Gordon Brown
The British public … were at no stage invited to vote on whether Gordon Brown should be PM.
I don’t remember any Labour spokesman revealing that they planned to do a big switcheroo after only two years.
..a transition about as democratically proper as the transition from Claudius to Nero.
Brown’s looking for a Scottish ally
It’s the arrogance. It’s the contempt. That’s what gets me. It’s Gordon Brown’s apparent belief that he can just trample on the democratic will of the British people. It’s at moments like this that I think the political world has gone mad, and I am alone in detecting the gigantic fraud.
Everybody seems to have forgotten that the last general election was only two years ago, in 2005. A man called Tony Blair presented himself for re-election, and his face was to be seen – even if less prominently than in the past – on manifestos, leaflets, television screens and billboards. We rather gathered from the Labour prospectus that said Blair was going to be Prime Minister. Indeed, Tony sought a new mandate from the British electorate with the explicit promise that he would serve a full term.
The British public sucked its teeth, squinted at him closely, sighed and, with extreme reluctance, decided to elect him Prime Minister for another five years. Let me repeat that. They voted for Anthony Charles Lynton Blair to serve as their leader. They were at no stage invited to vote on whether Gordon Brown should be PM.
I must have knocked on hundreds of doors during that campaign, and heard all sorts of opinions of Mr Blair, not all of them favourable. But I do not recall a single member of the public saying that he or she was yearning for Gordon Brown to take over. Perhaps I missed it, but I don’t remember any Labour spokesman revealing that they planned to do a big switcheroo after only two years.
It is a sad but undeniable truth that there are huge numbers of voters (including many Tory types) who have rather liked the cut of Tony’s jib. They have tended to admire his easy manner, and his air of sincerity, and his glistering-toothed rhetoric. They may have had a sneaking feeling – in spite of Iraq – that he has not wholly disgraced Britain on the international stage; and though you or I may think they were wrong, they unquestionably existed.
In 2005, there was a large number who voted Labour on the strength of a dwindling but still significant respect for the Prime Minister. They voted for Tony, and yet they now get Gordon, and a transition about as democratically proper as the transition from Claudius to Nero. It is a scandal.
Why are we all conniving in this stitch-up? This is nothing less than a palace coup, effected by the Brownites, and it is possible only because Tony had run out of road. He knew that the Brownites would eventually assassinate him, and so he decided to go “at a time of his own choosing” and, with North Korean servility, the Labour Party has handed power over to the brooding Scottish power-maniac.
The extraordinary thing is that it looks as though he will now be in 10 Downing Street for three years, and without a mandate from the British people. No one elected Gordon Brown as Prime Minister, which is bad enough; but what makes things worse is that he now proposes to share power with a group of people even less elected than himself – the Liberal Democrats.
Yes, that’s right: in revelations that yesterday rocked Westminster, it emerged that Sir Menzies Campbell has been engaged in talks with Gordon, about a “government of all the talents”, which must be faintly mystifying to all those Labour candidates, activists and voters who have been engaged in fighting the Liberal Democrats. They thought they were campaigning for Tony Blair – and it now turns out there was a secret plan to bring in Gordon Brown and assorted Liberal Democrats, including good old Paddy Pantsdown.
Correct me if I am wrong, but I don’t remember the electorate being asked their views of a Gord-Ming Lib-Lab coalition. It is fraud and double-fraud.
Why is Gordon Brown doing it? Because he is worried, of course, about his own democratic credentials to lead the United Kingdom. Last week, the exuberant Scottish executive, led by the Nationalists, decided that they would scrap any kind of co-financing for Scottish universities. Scottish students would go Scot-free, and so would Finns, Latvians, Germans, French, Portuguese, Luxembourgers and everyone except, of course, the English, who will continue to pay.
One of the consequences of this decision to return to taxpayer-funded universality (except for the English) is that the financial and competitive position of Scottish universities will continue to deteriorate. English universities, on the other hand, have received a cash injection of £1.35 billion in fees, and are thereby able to lure away Scottish lecturers; and many English university vice-chancellors hope to get more cash if it ever proves possible to lift the cap on fees.
