Time to limit the Power of the Murdoch press...?

The Guardian has a series of stories about Rupert Murdoch's UK newspapers, and their propensity to hack the phones of a wide range of establishment figures. This article outlines MPs findings that 

the News of the World  was guilty of;

Amnesia, obfuscation and hush money

hacking phones 'on industrial scale'

And that Scotland Yard and press body failed properly to investigate

The  report rejects executives' lone 'rogue reporter' defence

 The Guardian also reprts that ....

The MPs reserve their most damning passages for the News of the World and others involved in illegal phone hacking. The paper's royal correspondent and a private investigator were jailed in January 2007, but the committee says many others played their part. For the Guardian, which has doggedly pursued this story, revealing last July that the NoW had paid more than £1m to suppress legal actions, the findings are a vindication.

The MPs say they were "struck by the collective amnesia afflicting ­witnesses" from the NoW. These "claims of ­ignorance … and deliberate ­obfuscation" reinforced the impression "that the press generally regard themselves as unaccountable and that News ­International in particular has sought to conceal the truth about what really occurred," the report concludes.

Comprehensive coverage of the story, with the Guardian producing a full suite of facts and reactions, is to be found here

Add to that the bullying history of the paper under the editorship of Tory PR head Andy Coulson, and you have a truly astonishing story of the arrogance of unlimited media power. And this,also from the Guardian...

David Cameron's communications director, Andy Coulson, will come under fresh pressure to defend his editorship of the News of the World and his knowledge about the illegal activities of his journalists amid new allegations about the paper's involvement with private detectives who broke the law.

The Guardian has learned that while Coulson was still editor of the tabloid, the newspaper employed a freelance private investigator even though he had been accused of corrupting police officers and had just been released from a seven-year prison sentence for blackmail.

I can't help but think that, if Gordon Brown was to announce an inquiry into the ownership of the British Press with a view to restricting foreign ownership and limiting Murdoch's power, he would gain hundreds of thousands of votes overnight.

Blair's Defence

In about 1 hour from now, Tony Blair will sit before the Chilcot Enquiry and be asked to justify his key role in the Iraq war.

The interrogation will go on most of the day. Who knows what shape the questioning will take: will it take a broad look at politics and motivation or will it get bogged down in the detail of who said what and who knew what and when they knew it?

In my opinion, the vital questions to be asked would be: what did he think he was doing, and why did he do it?

It seems to me that Blair's defence could go something like this:

As an opposition leader, he saw the massacres in Rwanda and the developing wars in the Balkans and the murders in Halabja being ignored by the Conservative govenment. In fact the Tories gave export credits to Saddam and were close to Milosovic.

He saw John Major and George Bush the 1st stopping short of removing Saddam when they had a golden opportunity to free the people of Iraq.

Rwanda in particular must have made a deep scar. Millions were dying and armies and weapons of mass destruction were being used on defenceless civilians. Being a reasonable person, he thought that something should be done about this, but he saw our governments were doing little to stop it.

So he decided that if and when he was in charge, he would not stand by while he could do something about these and similar atrocities.

He persuaded Bill Clinton to actively oppose and destroy Milosovic. With a limited success in the Balkans he became convinced that intervention worked, and intervention to rid the world of mass murderers was a good thing: who could argue?

And so to Iraq and the failure of the USA to have a workable policy for the peace......

You could of course argue that intervention is always wrong, but few said that after Kosovo, because it was seen as a success, whereas the howls that followed in Iraq were loudest after the failure to consolidate the peace, hindsight being a wonderful thing.

The Politics of the Brazenly Foolish

David Cameron may be happy to think that he is being “brazenly elitist” in demanding that new trainee teachers must have a “good degree from a good university”. In fact he is being brazenly silly.

If Mr Cameron had any idea how schools work he would know that a “good” degree, (even from a “good” university, whatever that is), is no guarantee that the candidate will make a good teacher. The ability to teach is much more a matter of character and personality linked to experience than to the level of academic achievement, and if Mr Cameron doesn’t know that he needs to get out more. It is my guess that many of the best teachers currently practicing in our schools would not meet Mr Cameron’s totally arbitrary standards.

