Big Sticks and Small Carrots

As I understood it, Charles Clarke’s announcement on the status of the foreign ex-cons who should have been considered for deportation was due at 3pm today. As I’ve been going about my business today and waiting for news on this, I speculated to myself that the later it was, the worse it would be. Friday afternoons, as we know, are the dead spot in the 24 hour news cycle. New Labour under Blair have attempted to use this spot to release bad news any number of times.

Now, finally, at 5.47pm, the BBC has got some news. There’s not much to go on yet, most journalists are already in the pub (which is entirely the point), but based on what’s there, I think Clarke’s finished.

At least five of the foreign prisoners freed without being deported have gone on to commit more serious crimes. Home Secretary Charles Clarke said the five had been convicted since release for offences relating to drugs, violent disorder and inflicting bodily harm.

We’re talking about victims having suffered violence and bodily harm because of his and his predecessor’s incompetence. I doubt even the Friday afternoon dead spot can save him now.

Update
More information is now available from the BBC page above as well as the full text of Charles Clarke’s statement. He said:

The work of putting these decisions into effect and consideration of further cases is proceeding energetically and will continue over the weekend.

Proceeding energetically over the weekend? As opposed to last August when he actually learned of the problem? Glad to hear he’s got his priorities in order. Remember, it’s only a problem when its in the news. What we don’t know, the incompetant git doesn’t care about.

On C4 News, Clarke’s just said he won’t be resigning and that the “honourable thing to do” is to stay to put things right. If he’d tried that last August, perhaps, just perhaps mind, he might have a point. But now? Nine months later and with 288 new cases since he learned of it?

Clarke wouldn’t recognise the “honorable thing to do” if his own incompetence allowed it to cause him grievous bodily harm.

Tags: News, Politics, Charles Clarke, Tony Blair, Media

People may shout and boo and heckle you and all the rest of it, but you’ve got to take the decisions that are right for the country otherwise you really shouldn’t be doing the job.

I’m one hundred percent sure I don’t need to tell you who said that. It’s the sheer unshakable arrogance of it which gives the game away. The idea that people might be shouting and booing and heckling because they desperately want someone to take the decisions that are right for the country just isn’t on the agenda. It’s not even allowed to exist in the same universe.

Nick Robinson’s interview with Blair is worth watching if you like that sort of thing. You might want to check with your doctor beforehand if you’ve got heart problems or high blood pressure. Respect to Nick for keeping on with it though.

Blair said “you know me well enough to know there’s a resilience that will see through the next day’s headlines”.

Blair, famously, has always been obsessed with controlling the next day’s headlines. How many poorly considered initiatives has he announced for exactly that purpose? How many laws exist in Britain today because of Blair’s compulsive desire to “manage” the media? How many of his government’s publications have been directed specifically at generating a certain kind of headline (45 MINUTES FROM DOOM!!!!!!)?

And now he tells us he doesn’t really care what the media says. Amazing. Joking aside, I fear he may be very close to becoming completely detached from the real world.

PS. I’ve no idea why but Miranda.

PPS. For those who’re not Douglas Adams fans:
a) Why Not?
b) The Ravenous Bugblatter Beast of Traal “believes that if you can’t see it, it can’t see you”. The Ravenous Bugblatter Blair of Traal has a similar but slightly different problem.

Tags: News, Politics, Media, Tony Blair

So Labour are at a 19-year low in the opinion polls. I do believe I detect the beginings of a long slow decline into long-term opposition unless something dramatic is done like now. In all fairness, this is only partly Blair’s fault. The rest of the Labour Party have not been able to grasp that he’s become a serious liability so they’ve got to take some blame too. And the assortment of sychophantic incompetants he’s got as ministers, of course.

“A reshuffle is what’s needed” say some of the worst cuplrits. No, I don’t think that’ll do. What’s needed is a change of dealer; a fresh, clean hand on the deck. It wouldn’t hurt to get rid of a few marked cards while we’re at it but that’s really a secondary issue when you’ve lost confidence in person doing the shuffling. Watching that guy shuffle the pack yet again isn’t going to help at all. Hardly anyone trusts him anymore.