In those circumstances – with a potential conflict of interest between English and Scottish universities – it is unthinkable that Gordon Brown and the other 58 Scottish MPs should be able to sit and vote on higher education finance in England, when English MPs have no say over the matter in Scotland.
How can Gordon Brown decide on the rights and wrongs of English top-up fees when they could put Scottish universities at a further financial disadvantage? Of course, he might decide he wants English students to pay more for tuition in England, whatever the consequences for Scotland. But how can he really assess the impact of fees that will never be paid by his own constituents?
He must know in his heart that the position is increasingly morally repugnant, and I would guess that is one reason why he would like to bring in Ming Campbell, his neighbour in Fife. He can see trouble brewing, and would like to forge an alliance with another Scottish party leader against the logical and obvious Tory solution – English votes for English laws.
We cannot allow this Belgian-style coalition to be foisted on us. We know that there is not a cat’s chance in hell of a referendum on the new EU treaty, in spite of the further transfers of sovereignty involved. Gordon Brown could appease public indignation over that, and secure the democratic mandate he needs, by asking the public to vote at once on him, on the new EU treaty, and on the implications of the devolutionary settlement. Let’s have an election without delay.
80 Comments
Woops, apologies for the duplication, don’t know what happened there.
Rate This:
0 
0
…a transition about as democratically proper as the transition from Claudius to Nero.
This must have been said before I’m sure, but also perhaps from Mrs Thatcher to John Major?
It has been blindingly obvious among the electorate for a long while now that Gordon Brown would almost certainly succeed Tony Blair once he stepped down. This was no doubt in the minds of voters as they went to the polls.
Although that said, Boris’ point does raise questions about the British system that he himself would – as a shadow minister – be ill-advised to raise. Chris Walker’s first comment illustrates this point perfectly.
Boris – I love you, but you really do have to stop walking into these things old boy.
Rate This:
0 
0
Y’know, Tony’s still got time to call an election…
Rate This:
0 
0
Yes yes, the West Lothian question does seem to be rather unfortunate. The last decade has been led by Scots – who are lovely people – but it’s a bit much when they’re red in the face for independance.
Let’s hope the SNP speed up this whole independance thing – then we can go to the EU Court of Justice and moan about them. Also then we could elect a Conservative government. It works out for everyone.
Rate This:
0 
0
Gordon Brown is OK in my book – just a bit on the dull side. He has been practising in the mirror on his sparkler technique with his new shiny methodology. I think it may be working, too.
I do not know why people feel the urge to throw beer and eggs over you, Boris. Maybe they think your candyfloss coiffure looks too snowball-like and they want to turn you into a recipe. I do not know why you need police protection and a team to guide you through the back alleys and tradesmen entrances in order to avoid the general public. David Cameron does not attract this kind of attention. Perhaps people are jealous of your toff-like background and they think you are out of touch with real people and reality. Maybe you should go on Big Brother, NOT CELEB BB, to experience the real side of life and the trials of ordinary people. Maybe you should go incognito for a while, dye your hair black, grow a beard and live as a tramp for a couple of weeks. Maybe people would accept your politics if you got your hands dirty. Maybe if you could experience the hardships of others, then the rankling problems that you drag about with you could be assuaged somewhat. Maybe you should rid yourself of parasites like some of the wannabe Tory schmucks that attach themselves to you like limpets. That would be a definite bonus.
Rate This:
0 
0
Cameron’s Left Foot said:
Maybe…maybe…maybe…maybe
You sound like a seedy, spin doctoring, failed politico apparatchik, Cameron’s Left Foot. Though I wouldn’t like to guess for which party.
Maybe you should admit how horribly jealous you are of Boris’s broad popularity and go and get a real job.
Rate This:
0 
0
Oh Liberty, Oh, Liberty!! This is your job????
I am on holiday from my job. This is my hobby. This is my excuse for posting well-intentioned humorous advice to a politician. At least I am not throwing eggs and beer. What is your excuse???
Boris has only two responders in his mainstream tabloid article and I would not even dare to venture there, because I am on holiday and my advice would not be applicable in the mainstream world. Boris has conveyed his points perfectly well without ulterior dabbling therewith.
Rate This:
0 
0
As others have pointed out, both the main parties of government have given us Prime Ministers who served time at No 10 without having won a general election as leader.