A few months ago the Conservative’s shadow Health Minister announced that the Tories, if elected, would transfer our health records to Google. Until now this was believed to be the silliest policy proclamation from any political party, but Mr Cameron’s pronouncement on teacher recruitment surely runs it a close second. Perhaps Annabel Goldie would care to let us know if the Conservatives are planning to adopt Mr Cameron’s “brazenly elitist” approach to teaching in Scotland.

The Tories, The Sun and the BBC

I know it's a bit old news now but last week, when the Sun was attacking Gordon Brown for writing personal letters to bereaved relatives of military casulaties, I was more than puzzled by the BBC's slavish following of the Sun's agenda. The BBC got a lot of criticism from its viewers for that approach, and it was featured on their Newswatch programme.

The most difficult aspect for me to swallow was that there is an obvious agreement between the Sun and the Tories: the Sun will back the Tories between now and the election and in return, if the Tories get elected, they will neuter the BBC. They have already threatened to remove the BBC's Royal Charter.

This neat little plot helps the Tories with electoral support and it helps the Murdoch empire to weaken a media competitor.

The real puzzle for me is: what's in it for the BBC? Why "give comfort to the enemy" (the Sun) by publicising its stories, when that enemy is out to damage you by any means possible?

I actually complained to the BBC and got to speak to a senior BBC News Editor on this, but I have to say I got no satisfactory answer.

I wonder if this is the last time we will see the BBC and the Sun come together in the run up to the election?...

Keep yer eyes peeled...

UK Underwrites Glasgow - Edinburgh Rail Upgrade

The headline in the Herald says "Edinburgh to Glasgow in 35 Minutes". The story, which is good news in itself, tells how Minister at Holyrood are "relieved" that the money has been found to finance an improvement to the railway line between Glasgow and Edinburgh, and that the key financial element is that the money can be borrowed against the security of the value of UK Rail Network (my italics and emphasis).

So. It's the value of the UK network that allows a vital upgrade to go ahead in Scotland. Is this a benefit of the union or what?

Also, just a passing thought: why is this top-notch-high-grade-really-really-vital infrastructure development not being financed using the wonderful-marvelous-better-than-anything Scottish Futures Trust? Could it be because the SFT is a duck which can now be clearly declared as a dead and buried duck? Isn't it time to give the SFT a solemn sending off, along with the LIT, the abolition of Student debt, the 18 class sizes, the brick-for-brick school building programme and all the other fantastical elements that padded out the SNP's 2007 election "manifesto"?

Postcode Lottery -v- Local Decision Making

What is the difference between a "postcode lottery" and the devolution of local decisions to local bodies?

I only ask, because, according to the BBC, there is a "postcode lottery" for fertility treatment: i.e. if you live in different areas, such treatment might be given a higher or lower priority in terms of spending, delivery etc.

But then, we are all aware of the outcry that occurs when central government intervenes to direct spending and resources (NHS or otherwise) in a particular direction. Up goes the cry of "too much central interference" and "why can't they leave local decisions to local people?". So when does a "devolved decision" become a "postcode lottery"?

It always annoys me when the BBC, in particular, follows the tabloid view and takes the lazy journalistic path of sloganising rather than thinking the situation through. In an interview on Breakfast TV, an NHS representative pointed out that there is no centrally enforced rule. There are "guidelines" which can be interpreted and applied on the judgement reached by local agencies and taking into consideration local conditions and priorities.

This is the perfect definition of a locally devolved decision making process.

Think of the complaints if central government applied rigourous rules and strict regulations on the provision of this type of treatment. The first case which fell outwith the rules, or offered some ambiguity or difference from local practice or failed a local test of some sort, you would hear the voices of complaint all over the airwaves. Probably the same people who complain about the so-called "postcode lottery".

Come to think of it, far years now we have been spending more per head of population in Scotland than on England, on the NHS. Is that "devolution" or the ultimate "postcode lottery"?

We're Agin it!... Oh wait a minute...hold on there...

From today's Herald, this...