It’s not so much the awful opinion poll results which make me this this is the start of a potentially terminal slump. This poll, by the way, was taken before Clarke revealed himself to be hopelessly out of his depth yet again and before Big John’s little indiscretion. I doubt the latter will have much of an effect to be honest but the former? That’s going to hurt very badly indeed. But what really swung it for me was this. Patricia Hewitt being heckled. Again. Do yourself a favour and have a listen if you’ve not heard it. Ahhhhhh… isn’t that beautiful?

This not only raised a smile in a miserable cynic like myself but it also gave me hope. Too often in recent years, audiences have silently listened to the excuses and the half-truths and the spin and all the rest of it from Blair and his seemingly endless supply of incompetant sidekicks. Now, collectively, people are starting to show that they’ve had enough of it.

I started writing this post earlier today but left it half-finished. Since then, there’s been this invitation and this question.

Teflon Tony, as we’ve learned, should never be underestimated but it does look like he might finally be unable to avoid facing the fact he is now Labour’s main problem. Or rather, it looks like the Labour Party as a whole might finally be unable to avoid facing it.

Fingers crossed, eh?

Tags: News, Politics, Tony Blair

What else is there to say about Charles Clarke? It seems that the problem actually got worse after he found out about it. It seems that he thought it more important to brief the media than to come to parliament to explain himself. It seems that he offered to resign but Blair wasn’t having it.

Clarke says the problem was caused by a breakdown in communication between the Immigration and Nationality Directive and the Prison Service. Who, pray tell, is repsonsible for co-ordinating communications between the various departments of the Home Office? Who’s the one looking out for the big picture? Who’s job is it to consider the Home Office in its entirety? Who makes sure that all aspects of the H.O. are working together to deliver for the people of this country? I’m no expert of the arrangements which govern the workings of the Home Office but at a guess, I’d say it’s Fungus himself.

It’s hard to think of anyone who’s more of a waste of space (Clarke takes up a lot more space than the average person, of course). In the absence of any obvious political philosophy, many people have speculated as to what New Labour stands for. I think it’s increasingly obvious. New Labour exists as a vehicle to deliver power to bullying, unprincipled, incompetant and just plain repugnant toadies.

You want to talk about a rise in support for the BNP? I bet there was a hearty celebration at BNP HQ when they heard about this.

You want to talk about civil liberty versus security? Well don’t. It’s a false dichotomy. But is it really too much to expect that our government should be able to competantly use existing laws (which don’t curtail essential liberties) to deliver security as far as is possible? Clearly it is too much to expect from this shower of cronies and goons.

The other day, Blair and Clarke tried to say that there was no alternative but to adpot their authoritarian destruction of core British values if we are to protect the citizens of this country. I read a couple of people (alright, suspected astroturing New Labour lackeys) suggesting that it was all very well to criticise this position but that those who did were not offering an alternative themselves. Well, how about not having a grossly negligent buffoon in charge of the Home Office? There’s an alternative worth considering. How about having a prime minister who’s more interesting in making sure existing laws are actually working and serving the people of this country than in creating an endless stream of poorly considered, damaging, often dangerous headline grabbing initiatives for the Daily Mail and the Scum?* There’s an alternative I’d certainly recommend.

Clarke, it seems, is now determined to stay on and put things right. Only in modern politics (and perhaps in the boardrooms of big business) is this an acceptable defence when your gross negligence has been discovered. Try that in the real world and you’d be laughed out of your disiplinary hearing. And with good reason.

* Blair has failed to appease the Scum’s incessant demand for their own brand of authoritarian right-wingery. A bold, principled progressive leader would never have attempted it, of course. I’m in full agreement with Tim. On Murdoch, on Wade and on Blair.

Tags: News, Politics, Charles Clarke, Tony Blair

Oh Lordy. Here comes the bully Charles Clarke. Apparently, the policies of the Blair government are not in any way authoritarian or damaging to democracy; this notion is, according to Charles, nothing more than a myth created by the pernicious media. How very neo-conservative.

As usual Tim is on the case with some excellent points of order.

It’s worth comparing part of Clarke’s speech with a statement made by his boss just a few short days ago.

Charlie boy today: And let me conclude with one of the more ridiculous statements: “The presumption of innocence is no longer a fixed legal principal”. This is complete nonsense. In this country that you are innocent of an offence until proven guilty.