I belive that the Conservatives have 3 post-war – Anthony Eden, Alec Douglas-Home and John Major, of who only Major was able to win a general election. Labour gave us Jim Callaghan, and now Gordon (who may yet call an election sooner rather than later).
I also think it was fairly obvious to people who voted for Labour in 2005 that they might get Brown. It could not have been less obvious to voters who picked Maggie that they would get John Major, who very few people would have even heard of in 1987.
It’s legitimate to use the Brown situation to argue for constitutional reform, but not for a Tory MP to accuse Labour of bad faith with the electorate when they themselves have done exactly the same thing in the past, and will undoubtedly do the same thing in the future when they make it back to government.
Rate This:
0 
0
Boris you ask, “Correct me if I am wrong, but I don’t remember the electorate being asked their views of a Gord-Ming Lib-Lab coalition. It is fraud and double-fraud. Why is Gordon Brown doing it?”
GB is looking for the big one, the big idea/move/or thing that will give him the unassailable position. He knows that without it he will drive us all completely mad with his fiddling and meddling. He will quickly prove he’s no leader and will be asphyxiated in a mire of his own making.
Rate This:
0 
0
Camerons Left Foot said:
Oh Liberty, Oh, Liberty!! This is your job????
Oh, alright, perhaps I was a bit hard on you. I apologise for that – though not for defending Boris. We should all stand up for Boris, CLF, because he’s one of the few decent, human and honest politicians we have.
Rate This:
0 
0
< ‘Maybe you should go on Big Brother, NOT CELEB BB, to experience the real side of life and the trials of ordinary people’ (Camerons Left Foot)<
So going on a reality TV show would be a better way of experiencing ‘the real side of life and the trials of ordinary people’ than taking constituency surgeries, and dealing with reams of correspondence from ordinary members of the general public?
I can’t think of a better way for a ‘toff’ to understand the trials and tribulations of life than to become an MP.
Rate This:
0 
0
Even as a faithful Labour man, thanks for giving a mention to George MacDonald Fraser on Question Time the other night; he deserves a knighthood much more than ‘Sir’ Salman.
Alas, even though the man is utterly brilliant, I fear he will always be denied top honours because of his fearlessly honest reportage and welcome gift for humour, which, so many – bizzarely – find a threat…………..
Rate This:
0 
0
I can’t see much substance in your arguments this time Mr J.
Swapping the PM (under the radar so to speak) is a time honoured tradition of both parties so presumably you are implying that the next Conservative government will effect legislation such that a change in leadership of the party in government signals a general election.
Didn’t think so.
What is iniquitous in my view is when a member of the house elected on one ticket, such as Grantham’s Quentin Davies, crosses the floor without having the courtesy to resign their seat.
So, the good people of Grantham and Stamford were under the impression that they had a Conservative representative in the house only to discover that the duplicitous wretch was sailing under a flag of convenience.
Entirely disgraceful in my opinion.
P.S. I second Mr. Comiskey’s motion to ennoble George MacDonald Fraser; utterly brilliant writer and far more deserving of public honour than the slightly weaselly Mr. Rushdie.
Rate This:
0 
0
Stop press: In other related news – Quentin Davies (Conservative MP) has moved over to Brown:
Davies’ resignation letter
In his resignation letter to Conservative leader David Cameron, Me Davies wrote, ” Under your leadership the Conservative Party appears to me to have ceased collectively to believe in anything, or to stand for anything.
” Although you have many positive qualities you have three, superficiality, unreliability and an apparent lack of any clear convictions, which in my view ought to exclude you from the position of national leadership
” It has no bedrock. It exists on shifting sands. A sense of mission has been replaced by a PR agenda.”
” Believe it or not I have no personal animus against you. You have always been perfectly courteous in our dealings. You are intelligent and charming.
” As you know, however, I never supported you for the leadership of the party – even when, after my preferred candidate Ken Clarke had been defeated in the first round, it was blindingly obvious that you were going to win.”
He said that believing what he did, ‘” Believing that as I do, ‘ I clearly cannot honestly remain in the party. I do not intend to leave public life’.