"An ICM poll for the BBC to mark a decade of devolution found that 46% of Scots felt it had made no difference to their lives and 4% had no view. But of the 50% who did have a view, those in favour outscored those against by 41% to 9%."

Just a wee reminder... the SNP was against Devolution....and opposed it for ten years refusing to cooperate with the Constitutional Convention...then, when other people had done the work.....

and this...

"Alex Salmond will write to Gordon Brown this week asking him to press ahead with power transfers to Holyrood, such as control over elections, air guns and drink driving legislation, backed by the Calman Commission. "It is time to seize the moment - not let the Calman report gather dust,"".

Just a wee reminder... the SNP was against Calman....and opposed it for two years refusing to cooperate with the Calman Commission and the other parties in producing the report....now.... that the other people have done the work ......

Anyone see a pattern here...???

The SNP Matches Labour's School Building Programme Brick for Brick...Only Joking.

Today the Education Minister Fional Hyslop finally, at last, announced that the SNP is ready to build some schools in Scotland. She said the move would provide 55 new schools and see 35,000 pupils taught in modern buildings, with the first bricks laid in 2010.

The mystery is, having promised to match Labour's school building programme "brick for brick", why wait two years and two months to announce your programme? What has Fiona Hyslop been up to for the past two years?

The Minister said that building these schools would begin in 2010. But why could this announcement not have have been made two years ago? If it had, we might actually be building some schools now. Who knows, some of them might even be completed and have pupils in them by now.

Fiona Hyslop, Alex Salmond and, for all I know, other SNP ministers have been traversing the country for the last two years opening schools commissioned and built under the Labour/Lib Dem administration. In the meantime they have not commissioned, never mind built, one new school themselves.

The SNP Minister said that the schools would be occupied 12-18 months after start of build. So we have the bizarre prospect of an election in May 2011 with perhaps not one new school completed under a four year administration. If that's not a scandal, nothing is.

Calman Reports

The Calman Report has been published to predictable yowls of negativity from the Scottish Nationalist Party. Like all previous constitutional investigations, the Nats refused to get involved, hissy fits being their predetermined and fearful reaction to anything that might make them think too deeply about their shibolethic single "policy" of independence or independence in Europe or Scotland free in '93, or whatever disguise it has at this precise moment.

"Constitution"* Minister Mike Russell was on telly all night complaining that Calman didn't grant him independence by default, but constructive? Aye right...... look somewhere else for that m'lad.

I have read the Summary and it seems like there are a number of serious recommendations with serious implications, and it might be wise to take a bit of time to ruminate on the issues and the evidence before commenting definitively.

First impressions: Calman has tried to meet his remit of strengthening Scotland and the Union, and that's no bad thing. The variation of 10p in Income Tax looks difficult to achieve, but it certainly poses the question to the political parties of what they will do if Labour at Westminster puts up tax or the Tories cut it..... that is a real political choice..and who can object to that...?

* what's the point of having a Minister for the Constitution when he refuses to indulge in any serious discussions about the constitution?

Silver Lining Time

As Labour takes a beating in the English local elections, the good news is from Scotland, with two decisive council by-election gains from the SNP in Glasgow and North Lanarkshire and a third victory for Labour.

Two of the vacancies were created by Nationalist councillors standing down after becoming MSPs proved none too safe for the Nats. Iain Gray rightly claimed that these were "stunning" results for Labour in Scotland.

Ian Gray said: "It is a personal humiliation for Alex Salmond that two of the seats won were vacated by his SNP MSPs standing down from their dual council roles. Unlike their boss they gave up their dual mandate and voters replaced them with Labour."

In Drumchapel-Anniesland ward in Glasgow, Labour beat the SNP by 2,584 to 1,509 in first-preference votes.

In Coatbridge North and Glenboig (North Lanarkshire), Labour beat the SNP by 1,529 to 1,254 in first preferences.

And in East Dunbartonshire, Alan Moir won the Bishopbriggs South by-election following the sad death of local councillor and Provost, Alex Hannah. Alan Moir won 38 per cent of the first-preference votes, and an overall majority of 561 over the SNP.

