Bell on Blair

The Guardian seems to have the broadsheet sector's most misguided columnists and most cutting political cartoonists. Both Bell and Rowson hit the spot with greater frequency than any others. Steve Bell's take on Blair's EU presidency this morning says it for me:

Gormless

Walking through Trafalgar Square yesterday afternoon, I glanced at the nonsense going on at the fourth plinth. The attention-seeker atop the plinth didn't grab my attention, but the double-stacked portakabins did. And then I saw two brand new JCB loaders with platforms fitted; about £40k each. Why two? In case one broke down? And how many staff were 'managing' the installation? And one - or two - full time plant operators?

I've previously had a soft spot for Antony Gormley's work, but he is going to have to make something very special to negate this mistake. Roll on the next installation - a rather good statue of Sir Keith Park.

Rousseau would love New Labour

That black rogue Rousseau, who would have children taken from their families lest their allegiance to their fathers surpass their allegiance to the State, would love New Labour. Rousseau, who said;

Each citizen would then be completely independent of his fellow men, and absolutely dependent upon the state . . . for it is only by the force of the state that the liberty of its members can be secured

Rousseau would also have approved Lord Laming's crackpot view that

.. the state should become a responsible and effective parent to more children

And would cheer Labour's efforts to exclude any but State servants from any contact with or influence upon the nation's children.

The 'strike' by all of our most popular children's authors against the State requirement to license them before they can talk to groups of children in schools will be applauded by the rest of us. Anthony Horowitz in the Independent and Philip Pullman elsewhere both excoriate this inane measure from Labour's Leviathan State.

It is written "It is impossible but that offences will come: but woe unto him, through whom they come! It were better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and he cast into the sea, than that he should offend one of these little ones."

The offence to our little ones comes not only from deviants, but from the zeal of a State that destroys childhood, and I would reserve a very large and very heavy millstone for the Children's Secretary this morning.

Bob Jobsworth's moustache

Not only is he ranked 21st out of 23 cabinet members, below the minister for children's ball games and the minister for low-salt crisps, but the media is also picking on Defence Secretary Bob Jobsworth's moustache; the Times comments it is seen as signifying "the constipated mentality of an inept, small-town jobsworth".

That would be about right, then.

Government cock-up over Suffolk councils

It was the local government reforms of 1974 that united the old East Suffolk and West Suffolk county councils. The burghs, charter towns that had escaped the feudal dues by paying tax directly to the sovereign, usually had their own jealously-guarded administrations, which for Ipswich until 1966 included its own police force. East Suffolk, West Suffolk, Ipswich. It worked well for centuries.

More recently, the county has been administered by a single County Council and seven District Councils. The Boundary Committee (as opposed to the Boundary Commission) has proposed either creating a single-tier authority for the whole of Suffolk that would have swept away the existing district councils, or the absurdity of a single-tier authority covering Ipswich and Felixtowe and another for 'Great Suffolk'. The suggestions could only have come from a demented mind unfamiliar with local allegiances and associations. Three of the districts launched a judicial review into why the Committee hadn't considered their favoured option of creating three unitaries; East Suffolk, West Suffolk and, er, Ipswich. They won.

John Denham, the new Communities Secretary, is now left floundering as the Suffolk decision effectively puts the stop to his plans for Norfolk and Devon. The evidence suggests that Denham's Committee was deaf to local proposals, being determined to push through Whitehall's option at all costs. In an abrupt email exchange, the Committee responded to the local bodies;

We appreciate that local authorities would like the opportunity for further discussions with the Committee. However, we wish to emphasise the Committee's desire for positive and constructive discussions focusing on the draft proposal and the other pattern identified in the Committee's report.