Mr Davies said he had found increasingly that ‘I am naturally in agreement’ with the Labour Party. He praised Mr Brown as ‘a leader I have always greatly admired, who I believe is entirely straightforward, and who has a towering record, and a clear vision for the future of our country which I fully share’.
The 63-year-old is a former diplomat. He has been shadow Northern Ireland secretary and shadow defence secretary. He became an MP in 1987.
Rate This:
0 
0
Remember Matthew Paris attempting to live on unemployment benefit on a sink estate? That’s an experience that would do members from both sides of the House some good.
Somewhat ironic Mel, when the way Davies describes Cameron, even if valid, sounds exactly like a description of Blair. I find it slightly difficult to view it as an act of conscience when it’s so PR timed. Mind you, the boy David is affable, but does appear somewhat too weak. Is Boris going to follow suit?
Rate This:
0 
0
Yet another Cameron-inspired defection is oddly remininscent of the numerous Labour defections in the late ’70s in the wake of the growing leftist stranglehold on the party. Thankfully, many of them joined Thatcher’s Conservatives.
What continues to unnerve me with the current situation however is that the more fluffy, centrist, ambiguous and ‘New Labour’ the Tories become, the more they push people with legitimate (and traditionally conservative) concerns into the arms of far-right nutcases that promise them solutions from their platform of discrimination and hate.
Already the UK Independence party is becoming a refugee camp for disillusioned Tories. I admit to knowing very little about UKIP, though it is a party frequently accused of being the respectable face of racism and far-right radicalism.
Does anybody here have a good authority on them? From what I’ve read of their policies they appear a solidly Thatcherite party, but this could very well be a façade.
Rate This:
0 
0
Melissa said:
Stop press: In other related news – Quentin Davies (Conservative MP) has moved over to Brown:
Very small beer by comparison, I know, Melissa, however Cameron’s attack on Brown & Blair’s refusal to stand by Blair’s Referendum promise may have driven pro-EU Quentin out but it’s driven anti-EU me – and many others too – back into the fold.
Rate This:
0 
0
< ‘A sense of mission has been replaced by a PR agenda’ (Quentin Davies resignation letter) <
Anyone with so much as one eye poking out of the sand can see that PR has become central to politics on both sides, and that David Cameron is a good PR man. However, this is surely a natural reaction to a celebrity and media obsessed electorate. Hardly anyone seems to go out in search of the facts these days or to make much effort to form their own opinions. Is it any wonder that politicans have to embrace the media to get their points across to the voters?
As for the Tories not standing for anything, I’m not sure how he can come to this conclusion. Cameron has made it perfectly clear that he champions the environment, less state interference, sharing the proceeds of economic growth between the taxpayer and public services, a less federalist EU, forging political alliances with New Europe who see eye to eye with many British Conservatives on this, builidng on both Thatcher’s and Blair’s policies on secondary education with regards to Grammar Schools/City Academies and greater individidual responsibility.
It’s quite apparent to many voters that Gordon Brown believes in more state interference, taking the proceeds of economic growth in the form of tax hikes to spend on an ever increasing, and ever more pointless, public sector, a federalist EU and punative wealth re-distribution based on crude means testing policies that reward irresponsible behaviour whilst penalising self-respect.
I hope Quentin Davies enjoys admiring Gordon Brown from behind on the Labour back benches and sharing his vision for the future of Scotland. I’m sure you’ll meet all sorts of wonderful new friends in the Labour Party and have many inspiring after-dinner conversations about Gordon’s wet dreams of financial equality for the criminal classes with all your new comrades.
Rate This:
0 
0
“I admit to knowing very little about UKIP, though it is a party frequently accused of being the respectable face of racism and far-right radicalism.”
The problem with these right wingnuts is what they say and what they do may be two entirely different things.
For example, If you read the BNP manifesto literature on their website, it’s not entirely dissimilar to a robust, if somewhat right wing, Tory agenda. You certainly don’t come away with the impression that a pair of jackboots and an armband are quietly waiting in the stationary cupboard. It’s this thin and undeserved veneer of respectability that allows them to operate at all. Sadly, as with Boris’ slightly hypocritical tilt at Labour in the article above, no other party could legitimately criticise the BNP for such a fraudulent representation because they all do it.