These labour victories are a kick in the teeth for the Nationalist Party and, just possibly, an indicator that any upcoming General Election is not the foregone conclusion that opposition parties and the media foresee.

Credit crunch, what credit crunch? Pandemic, what etc..?

To Braehead shopping centre outside Paisley today, for a bit of this and that. Horrible weather, so inside of the shops seems an attractive option. Question is: what effect will the CC have on business? Empty shops? Deserted roads?

Not bloomin' likely.

We were queued back to the motorway slip road on the way in. And on the way out? We couldn't get out! Stuck in M&S car park while traffic gridlocked in every direction. So, after ten mins, found a space and parked and went back to M&S for a coffee.

Twenty mins later, back to the car, but no use. No movement, indeed worse if anything.

So, into Waterstones to buy a couple of boooks (PG Wodehouse and Goerge McD Fraser since you ask). Try again after another half-hour. This time not so bad. Cars actually moving if not very fast. And then blocked at the motorway on-ramp...!!

So what credit crunch is it that is making people spend so much?

On the way home, radio 5Live informs us that a London school has closed down because six (that's 6) pupils have 'flu! Bloody Hell! What kind of pandemic is it that affects 6 children in a capital city and makes headline news into the bargain! And closes a school!

I'm not the type that immediately scorns any headline news, but, blow me down, this is a rum epidemic. Very few get ill, and nobody dies. And still it leads the news: maybe we should call it media-swine fever. Might be very apt on a number of levels.

First Ministers' Forum

According to the Herald today, three First Ministers think Holyrood needs changing.

http://www.theherald.co.uk/news/news/display.var.2505604.0.Former_first_ministers_say_Holyrood_should_change.php

The story has the air of a holiday weekend filler with not much detail of where, when and under what prompting the various quotes were gathered, but it is on the front page, so the Herald might actually be taking it seriously.

Jack McConnel says that the financial powers should be revisited and, he implies, increased. Henry McLeish says we should look at a "federal" system. Alex Salmond looks forward to independence.

The first and last are no surprise. Tax raising powers that never get used have always been a conundrum that needs to be addressed. Which is not to say that there is an easy and obvious solution. And Alex Salmond promoting independence, well that's always been his public position.

But Henry McLeish goes further, expressing a view in favour of federalism. He says..

"We have to have an alternative narrative to independence, and I believe federalism addresses the question of what to do about an England that looks increasingly out of kilter with the rest of the UK. ....Why should sovereignty rest solely at Westminster? Why should diversity be a problem? Why should different self-identities be a problem?"

I have to say I don't agree with his premise that "We need an alternative narrative to independence". We have an alternative narrative. It's called Devolution, and Henry McLeish was a great supporter of it when he was FM.

As for his staement that"...England .... looks increasingly out of kilter with the rest of the UK". Where is the evidence for that?

When you anlayse the statement further, you see that it's full of weasel words. For example: "looks", well is it or is it not? "increasingly", increasingly over what? "out of kilter", what exactly does "out of kilter" mean? And who says "diversity" is a problem? Or "different identities", whatever that means? You would have to be fairly foolish to opt for any major change on the basis of that analysis.

Federalism has been a Lib Dem aim for some time, and they and Henry would have to explain what exactly is meant by "federalism" in this context, but it will take stronger arguments than that to be convince anyone that a federal solution would be any better than the current set up.

E.g. under a federal set-up, would the UK have bailed out RBS and HBOS, as they have just done? Or would a federal UK leave these matters to a federal Scotland? Under a federal system would we co-operate more closely or less closely on health matters such as the swine flu pandemic?

It's not clear who is flying a kite here, the Herald or Henry McLeish, but somebody is.

The Budget....is that it?

I watched the budget. I listened to the Chancellor. Almost every word.

Usually you get a "steer" from the wording and the emphasis of the speech. The "steer" would be what the Chancellor wants you to think, the message he wants to send, the headlines he wants to read in the evening papers, whatever else is the real meat of the budget.

But this time..... I really got no impression. No spin. No "steer" from the politicos.

Except that we're in a really bad place. We have to borrow eye-watering amounts to stay afloat. And we hope to be out of it soon.....