In other words, 'get lost - we're not listening'. Gall and his Whitehall Committee persevered with their fruitcake plans, even despite the local councils providing clear evidence of its lack of local support;

As you know, Waveney, Forest Heath and St Edmundsbury Councils maintain the view that a three unitary solution comprising Greater Ipswich, East Suffolk and West Suffolk best meets the Secretary of State's criteria in aggregate. We very much hope that you will be issuing a workbook on this option.We would also like to draw your attention to several key findings of recently published independent opinion research which found that:

1. More than half the population of Suffolk is not aware that a review has been taking place (a finding, we believe, that should be of some concern to you)

2. Nearly nine out of ten felt that the three unitary solution of Ipswich/East/West should be consulted upon by the Boundary Committee

3. They support this option by a margin of more than 2:1 over any other option.

Mr Justice Foskett agreed that the Councils had a case, and has granted relief in a form yet to be determined. A victory for local determination and common sense so far, at least.

Large unitaries are not of course the lowest level at which many administrative functions can most effectively be exercised. For that we need to look at the old Hundreds. But it's a start. And if Ipswich gets its own Police Force back as a result, as it should do, it will restore much local accountability.

Brown running the IMF? Blair running Europe? Don't make me laugh

Richard Littlejohn suggests in his Mail column this morning that the real reason for Brown's despicable behaviour in throwing Gary McKinnon to the US wolves is his hunger for future US support for his heading up the IMF after we've kicked him out of office.

Likewise, Blair's quiet campaign to gather support for becoming the EU's first President after his abject failure to achieve anything at all since we kicked him out is well known.

The notion that this pair of useless spivs, a double-act of chiselling little crims, could be responsible for anything other than running the library at their open prison is risible. It is a triumph of self-delusion over sanity that either could believe that they have any future at all in any position in which they ever again exercise any influence over our nation and people.

Elected representatives are not unhealthy

The Taxpayers' Alliance have kicked off a predictable furore with news that 29,000 politicians are costing taxpayers £500m a year. The Mail heads its report 'A plague of politicians' and goes on to conclude we'd all be much better off with fewer elected representatives.

Wrong.

My contempt for what Peter Oborne has called the political class is familiar to readers; 'professional' politicians and their dags in all their forms are anathema to me. State funding of political parties is also a great evil that stifles democracy, and I loathe any suggestion of its extension. But let's not confuse these 'bads' with the 'good' of having elected representatives. The UK has fewer than almost everywhere else, and in place of democratic representation we have 60,000 unelected local quangocrats and 30,000 unelected national quangocrats, all of whom cost us a great deal more than our elected representatives. We can't have it both ways.

The TA's figure is broadly in line with Michael Pinto-Duschinsky's finding that State funding for the parties already amounts to some £1.75bn over a four-year electoral cycle. This is the real scandal.

We need more, not fewer, elected representatives. And we need to strangle the haemorrhage of State funds to the parties. The two are not mutually exclusive. We must reverse the venal and corrupt 'snout' culture engendered by the loathsome policical class. We must purge our political institutions of the thieves and robbers. We must trash the quangos. And above all, we must return power to municipalities, communities and parishes.

What's happened to steel woodscrews?

I'm just finishing restoring an old Victorian chest. It came painted in a thick coat of varnish with modern brass screw-in cupboard knobs disfiguring the drawers. It was therefore unwanted by the dealers and very cheap. Many hours of careful work with ticketed cabinet scrapers to remove the finishes down to the wood, careful filling of blemishes and old screw-holes and hours of traditional French polishing have brought it to the stage at which I can fix the salvaged period handles I have sourced.

The handles are fixed with 4 gauge brass screws, requiring, in hardwood, a pilot hole of 1/32" and a clearance hold of 7/64". However, if you try to fix the brass screws directly, you risk snapping them. So one first fixes using equivalent steel wood screws, then with the brass screws.

Fortunately I have a decent stock of 4 gauge round-head Brass wood screws, but couldn't find any 4 gauge steel screws of the appropriate length anywhere. Last night I searched the web to little avail - they seem to have disappeared. Only one company still claims to stock them - I'll call them later. Many other websites claimed the new 3mm size to be the equivalent of 4 gauge. It isn't.

Will I now, as with Tungsten filament lamps, have to stock up on sufficient Imperial wood screws to last me until my death-bed?