This tacit acceptance of pre-election mendacity, if anything, epitomises modern democracy; it’s a license to lie. And, because we unconsciously expect this type of behaviour from our elected representatives, when such mendacity is exposed we just blithely accept that that’s what politicians do: Lie. It’s almost in their job description nowadays.
Kelly, BEA, Dodgy dossiers all scream cover-up but what do we do? Give a Gallic shrug and ignore it.
Rate This:
0 
0
Liberty – you have a point on EU matters and I agree with you on that. Let’s hope that Blair doesn’t head the Eurocrats next as in top dog for Council of Ministers. That would send many of us reeling…
Rate This:
0 
0
I don’t know about ‘good authority’, but I did go to one UKIP meeting. The leadership is OK and very entertaining (also very polished), but you can hear the heels of the jackboots click when some members talk, and the local organiser is ex-BNP. Others seem to think it’s possible to return to the 1950s. Their main funder ran betting shops round here and he’s alright, his wife used to dabble in antiques and I was in her shop several times, she’s a nice lady. They are producing some quite good publicity/propaganda … I particularly liked the map that depicted S.E.England as part of France, but then I realised that there were advantages to being part of France. However, despite claims to the contrary, they still appear to be a single issue party.
On the other hand they do still have open public meetings, and how many other politicians dare risk that today?
Rate This:
0 
0
“Blair Has Accepted Mid East Envoy Role”
Yup, it’s another world beater.
Consider this:
1) Mr Blair makes no secret of his Christian fervour.
2) Mr Blair is an ardent amateur theologian and, given his Catholic leanings, no doubt takes the Bible more literally than many.
Whichever side of the fence one sits in terms of the Israel/Palestine issue how can anyone select a mediator who:
a) Perceives the point of departure in the whole situation to be that the land in question was given to one side by God?
b) Has been co-responsible for the deaths of between 100,000 and 650,000 (ref Johns Hopkins) Moslems.
c) Has just, inexplicably, knighted Slim Rushdie presumably to show Moslems who’s boss. (I can think of no other reason. It certainly can’t be because of Rushdie’s writing which can only be described as turgid at best. Given a choice between reading ‘The Satanic Verses’ and a telephone directory I would already be skipping through the C’s)
d) Expresses his embrace of hard line Christianity to which Islam is a direct contradiction and therefore, one presumes, an affront.
e) Is friendly with the world’s foremost despot who makes no secret of his antipathy to all things Middle Eastern and whose government supports one side in the dispute to the tune of $15M – $50M dollars per day.
You can almost hear the collective Palestinian “You’ve got to be f**king kidding!” from here.
Rate This:
0 
0
So it’s a good place to send him then. I wonder if he could be persuaded to wear a target on his back?
Rate This:
0 
0
Quentin Davies’s defection is of no consequence. The new generation of Tory supporters will be glad to see the back of a pompous old windbag and Labour will be lumbered with him. Good luck to them.
Paradoxically, Davies has done Cameron two favours. He has also taught DC a lesson he badly needed. Let’s hope he learns from it.
Rate This:
0 
0
I don’t give a monkey’s if Cameron smoked ganj or not, but I really don’t like the look of this which someone sent me a link to: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2007/02/14/noxford14.xml
I’m not sure how I feel about someone who belonged to something like that running the country. It would be better if he was willing to speak out against that sort of extreme privilege. Sane to Boris, who is also on the photo.
Rate This:
0 
0
Catch up Klinker, old chap. That one’s been done to death.
Rate This:
0 
0
“So it’s a good place to send him then. I wonder if he could be persuaded to wear a target on his back?”
Lol.
A friend of mine made a wry comment today along the same lines and added the following observation: If you say something derogatory about Mohammed or draw an amusing cartoon, it appears that some Iranian Mullah will obligingly issue a fatwah making it incumbent on all Moslems to whack the offender. So, rubbing out a significant percentage of Iraq’s Islamic population is therefore, presumably, pretty much okay.
I think they should issue some sort of rule book.
Rate This:
0 
0
klinker, I was a Mod in the 1960s. I wore stilettos, winkle pickers, platform shoes and other contraptions which would now be banned on grounds of ‘elf and safety, eye make up you could scrape off with a knife and hair sprayed bouffants which were a fire hazard and made a scraping sound when a brush was dragged through them. On various occasions I was decidedly anti-social. I’m now a law abiding and sensibly dressed businesswoman.