On the other hand, the budget will not balance again before 2015/16, which seems an awfully long time....

One thing is clear though, and that's the weakness of the Conservative position. Cameron made a stinging attack on an open door, on the lines of "the situation is dire". But since the Chancellor had already admitted that the situation is dire, the Cameron angle, - "I agree, it really is dire" - seemed blunted and obvious. And it exposed the fact that he had no realistic alternative proposals.

Because the Tories seem to oppose measures to boost spending, they seem to prefer "responsibility" (i.e. cuts, or at least no easing) but they have no detailed, worked out, spelled out, policy alternative.

If the situation really is dire, shouting out as loud as you can "it's really dire", is not a solution.

So, We've got what it takes. Have we?

The Scottish Nationalist Party revealed its new slogan yesterday. Wonderfully gnomic it is too: "We've got what it takes", apparently.

Now isn't that comforting? "We", it seems, "'ve got what it takes." Aren't "we" lucky? Would you adamaneveit? There must be plenty of people - hunners at least - who do not have "what it takes", but never mind you, "we" have, ... so rollocks to them, whoever they are!

Hurrah! And Huzzah! Clap the celebration bells!

The country is saved at last. Safe for elderly matrons off to church, no longer in fear and trepidation and a tartan shawl. And for babes in arms, suckling in previous terror, now relieved.

At any moment you expect joyous crowds to swarm the streets and parks and public buildings: light the bountiful bonfire, bring out the fireworks! It is revealed: we have what it takes! Could any news be more welcome or more worthy of salutation?

Hallelujah. Arise Saint Eck, the man who brought the good news from Inverness to Banff, the Borders and Beyond.

"We" can rest easy in anticipation of a prosperous future... because....

WE'VE GOT WHAT IT TAKES!!!

Curry at Queensferry

Gordon has invited Alex Salmond back to his for a meal tonight...so...what could be on the menu to keep oor Eck happy?

Well, it so happens that we have a sneak preview of the Eck-friendly menu prepared by Gordon's chef for a hungry FM...the choices are...

Starter

a choice of

Curry and Chips (small portion)

or

Curry and Chips (small portion)

followed by a main course

a choice of

Curry and Chips (large portion)

or

Curry and Chips (large portion)

followed by a choice of desserts

Curried Strawberries

or

Curry and Chocolate Chip Cookies

in the lounge

coffee with wafer-thin curried mints

Hmmm delicious..... that's independence off the menu... maybe he'll build some schools....

The Sqeak of the Tiger

Some of us will be familiar with the SNP's pricelessly funny and stunningly stupid examples of "independent" countries with which to compare Scotland, countries that we would "like to be like": viz Iceland and Ireland. These wondrous bubble economies were seen as exemplars for Scotland. How wonderful to be the new Iceland, sang Alex in the bath. At least they were seen as exemplars until they collapsed in a tornado of debt, and now their economies are in ruins.

Another SNP slogan bites the dust. to join "Scotland free in '93", we have "Let's do an Iceland" and "Love Ireland, just like us".

Full embarassing* story here:

http://www.theherald.co.uk/search/display.var.2500541.0.emergency_deal_launched_to_rescue_irish_economy.php

*For the SNP that is...

Well, did he....?

Did Gordon save the world.......

well yes!

At least the G20 summit was a success in its own terms. And the list of announcements from the summit is very impressive.


$500bn for the IMF to lend to struggling economies
$250bn to boost world trade
$250bn for a new IMF "overdraft facility" countries can draw on
$100bn that international development banks can lend to poorest countries
$6bn increase in lending for the poorest countries.

There will also be sanctions against secretive tax havens and tougher global financial regulation.

London's FTSE 100 index of leading shares ended 4.3% higher. In Paris, the Cac 40 jumped 5.4% and in Frankfurt the Dax rose 6%.

other highlights:

Bankers' pay and bonuses will be subject to stricter controls
A new Financial Stability Board will be set up to work with the IMF to ensure co-operation across borders and provide an early warning mechanism for the financial system
There will be greater regulation of hedge funds and credit ratings agencies
A common approach to cleaning up banks' toxic assets has been agreed
The world's poorest countries will receive $100bn extra aid
G20 countries are already implementing the biggest economic stimulus "the world has ever seen" - an injection of $5tn by the end of next year.