Gordon Brown 'not a ladies' man' shock

Gordon Brown is not a ladies' man. Neither is he a man's man. There can be few dining tables in the country that would count the Prime Minister's presence as conducive to a successful dinner party. As readers sometimes remind me, he is a sociopath - disconnected perfectly equally from both sexes in a way that must please Mz Harman tremendously.

Radio 4 broadcast 'Gordon's Women' yesterday, analysing his relationship (or lack of) with his female colleagues - iPlayer recording here. Worth a listen.

Every soldier matters

Gordon Brown had hoped that if the level of attrition of our forces in Afghanistan remained at low background level, he would not be called upon to explain why we are there and what we are trying to do. He hoped he would not be called-out on starving the army of resources whilst throwing our tax earnings at lunatic Labour schemes. The cluster of casualties over the weekend have changed all that.

I don't propose to go over ground better covered by Richard North on his Defence blog, but if Gordon Brown is telling the truth (which will be something of a novelty) in explaining that we are there to destroy Jihadist training camps and therefore prevent trained Jihadists from attacking us here in the UK, one has to wonder if there are not more effective ways of doing so. Can't ground-attack aircraft, artillery or missiles usefully destroy training camps? Why are infantry the preferred solution? And wouldn't more effective border controls that prevented Jihadists entering the country be a good idea?

We must keep digging at this one. At last, it's on the national agenda. Let's keep it there.

A recession of two halves

I'm exhausted. I'm now working six days a week and hours that would induce apoplexy in an EU Commissioner. Apart from a couple of days at Christmas and Easter, I've been working without break since late last year. I even woke this morning half-wondering whether I should go into the office today. I won't. And I'm going to carve some time out and spend it on the boat. Last week I turned up for drinkies with fellow bloggers a day early, which was worrying; losing track of the days is not a good sign. On site at 7am yesterday morning, watching the clubbers making their way home whilst we had a full crew in on overtime, made me wonder if this isn't a recession of two halves.

Last week a guy I worked with on a job in the late 90s called me; he was going through the dregs of his contact book in an increasingly desperate search for work. He hasn't had a tickle in six months. All those I know seem either to be overworked to the point of collapse, or in a work famine.

Funny old world.

Another reason they won't make Blair EU President

Blair's abject failure in the Middle East, a graveyard of political reputations that only an utter narcissist such as Blair would have taken on in the first place, is not the reason Sarkozy has gone cold on him, as the Telegraph reports.

An EU President cannot easily exercise the panoply of ceremonial functions required from a cell in the Hague's remand prison at Scheveningen, or from asylum in the US in flight from a European arrest warrant. Best to avoid the potential embarrassment.

Labour's degradation of women and ethnic minorities

Kelly Holmes is a British hero. Her sporting achievements were recognised firstly by an MBE and then a knighthood. And the many other women and ethnic minorities who have received honours can rightly feel proud that they have earned their gong; the MBE, the OBE and the KBE/DBE have become the 'people's medals', and indicators of unimpeachable merit. Labour, of course, are going to degrade this, and make such an award meaningless. Just another spiteful and destructive Labour measure to spoil anything good and worthwhile in this nation. In future, British Empire awards are to be handed out in strict accordance with sex and racial quotas. No woman or ethnic minority who holds such an honour in the future can be sure they earned it on merit, and we can no longer regard the holders of such awards with respect. Labour therefore does both women and ethnic minorities a great disservice, and if Dame Kelly Holmes flings her awards in Gordon Brown's face in disgust, who would blame her.

Police top-brass troughers have learned nothing

Let's get rid of a myth. Policing is not a high-risk occupation. OK, it's more dangerous than working on a supermarket check-out, but nowhere near as dangerous as working in the construction industry. A construction worker dies nearly every day in the UK; the only policeman to have died on duty this year was allegedly murdered by a colleague. The police are citizens in uniform. They're not members of the fighting forces. Their lists of work-related 'injuries' are frequently trivial and would go unreported by any other occupational group; wasp stings, a bruised thumb, a banged knee when climbing out of car. With generous sick pay and an unacceptable level of 'medical' early retirement, they're cosseted prima donnas. We all know this, because we're paying for this largesse.