Rebellion is a – necessary and healthy – stage which most young people pass through before eventually growing out of it.
Rate This:
0 
0
Is it true that Blair’s Middle East envoy role is designed to provide Blair with immunity from prosecution in respect of any crimes he’s committed? If so, this is one law which must be changed.
Rate This:
0 
0
I’m afraid, Liberty, that the Bullingdon was not normal teenage rebellion, but rather David (and Boris) continuing to wallow in etonian privilege when finally they had a chance to mix with people from different backgrounds. Aged 18, they really should have been mature enough to know better.
Rate This:
0 
0
Aged 18, they really should have been mature enough to know better. (Klinker)
Aged 18, some of them probably hadn’t even had carnal knowledge. And how do you know they didn’t “mix with people of different backgrounds” while also having the occasional silly get-together with their old school friends? It would be odd if they didn’t.
Never judge a man by the child he once was.
Rate This:
0 
0
< ‘I’m not sure how I feel about someone who belonged to something like that [the Bullingdon Club] running the country. It would be better if he was willing to speak out against that sort of extreme privilege. (klinker)<
I can’t help but think, that one of the people who has done more for our country and it’s people than just about anyone I can think of, and who carries on promoting our country and good causes tirelessly into old age, came from a background that is the very personification of extreme privilege. I am talking of course about Her Majesty the Queen.
There are all manner of student gangs, clubs and cliques up and down our campuses. Many do shameful things, steal, vadalise, take drugs and generally abuse our freedoms. Please remember that one of the most trusted members of Blair’s cabinet was once a member of the Communist Party, and stood firmly not only against any sort of ‘privilege’, but against the very freedoms that make us British. I’m sure that Brown’s new cabinet will include a few people with skeletons in the closet.
This Bullingdon Club thing about smashing restaurants is the sort of behaviour that warrants a good clip around the earhole, no-one denies that. Mind you they pay for the damage. I never gave back the road sign I nicked when I was a student. No one needs to speak up against privilege, it’s opportunity and freedom that Britian needs more of. Privileged people seem to do a lot in the way of extending opportunity to others less fortunate than themselves. HRH Prince Charles runs the Princes Trust, Cameron want’s to see a ‘grammar stream’ in every school. Boris speaks up for the freedom to attend university, and enjoy the opportunities it provides, against middle-class whinges that too many kids are being hurded in.
What have New-Labour done exactly to provide more opportunity, or more freedom to people? As they destroy freedom with their regulation agenda, and stifle opportunity by politicising and dumbing down education, all they do is exacberate the effect of privilege.
Rate This:
0 
0
PaulD said:
Aged 18, some of them probably hadn’t even had carnal knowledge.
‘Carnal knowledge’. That lovely expression reminds me that I’ve been wondering if our Jimmy (aka Gordon) has been reinvented and given body language and speech presentation lessons by Bill Clinton or, more likely, one of his aides. Isn’t that partly what Clinton was hinting at during his speech at the last nulab conference?
Watch out for Jimmy to try to copy the Clinton thumb – he’s already had a go, dismal attempt it was too. No matter how hard he tries, poor old Jimmy’s own – very revealing – body language and the subconscious compulsions underlying it creeps in. He just cannot keep the lid on his compulsions for long. Just wait until the nulab honeymoon’s over and he’s under pressure, he’s going to be hilarious when the learned responses begin to unravel
How do I get from Carnal knowledge to Clinton? Well, aside from the obvious explanation, the secret of Clinton’s charisma and prowess as a speech maker has been said to be his ability to have carnal knowledge (presumably tantric?) with each individual in his audience.
Lord help us if old Jimmy gets any ideas along those lines, since his idea of carnal is probably a good old nose pick. Yuck! Too disgusting to even think about that.
Rate This:
0 
0
klinker said:
I’m afraid, Liberty, that the Bullingdon was not normal teenage rebellion
What exactly is ‘normal’ teenage rebellion, klinker? You’d be horrified by some of the dreadful stuff I got up to as a teenager. I was a real junvenile delinquent. Yet now, aside from the occasional demo, I’m such a Goody Two-Shoes.
