Showing posts with label Cameron. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Cameron. Show all posts

Friday, 17 July 2009

Mr Call Me Green

Dave call-me-green Cameron went to Norwich today for a meeting on biofuels.

He went by helicopter. For a twenty minute meeting.

What a complete charlatan he is.

Hat tips to Andrew Reeves and Liberal Burblings.

Thursday, 16 April 2009

Gordon Brown does what I told him to do

So Gordon Brown has done what I told him to.

Perhaps I should set myself up as a political adviser.

Sunday, 12 April 2009

McBride, Brown, Cameron..... Oakley?

So David Cameron is furious with Gordon Brown and is demanding an apology from him. He should get one. McBride's cheap little scheme has no place in politics.

On the other hand, the Conservative PPC for Watford carried out a vicious and criminal campaign of vilification and intimidation against Liberal Democrat party members, deliberately and persistently sustained over three years before he was finally arrested, charged and convicted of those crimes. And we have not had one single word of apology from David Cameron. We are still waiting.

Gordon Brown should apologise to David Cameron. Not least because he can take the high ground.

Because David Cameron is a hypocrite.

Update: Eaten By Missionaries points out that David Cameron has apologised, albeit seven months late, and only when he had no alternative, having been put on the spot publicly in Watford. But, examining the record in the Watford Observer, what it says he says is "I am extremely sorry about what happened. Of course I regret what has happened. I think everyone on the Conservative Party regrets what has happened." That strikes me as a typically political choice of words. He's sorry "about" it, but he's not sorry "for" it. On the assumption that the Watford Observer is accurate, he still hasn't actually apologised.

Wednesday, 1 October 2008

It's all about character

So says Dave. Well, he would wouldn't he, as he doesn't have experience on his side. It was quite a decent response in some ways - now there's a battle on.

But I can't help thinking about character. What do you say about the character of a party leader whose two main funders have broken promises, and clearly intend to continue breaking them, and he can bring himself to do nothing about it?

Lord Ashcroft promised to be a UK tax payer if he became a lord. He is very secretive about his movements and his businesses. He's entitled to be. But when David Cameron makes noises about cleaning up the mess in British politics he needs to ensure that his own party's receipts are squeaky clean. So is Lord Ashcroft a UK taxpayer? Ashcroft recently grudgingly confirmed that he pays tax in the UK, but wasn't specific about how much,or on what basis, when it would have been easy to do so. His behaviour leaves open the assumption that he is still hiding something. And those donations wend their way to the Tory party via a chain of companies, according to Channel 4, ending up with a British based company which donates more to the party than its own turnover. Why the stealth? It invites an assumption that there is something fishy about the origin of the money. But Dave isn't bothered about that in the slightest.

Lord Laidlaw made a written promise in 2003 that he would become a UK taxpayer if he became a Lord. He clearly never intended to keep that promise. Does Dave care? Apparently not. Lord Laidlaw has now apparently taken leave from the House of Lords. But he's still a Lord, and a broken promise continues to lie on his silver salver.

And what about Ian Oakley? He conducted a sustained, vicious, deliberate, premeditated, three year long campaign of hatred, harrassment and intimidation of political opponents while he was the Conservative candidate for Watford. He has admitted to 75 offences committed over that time. And Dave has not uttered one word of condemnation.

Yes. I do wonder about character.

Monday, 24 December 2007

"I. Am. Clegg."

I've had a hatful of lazy media speak this week. First it was Nick Robinson's analysis on Radio 4 of Nick Clegg's interview, sticking to the sad old two dimensional model. They're left, they're right, you must be in the middle. At least we're no longer being painted as being to the left of labour - basically because everybody is nowadays.

Then we have Rosie Millard's cheap sneers in the Sunday Times, and of course Simon Jenkins' habitual inability to connect to liberal democracy.

Politics is more complicated than that nowadays, but it will take an earthquake for the media ever to present it so. I think the best way to conceive of politics is to think in terms of a series of dimensions, but it's very diffcult to get that across in news media. You can get it across, but you need Newsnight or Andrew Marr. News as such doesn't do anything that can't be labelled in three words or less.

One phrase that got to me particularly about this weekend's coverage was the repeat in the Daily Telegraph of the horrible phrase "Cameron lite". That more than anything illustrated to me the vapidness of journalist speak. Look at Cameron. How is it possible for anything or anyone else to be Cameron lite? Cameron is Cameron lite. He is so insubstantial, he'd float away if it weren't for the dead lump of the Conservative party anchoring him to the seabed.

Unfortunately journalist speak has great power, so it's not possible just to wish it away. Cameron's biggest asset is that he knows this. He has the DT, for instance, saying that like Clegg, he has put the environment at the heart of his agenda. This is a man who habitually takes a private jet to go places. It's at the heart of what he's saying, but not of what he's doing.

So Nick Clegg needs to combat that attempt to paint him as light and frothy as Cameron. Maybe he needs to come out and say straight, "I am not Cameron lite. If I was Cameron anything I'd be Cameron weighty. But I'm not Cameron anything. I. Am. Clegg."

I'm pleased to say he's going about things the right way. The measured response to Dave's overtures - this from the Telegraph again " "At least Blair made these approaches with some skill and also with serious intent," said one official in Mr Clegg's office. "Cameron's offer was opportunism. They have not approached us privately in any serious way. It is inconceivable that we could go into a formalised arrangement with any other party without electoral reform." " The tone is excellent and the comparison to Tony Blair is deadly.

And I particularly like his response in the People, this via Stephen Tall on Libdemvoice.

"Rs 'What Christmas gifts would you buy Gordon Brown and David Cameron?'


Nc 'After Northern Rock, the PM needs basic lessons in finance, so I'd buy him Monopoly. Cameron needs a compass to help him work out what political direction he's going in.' "

Does the job nicely.