So..well done Gordon. You have proved the doubters so......wrong.

Friday morning update.... see Will Hutton, no Brown sycophant, on Commentisfree here;
http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2009/apr/02/g20-financial-crisis2?showallcomments=true

Gordon Saves The World...

"Gordon saves the world..". That's the dismissive, ironic, characterisation that knee-jerk pessimists and political opponents are putting on the G20 meeting in London.

But it has to be said that the meeting is already a triumph for Gordon Brown: the fact that all the leaders of the great countries of the world are coming to the UK capital at the behest and invitation of our Prime Minister is a remarkable testiment to Gordon's dedication, perseverence and vision.

The world economy is teetering on the edge of depression and doing nothing is not an option. Gordon Brown was the first to grasp that fact, the first to voice a coherent view of the problem and the first to suggest possible global solutions. He has spent many weeks and much diplomatic currency persuading other countries and governments that they have to act together.

Teamwork, co-operation, and a co-ordinated approach, as far as is possible from such a disparate grouping: that's the only way to divert a deeper, potentially catastrophic, depression.

Gordon is due the credit for providing the motivation and the forum for this historic gathering. It's already a personal triumph for the PM. We can only hope that the other leaders have the intelligence and vision of Gordon Brown, and that they overcome petty differences and deliver on behalf of us all.

Dunfermline Building Society - What's the Score?

I have savings with the Dunfermline Building Society. I chose to put my money there after the Woolwich and other mutual organisations I invested in went "private". On three ocassions (at least) I voted against organisations I was a member of going down the path of de-mutualisation.

I chose the Dunfermline precisely because it was a mutual, it gave no indication of demutualising, it invested in personal mortgages, I assumed that it had safe and sensible investment and return policies and it would not be swimming with the financial sharks.

How wrong I was. The revelations that the Dunfermline had large investments in the commercial market with the consequent risks, that it had bought mortgage packages from Lehmen's and others and that it had embarked on a vainglorious IT expansion came as a bombshell to me.

Much has been made of the UK government's role in the sale of the Dunfermline. But I have a fairly robust attitude to these things. The management of an institution has the responsibility for safeguarding that institution. If they take rash decisions or make dodgy investments, they carry the most responsibility for the consequent problems. Bleating that the FSA or the Treasury should have stopped them is no defence. It's like a burglar, on being sentenced to a few months in the chokey, blaming the police for not stopping his nocturnal activities.

The one thing I am grateful for is the UK Government's policy of ensuring that savings are secure. This is a welcome change from the crisis management of previous governments during recessions and is greatly to be welcomed as a huge leap forward in public policy.

What does "brick for brick" actually mean?

Yesterday at FMQ's Iain Gray asked Alex Salmond to take responsibility for the lack of delivery by Education Minister Fiona Hyslop.

The latest admission by Hyslop, that there are 1000 fewer teachers in Scotland's schools than a year ago is bad enough.

But the SNP has already abandoned it promise of reducing class sizes in P1-P3 to 18.

As for the SNP's promise to match Labour's school building programme "brick-for-brick": it is a disgrace and a disaster. Not one new school has been commissioned since the SNP came to power.

Meanwhile Fiona Hyslop and Alex Salmond travel the country opening the latest of the almost 200 schools that Labour commissioned and built, and shamelessly basking in the reflected glory of the achievements of others.

This is more than just another party-political bunfight. The education of our children is a key to our future prosperity. The provision of new and efficient buildings in which teachers can teach and children can learn is vital to this process. The non-delivery of new schools is a crime against a whole generation of youngsters, and the Scottish Nationalists should be ashamed of their failure to deliver such a basic requirement of any competent administration.

Two weeks ago, three junior ministers were sacked. I don't know how competent or otherwise they were, but it seems to me that Ms Hyslop's incompetence is so great, and she is so close to the First Minister, that it gives her a paradoxical protection from the the fate which she surely deserves.