Rate This:
0 
0
Steven_L said:
I can’t help but think, that one of the people who has done more for our country and it’s people than just about anyone I can think of, and who carries on promoting our country and good causes tirelessly into old age, came from a background that is the very personification of extreme privilege. I am talking of course about Her Majesty the Queen.
Good point, Steven_L!
Rate This:
0 
0
Well Liberty, it’s quite simple really. Rebellion (at a personal level) means rebelling against your background. What else have you got to rebel against? And Cameron (and Boris) didn’t: they chose to remain in the reactionary cocoon of privilege and wealth.
Please, no more talk of rebellion when it so clearly wasn’t.
Rate This:
0 
0
Steven L:
“This Bullingdon Club thing about smashing restaurants is the sort of behaviour that warrants a good clip around the earhole, no-one denies that. Mind you they pay for the damage.”
That’s the worst bit: they peeled off a few notes from a wad of money they’d never lifted an idle finger to earn. What a shameful lot these etons were, and are.
Rate This:
0 
0
…continuing to wallow in etonian privilege
The Klinkers of the world make me pewk. Theirs is the cheapest shot. They are the first to scream if anyone makes an oblique remark about someone who is “different” by accident of birth, yet they are quite happy to crucify someone whose accident is the school they were sent to.
What is so very wrong with some people in power having the benefit of an education at one of the world’s finest academic institutions, which also happens to have produced a succession of great Prime Ministers over the centuries?
What does he want? Hansard in rap?
And no, the nearest I’ve been to Eton is getting lost outside Slough.
Rate This:
0 
0
Furthermore, Klinker, what shred of evidence do you have that either Cameron or Boris have made bad decisions on the basis of their background, other than trying to uphold standards of common decency?
Compare with the class-ridden bile pouring from certain quarters of New Labour and there’s no contest.
Rate This:
0 
0
I think a privileged background is a good thing to have for a Prime Minister myself. Less likely to have a chip on their shoulder that way. People like Boris go into politics because they care about the nation and want to help shape it’s future for the better. If all he’d wanted was money, with the contacts he’s got, he could have walked into any investment bank he’d wanted. I’m not saying Gordon Brown didn’t enter politics with the same intention, it’s just I disagree with his politics, Cameron, and Boris, on the other hand I like the sound of.
Rate This:
0 
0
Chris is right, Boris. You seem to have fallen into the trap of thinking the PM is a President, even though I’m sure you would use ‘presidential’ as a criticism.
Rate This:
0 
0
I tend to judge people by what they think, say, and do, rather than where they come from. Since I’m something of a disciple of Peter Kropotkin’s, and he was a Tsarist prince, this is hardly surprising. He was also a revolutionary and a genius. I do however crack the odd joke at public school boys’ expense (never at public school girls’ expense!), but then I do the same to that NuLab shower … Prescott talking about ‘class war’ when he lives in a mansion had me in stitches … just what class does he think he represents? Has he never heard of social mobility? There are very few, if any, working class representatives amongst Labour’s front ranks anymore, unlike the days when Churchill pointed out that class background and privileged education didn’t seem to inhibit the opposition front benches in a memo to Butler.
As I told Mel in an email, I was at Kings. It was for a party back in the days Liberty is talking about (though I’m not sure she’d have liked my flares, long hair and dope, but I would have traded some for some of her pills and we could have listened to Otis and Aretha together). Coming from red-flag Hull I managed to persuade the lads (the most privileged group at the time, or so I was told somewhat disgustedly by the middle class socialist bloke that had invited me down to Cambridge) to nick a crate of champagne … they were very good thieves once I got them into the idea (Kings can afford it, I assure you). We laid on the grass and drank it from the bottles as the sun rose, recycling the bottles by chucking the empties into the river. There was nowt wrong with them lads Clinker.
I’m not sure however that ‘paying for the damage’ can excuse vandalism. Does paying off the life insurance premium excuse murder?
My objection to this Bulligdon Club biz is that the boogras never invited me along … I do a damned good line in vandalism guys!
The problem with elitist education is that it puts everyone else at a disadvantage, there’s no problem with the nature of the education itself. I would suggest that there is a contradiction here for a contemporary technology-based democracy worthy of the name, though I’m not suggesting any solution to it.