His boss last week: I would widen the police powers to seize the cash of suspected drug dealers, the cars they drive round in, and require them to prove they came by them, lawfully. I would impose restrictions on those suspected of being involved in organised crime. In fact, I would generally harry, hassle and hound them until they give up or leave the country. [my emphasis obviously]

These powers already exist to some extent (note Blair’s use of the word “widen”). And Blair is on record as saying that he wants to “harry, hassle and hound” people who have not been proven guilty of any offence.

Blair, undeniably from his own words, does not believe that the presumption of innocence is a fixed legal principle. Does this stop Clarke from ridiculing others for having the audacity to accurately report the patently indisputable position of the Prime Minister? Does it f*ck.

How can you argue with people who refuse to abide by the most basic rules of honest debate? Is that not the very essence of the problem? Is that not the very reason why so many people now believe that Blair and his cronies are a danger to British democracy?

The cause of the increasingly strident language used to describe this government is easy to discern. It’s certainly not the fault of those in the media who have the courage to stand up to the bullying and the spin and the lies. No, it’s the bullying and the spin and the lies themselves which are a large part of the problem. That and the policies they need to bully and spin and lie to try to defend. There’s an obvious irony in Clarke doing exactly that here. It’s certainly not an amusing irony though.

Tags: News, Politics, Media, Tony Blair, Civil Liberty

“Then there is the repugnant practice of human trafficking whereby organised gangs move people from one region to another with the intention of exploiting them when they arrive.

[I]mplementing the EU action plan [involves] developing proposals to hit the people… traffickers hard, in opening up their bank accounts, harassing their activities, arresting their leading members and bring them to justice”
- Tony Blair, June 2005

Bringing them to justice seems the way to go. (Blair’s attitude towards that is somewhat questionable in the real world but let’s put that to one side for a moment.)

And now, a quick trip overseas (via).

The top U.S. commander in Iraq has ordered sweeping changes for privatized military support operations after confirming violations of human-trafficking laws and other abuses by contractors involving possibly thousands of foreign workers on American bases, according to records obtained by the Chicago Tribune.

Gen. George Casey ordered that contractors be required by May 1 to return passports that have been illegally confiscated from laborers on U.S. bases after determining that such practices violated U.S. laws against trafficking for forced or coerced labor. Human brokers and subcontractors from South Asia to the Middle East have worked together to import thousands of laborers into Iraq from impoverished countries.

Two memos obtained by the Tribune indicate that Casey’s office concluded that the practice of confiscating passports from such workers was both widespread on American bases and in violation of the U.S. trafficking laws.

The memos, including an order dated April 4 and titled “Subject: Prevention of Trafficking in Persons in MNF-I,” or Multinational Forces-Iraq, say the military also confirmed a host of other abuses during an inspection of contracting activities supporting the U.S. military in Iraq. They include deceptive hiring practices; excessive fees charged by overseas job brokers who lure workers into Iraq; substandard living conditions once laborers arrive; violations of Iraqi immigration laws; and a lack of mandatory “awareness training” on U.S. bases concerning human trafficking.

Mr Blair, as a committed promoter of the rule of law, democracy, human rights and universalism, will no doubt make a huge noise about this and demand that those guilty of human trafficking crimes and other related abuses are arrested and brought to justice.

Yeah. Right.

For those who say the difference between “us and them” is that we deal with the problem when we find out about it, I suggest reading the article to see how long it has taken before any sort of action has been taken on this. The difference between “us and them” is that we might do something about it if the media (and the State department to give them due credit) kicks up a big enough stink over a prolonged period of time.

Tags: News, Politics, Iraq, Media, Tony Blair

Big John is worried that voters in the local elections will vote based on their dissatisfaction with Labour’s national leadership. In other words, he concedes that Blair and his cabal are now an electoral liability. This, he reckons, is “unfair” on hard working Labour councillors. He says:

“If [voters] have got differences about national politics it’s not fair to put it on local authorities.”

Not fair? Aw, diddums.

These words, I need hardly remind you, come from the deputy leader of the party who devoted their first party political broadcast for the LOCAL election campaign to an attack on Dave the Chameleon. Isn’t that just the tiniest bit inconsistent?

Fear not though. Mr Prescott has a solid defence for his party’s attack on the national leader of the Conservatives during the local election campaign.

[Big John] brushed off criticism of Labour for choosing negative campaigning with its “Dave the Chameleon” advert, describing it as “a bit of fun” which had a serious message about Mr Cameron’s inconsistency.

So that’s alright then.

Tags: News, Politics, Tony Blair