they will be doing tomorrow.
The leaders of the world's richest nations met this week to declare that this must never happen again and to make unthinkable amounts of money available to prevent it from doing so. Just where is this money suddenly plucked from and if it is as easy as that to find the resources to save our selves who are suffering from a bout of gluttony and wrongdoing, why hasn't more been available to sort out the poverty and starvation in the under developed countries. Thousand up on thousands have died through lack of clean water. Millions live in poverty with little hope of a better life and we have been sad to see them on our widescreen TV in each room and have put a few pounds into the collection box whilst on a boozy night out on Comic Relief night.
The g20 also declare that they will do something about tax haven's that have allowed the very rich to avoid paying their fair dues. Just a minute? Have tax haven's been ok up until now then? Why have they been allowed to exist for as long as they do if they are at fault? And why do we have a Minister in the UK Government who has previously been associated with them?
Of course, what is clear is that there will be many of the "haves" to which the credit crunch will be no more than a mild irritation. They will be making very sure that what they have, they keep, and even do their best at gathering in a bit more from those not so lucky. It is said that "to those that have, it will be given, and to those that do not have, even that that they have shall be taken away from them". Words, I know, which are quoted out of context, but time will show us just how true they are.

Obscenity

So our Home Secretary is said to be furious with Mr Smith. Was this because he has been found out watching "adult movies" whilst wifey is away protecting our citizens from cut-throats and muggers. After all it was Mrs Smith that put in the claim for her TV package with Virgin Media as part of her allowances windfall. Apart from the question as to why we should be paying for her TV package at all- there is a perfectly adequate free digital TV supply available, is it the case that the "blue movie" charge has just opened the door to the fact that we had been paying for her TV for some time and this new revelation has merely let the cat out of the bag? 

Ms Smith is also the Home Secretary that wants to tighten up the laws to protect women from the sex trade. Does she condone her husband watching these films or does she consider that the women  in them are as equally exploited as those who work in massage parlours or walk the streets. She has said " I want to do everything we can to protect the thousands of vulnerable women coerced, exploited or trafficked into prostitution in our country and to bring those who take advantage of them to justice.

"That is why I am determined to shift the focus onto the sex buyer, the person responsible for creating the demand for prostitution markets which in turn creates demand for the vile trade of women being trafficked for sexual exploitation"

Does the honourable lady consider that these late night escapades by Mr Smith equate in anyway with the lap dance customer and the curb crawler?  Or are "adult movies" a normal part of the Smith family weekend viewing pattern after a hard week in the House? 

Men will always be willing to pay for sex just as women will always be willing to have sex in return for favours, monetary or otherwise. The stately homes of England, and the House of landlords, are full of families descended from such principles. 

Mrs Smith, who's morals are not open to doubt after claiming around £100,000 in allowances for the occasional use of a room in her sister's house, perhaps needs to spend more time with her family, as the saying goes. 

The fact that Mrs Smith, and several of her cohorts have been caught with their pants down over their expenses, no doubt loaded down with doubloons, shows the lack of moral character amongst our elected members. Or is it just shear incompetence? But no doubt we do get the Government we deserve.

What does not surprise me as much as it should, is the fact that the Government, who we trust (?) to run the country, can't even think up a equitable method by which to pay those we elect to Govern us.

Oh yes, I remember now! Ms Smith has said that she didn't realise that the Broadband connection she had signed up to included a TV package. I hope she reads the small print a little better before she signs her ministerial papers.

British values

So Gordon Brown has said that the bankers "had acted outside the values everyday people trying to uphold in their daily lives." Well does he consider that MPs who claim allowances just because they are available, and not to off set an actual necessary expense, are upholding these values? The Home Secretary says that we must protect British values, but what exactly are the values that she wishes to protect? The ones that suggest that if its there you should take it, even if you don't need it?; The values expressed by the celebrity culture that is so prevalent in Britain today? Where you can be famous just for being ignorant;; The values reflected by the suggestion that grandparents should receive tax credits (be paid) for carrying out a basic family function of looking after the grandchildren?; The values expressed by the fact that Jonathan Ross was not sacked over his criminal behaviour and was even invited to host a top awards event?; The values reflected by the 4 FAT people complaining that they were too heavy to work and need more benefits?; The values reflected in the report that a hospital patient was left without feeding for 26 days in a Uk hospital?; or The values reflected by the fact that the people employed in the banking industry who created many of the conditions that led to this mess we are in can walk away with a fat pension, whilst those that have invested their life savings, to provide for themselves in latter years, see them reduced to little more than waste paper.
If the values include the freedom of speech, then why is the Government planning to record all our emails? If they include fair play then why aren't the erring bankers forming a queue to hand back the bonuses that they have been paid or the small fortunes they have made in betting on which company shares they can put into a tail spin? And why, indeed, isn't this Government falling on its sword? Perhaps there is a real need for throwing away the current values of the Uk and adopting new ones, from all sections of the community.

So Sharon Shoesmith plays the Victim card on radio 4

Not having read the official report into what went wrong at Haringey, I can't rightly comment on the rights and wrongs of Ms Shoesmith's treatment by her employer.
Whenever something dreadful happens, and something dreadful did happen in the anonymous property where "baby P" died, even though similarly dreadful things are happening every hour of every day somewhere we have not tuned our attention to, then we must have someone to fall on their sword to ease the burden of the rest of us. Well in this case it was not going to be a Government Minister who would put his/her hand to say "It was me". After all any Government Minister can only be responsible for the short time that he/she has held the post and can not, obviously, be responsible for all the poor decision making that has precluded him/her. Ed Balls for one doesn't seem to be the kind of man that would take any sort of responsibility for this case. Much easier to take the line becoming more common with our current "Government" of “the proper thing is to stay to sort the mess out", whilst not adding "and I'm not certainly not going until I'm pushed and with the Government in such a mess there's at least a 50:50 chance that wont happen" .

The fact that Ms Shoesmith appeared on all of the TV coverage to be a "hard faced bitch" certainly made it easier for those that saw her as the natural candidate for taking the blame.

Samuel Smiles, in the mid 1880s, commented on the No blame culture that then existed. “They tell us no one is to blame. That terrible Nobody. How much he has to answer for. More mischief is done by Nobody than by all the world besides”. We, however, have moved from the laissez-faire culture of the 1800s to the knee jerk legislation of the current century.

Someone was responsible for the death of “Baby P”. At the top of the list was the man that killed him and the mother who did not stop it happening. Of that there is no doubt. But of course the responsibility, rather than the blame, does also fall on others, and we all probably have to stand somewhere in the line.

“Baby P” and all the other poor little sods that live a miserable life at the hands of inadequate mothers and their “boyfriends” deserve the opportunity to live a better life. We happily put the responsibility for protecting these children into the hands of the Social Services Departments, wring our hands in despair when things inevitably go wrong, call for more legislation, more checks, more paperwork, none of which will have saved this tiny life.

As for Ms Shoesmith. Well it is good, for once, to see someone from the public services sacked without a massive payout. Whether the Council will be found to have acted in accordance with all of the rules and regulations that surround employment conditions and dismissal, or not, is still to be determined, at even greater expense.

My opinion, for what it is worth, is that Ms Shoesmith was at the helm so it was right that she should go. She should not pass Go and should not collect her £200.