Perhaps it’s time that we either elected our PM in a presidential manner, since both Thatcher and Blair have acted in that way, or curtailed such abuse of the position. Not too sure about Her Maj for PM though (or about such emotive arguments) … if Scotland does leave the Union, will they crown a Stuart king? We always did rebellion much better than revolution in this country.
Rate This:
0 
0
PaulD: “Furthermore, Klinker, what shred of evidence do you have that either Cameron or Boris have made bad decisions on the basis of their background”
calling people from Liverpool plebs. It’s a cheap and predictable shot that no doubt gets a few sniggers in posh circles, but ultimately serves to reinforce stereotypes that contribute to stopping people achieving their potential.
Rate This:
0 
0
Hello.
Crack on Boris. More of the same please.
Here’s a pretty picture of Gordy:
http://www.englandism.com/images/gordon-brown-prime.jpg
Enjoy
Rate This:
0 
0
< ‘Does paying off the life insurance premium excuse murder?’ (Agent Provocateur)<
In some cultures the payment of ‘blood money’ is perfectly acceptable. In British culture, if you break something it is polite to pay for it. If you spill someones drink you offer to buy another one. Let’s face it, if you were a restauranteur in Oxford you’d rub your hands together when the Bullingdon Club booked a table, get the cheapy crockery out, invite your hardest looking mate around for the evening and squeeze them for everything you could get.
Rate This:
0 
0
“It’s the rich wot gets the pleasure,
It’s the poor wot gets the blame ……”
Yobs are yobs, whatever class they’re from. And crime is crime. As Durkheim pointed out, on an island of saints dropping litter is a death penalty offence. Reference to more primitive cultures is irrelevant when considering the laws of this country. To excuse such behaviour is pure hypocrisy if one then intends to punish chavs for similar behaviour simply because they can’t or won’t pay. All must be treated equally under law or law itself is brought into disrepute. If the rich can be seen to be getting away with it why should anyone else obey it?
Rate This:
0 
0
Further to Chris Walker et al (initial comments)
Agreed.The constitutional position is that we elect a government not a PM and that the cabinet is responsible for the UK. Gordon Brown has the legal right to be PM and the cabinet has the legal right, as the executive, to introduce and adapt legislation in the legislature.
I would argue that Gordon Brown and any MP not elected in an English constituency does not have the MORAL right to govern the English in matters not equally applicable to the electorate which provided the mandate.
This is not a little England hissy fit. This is coming mainstream and the degree of ‘frustration’ that is felt across England is actually, to me, getting frightening. Believe me, I know.
This is not about disliking the Scots. Not that there has ever been anything but the greatest kindness and fraternal love directed southwards and not that a little bit of harmless banter is now being directed northwards.
This is about equity.
Rate This:
0 
0
Brown has started cutting spending in England already
http://scottishrajwatch.blogspot.com/2007/06/todays-disgrace-english-patient.html
While Scotland spends more English taxpayers money
http://scottishrajwatch.blogspot.com/2007/06/account-so-far.html
Rate This:
0 
0
Brown’s elevation to PM wasn’t exactly democratic, but it seems that nobody else wanted to take over as party leader (and who could blame them?), so he’s probably the best of a bad lot.
As for bringing in MPs from other parties, I say it’s a welcome change from the tribalism that’s dominated politics for far too long; whilst I’d prefer a greater diversity of points of view in the House of Commons, I’d also like to see a little less competition and a little more cooperation.
As for Menzies Campbell, he has stated publically that his MPs are entitled to vote according to the will of their constituents rather than their party leader. If he is sincere, then that alone makes him a worthy Prime Minister.
Rate This:
0 
0
Perhaps you weren’t paying attention. During the last election campaign Blair left Brown sulking at home, until it became obvious that everyone hated Blair and only the inspired choice of Michael Howard as Tory leader was giving Labour any chance of winning. Blair then trundled Brown out and it was stated very clearly that he would be taking over at some point during the ensuing parliament. Insofar as anyone voted for a Prime Minister, they voted for Blair and Brown (except the three people who actually wanted Howard). Get a grip, Bobo!
Rate This:
0 
0