Labour Election Manifesto

New Labour shines it's atomic ray's upon the nuclear active family.

Manifesto - [man-uh-fes-toh] - noun - A document that political parties release, which promises you something for your vote. Yet changes at will when they are elected. See bribery.


Update - Another Cover.

Electoral Reform - An Empty Vote

Gordon Brown has written a comment is free piece over on the Guardian subtitled:

I will do everything I can to secure a referendum to let the people decide on electoral reform.

Can't help but think he'd be better off not mentioning the words "referendum" in the same sentence as anything alluding to New Labour and promises. Tony Blair pledged to do exactly the same thing their 1997 manifesto and lest we forget the Europe referendum that repeatedly never was.

Faith and trust in parliament has taken a severe knock in the past year, but I do not believe people have lost their appetite for politics, or for the change it can bring.

Indeed politics at the moment is like a haggis, bon appetit. Yet when Brown speaks of reforming politics via the voting system, it's just pointless without addressing what has done the most damage - expenses, lack of transparency, accountability, over-powerful whips and party machines etc. Otherwise the only thing you're changing is the MPs, it's like painting over mould and hoping no one notices the smell. As though I support a change in the voting system, I don't at the expense of ignoring more important reform that is yet to surface.

The vote for Browns "election reform" is thought to be next week as he says:

I am determined to do everything I can to take on and persuade those who want to deny the people the chance to decide at a referendum, and I will build support across the Commons, the Lords and the country.

Support he created in less than a working week, now that would be a good use of whips "leadership". So perhaps he could use some of that "leadership" to get the basics right first, like what on earth is going on with expenses, everyone is paying something back while 5 Sirs report on the report, that 3 separate Sirs created and rules get changed but parliament doesn't vote, but everyone criticises everyone else including the Sirs? Certainly seems the best way forward for a clear transparent system.

A Mountain of Bad News Was Buried Today

26 ministerial statements were released today, timed so the government won't be able to face difficult questions in parliament. I don't even know where to begin with this, it's just uncensored ineptness. On the plus side we are all less likely to be killed by terrorists, after the terrorism warning level was downgraded.

Brown Signalling U-Turning on Iraq Inquiry

Only three days after saying the inquiry into Iraq would be held behind closed doors. Brown is opening the doors slightly, while pretending he never said anything as awful as it would be held in private. Quietly passing the buck to Sir John Chilcot heading the inquiry, by saying it was up to Chilcot to consider how the precise format of the inquiry should be structured.

It does make you wonder if Brown or Labour think anything through before making statements. All of this could have been avoided by talking to a broader range of people. Having an inner circle may protect you, but when you're only talking to each other it limits your greater understanding.

There is still however no mention that the Iraq inquiry will cover the torture allegations surrounding the government. Philipe Sands QC has written an article that outlines what is known against international law. It concerns me that this government not only may have been complicit in torture, but they may still be. As Churchill succinctly said:

the use of instruments of torture can never be regarded by any decent person as synonymous with justice.

Surely if "lessons are to be learnt" how intelligence is obtained, given not only it's legal ramification, both in ability to prosecute and our obligations under international law. But also wider influence on foreign policy and moral standing, shouldn't just be swept under the carpet.

Is Bown Getting The Reputation As a Liar?

It's a dirty word liar, in the media and parliament terms like "spin"and "being economic with the truth", are usually words that describe politicians lying. Yet increasingly the unparliamentary word liar is being used with regard to Brown. The real turning point seemed to be his press conference after the chaos reshuffle, where he revoked his Father's words of honestly and stated he had no intention of removing Alistair Darling from the cabinet.

You could almost see the disbelief rise into the air and the press recoil with disgust. Reading the main stream media since has shown a shift in reporting, particularly this investment vs cuts debate. Alienating the press when he needs them to get his message out, wasn't the best thing to do, particularly if the word sticks. Even the Sun are calling him on it and if they come up with a catchphrase he's doomed.