Senior police officers are not equivalent to the commanding officers of our fighting forces, despite aping their insignia. They're more like NHS managers. Indeed, given the number of 'sick' plods they're responsible for, they could almost be redesignated as health administrators.

Yet these troughers have decided they need a number of devious mechanisms to up their wedge. Not happy with a NHS Manager's pay, they think they deserve more. These troughers have only one aim - to max their final salary, and retire as early as they can on a taxpayer funded final-salary pension. So please don't bleat to me about 'committment to public service' or 'putting our lives on the line' or being 'the thin blue line that preserves the nation from anarchy'. They're troughers. No less venal and no less corrupt than the MPs who have done exactly the same.

Plus ca change ...

Richard North has a brilliantly indignant post HERE on the DFID's inanely expensive schemes for Afghan 'wimmin' whilst the basics go unaddressed.

I'm reminded of the anecdote about the USAID feminist who first followed the original occupation. She spent several months lecturing the women of a small village on their new found rights, imported American labour-saving kitchen utensils and pregnancy testing kits, and arranged for literacy tutors.

Returning to the same village four years on, she was appalled to see the women behaving as she had found them - burka-clad, and following twenty paces behind the men.

She harangued the women that she knew at American length, excoriating their subservience. "You're equal" she railed "Why the Hell are you still walking twenty paces behind your husbands?"

The answer came softly. "Mines."

The Quangos must die

Apart from electing 646 MPs - approximately one for every 70,000 voters - we elect some 23,000 local councillors. Unfortunately, they have about as much power as a dead Duracell on Christmas Day. Not only have councillors been neutered by the central State, but councils themselves are too big to be meaningful to many people. France has an elected local administration for every 1,500 electors - even the tiniest hamlet with three cottages and a dunghill has its Mayor - but 120,000 Britons are needed to get a government unit in its lowest form.

And those 23,000 elected councillors are dwarfed by 60,000 unelected people serving on 5,200 quangos. Yes, 60,000 people we've never had a choice in appointing, who serve on bodies exercising real power in the health service, policing, housing, prisons, training and economic development. Even your supposedly elected council must have its overall policy agreed by an unelected 'local strategic partnership' dictated by Whitehall.

In addition to those 60,000, there are a further 345,000 unelected school governors who have dismally failed to govern our state schools and 31,000 Whitehall appointees to central quangos.

What price democracy? Our elected representatives are powerless, whilst the central State's insidious agenda is advanced through thousands of unelected placemen. Make no mistake, this is the agenda of the metropolitan political class and a civil service out of control. The balance between central and local has been lost, and every one of us is poorer as a result.

Simon Jenkins points out that a third of the income of the 'big seven' comes from public sector work; in many ways they are the State's occupying troops. Where once the keep of the King's castle rose above Derby or Sheffield or Norwich as reminder of State power, now the steel and glass regional offices of PriceWaterhouseCooper perform the same function. And the most entrenched, the most negative, the most destructive, the most incompetent and the most antidemocratic of all the Whitehall departments is the Treasury, its malign effects magnified and multiplied by Brown's tenure.

Unless Cameron tackles the Treasury, he has no hope of making inroads into the quangos. He is concentrating on the 31,000 strong central quangos; maybe he will trim 3,000 unelected officials. In the meanwhile the Treasury will have created a further 2,500. The 60,000 local quangocrats will remain untouched.

School governors must govern schools, not Whitehall civil servants, and for this we must elect them. Local Watch Committees must manage local police forces, not the Home Secretary, and they must be voted into office. Who sits on the board of your primary health trust? Who governs your local hospital? You have no idea - but Whitehall does. Forget abolishing the Potato Marketing Board, David, and concentrate on how you can return power to the urban community, municipality and parish.