Hey,

I haven't wrote about television recently, which is a shame. Until now!

Is New Labour dead?

Hey,

Remember the days before the General Election? Before all I ever wrote about was politics? It was a simpler time, many say, and a time which I miss. The last month or so has been all about three middle-aged white middle-class men, all in search of a promotion (or in the case of Gordon Brown, keeping his job). It has been exhausting. And to make it worse they lied when they said it would all be settled by May 7th. The nausea of the campaign is still here, nearly two weeks since voting day.

As you may have guessed from the tone of recent blogs, I wasn't too jubilant about the result of the election; the "crawling into bed" of Nick Clegg with David Cameron which on paper is just wrong yet has an eerily comfortable look to it. The two of them, standing there, could be leader of either party and they wouldn't look overtly out of place. It shouldn't work for a number of reasons;

* Trident

* Nuclear Power

* European Integration

* Economic Recovery Policy

* Electoral Reform

* English Grammar (Liberal and Conservative are, by definition, opposite?)

* George Osbourne, not Vince Cable, as Chancellor

And yet it does. It bloody does. And it is down to one reason; Nick Clegg wanted a "jellyfish" parliament of transparency. But the only reason it's like a jellyfish is because he has no spine. I just expected more from him and his party (Kennedy, Ashdown excluded).

It's stitched up the media quite nicely, with The Times and The Guardian singing from a hymn-sheet which is growing increasingly similar. The Sun has a fondness for the pair now, despite a slightly tougher stance on Clegg a few weeks ago. I wish Murdoch would make up his mind!

Obviously there is still opposition. The Daily Mail and The Daily Express feel betrayed almost by letting this "left-wing party looking for right-wing votes" in. But, if we are honest, these papers have always been, for want of a better word, absolutely insane. I mean, what would Diana say about this is coalition?

But the question that has been asked often in the press is, "what is the future of Labour?". Many are sceptical, believing that "New Labour is dead". Personally, I am not so sure. I am not saying that New Labour worked perfectly, for it didn't. But I refuse to believe that it didn't work at all. There are three things that brought down this Government; the Iraq war, the economic crisis and the uncomfortable appearance of Gordon Brown. If Labour can learn from these mistakes, via tougher financial regulations, an alternative foreign policy and a charismatic - the Miliband brothers and Ed Balls all have the credential to be strong leaders in Opposition - then I believe New Labour can re-emerge. After all, it was New Labour which brought us, amongst many other things, the National Minimum Wage, a stronger NHS where waiting times have fallen dramatically, Sure Start centres and devolved powers in Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland. Although Labour shouldn't have entered this war, and the banks got away with too much, people seem to think the Tories would have dealt with these problems in a better fashion. Truth is, they wouldn't.

So as the dust settles, and a bluey-orangey coalition fully get to grips with Government, those who claim the death of Labour in this country are wrong. Or at least I hope so.

DC

x

Stop being so laissez-faire, we are all scared of the future.

Hey,

So yesterday got very emotional didn't it? From being near tears with Gordon's farewell speech to a strong sense of injustice following the consequences of it, it was huge. I got stirred up in it all, as the blog post / Facebook statuses show.

So today, it's going to be a little more chilled out, I reckon. This is my revision playlist, the songs I've been listening to to get me through these exams. I know, before you ask, there is the occasional random one. I blame Glee for a certain Madonna reference. I blame the people who sent me some of the songs. You know who you are.

1) Shelter - Xx

2) You've Got Everything Now - The Smiths

3) Stay the Same - Bonobo

4) When Doves Cry - Damien Rice

5) Frozen - Madonna

6) Unfinished Sympathy - Massive Attack

7) I Feel You - Placebo

8) Roadside - Rise Against

9) Come Pick Me Up - Ryan Adams

10) Plans - Bloc Party

11) Machines - Biffy Clyro

12) To a Friend - Alexisonfire

13) Gangsta's Paradise - Coolio

14) Pavlove - Fall Out Boy

15) Not Great Men - Gang of Four

16) Disorder - Joy Division

17) I'm Not Calling You a Liar - Florence + the Machine

18) Don't Stop the Music - Jamie Cullum

19) Paper Planes - M.I.A

20) Time After Time - Saosin

21) End of the World News - Tom McRae

22) Sunday Bloody Sunday - U2

23) I Caught Myself - Paramore

Pretty random, I admit. Especially Coolio. Download them if you like, legally or whatnot.

"Power and the money. Money and the power. Minute after minute. Hour after hour".

It's like Shakespeare.

DC

x

Reading Between the Lines.

Hey,

You know the news. I know the news. We all have our opinions on the news. So I won't talk about the news. All I am going to do is try and interpret what David Cameron said on his acceptance speech, shortly before he entered 10 Downing Street.

"I believe that is the best way to get the strong government that we need, decisive government that we need today"

He means a majority in Commons, which is only properly feasible through first past the post, a system which would not be getting tampered with if it weren't for the hung parliament. Just remember, even though 63.9% of the population voted for electoral reform, he would rather keep the system which is unfair and only benefits two party politics, a scenario we don't have anymore. Turkeys don't vote for Christmas.

"Real change is not what government can do on its own - real change is when everyone pulls together, comes together, works together, where we all exercise our responsibilities to ourselves, to our families, to our communities and to others."

This refers to this "Broken Britain" / "Open Government" / "Big Society" "We're All In This Together" jargon which he goes on and on about. Britain isn't broken, don't be fooled by the Daily Mail. He speaks of a laissez-faire attitude; after all, if you are in charge of your school it's your fault and not the Government when it goes tits up!

"And I want to help try and build a more responsible society here in Britain. One where we don't just ask what are my entitlements, but what are my responsibilities."

A Britain where we don't help those in poverty, the single mothers, the unemployed. But instead put more on their plate. And not in a good way.

"One where we don't ask what am I just owed, but more what can I give"

One where a Government doesn't look after it's neediest, but more what can it what it extract.

"We must take everyone through with us on some of the difficult decisions we have ahead."

Even though it wasn't the majority of us who got Britain into this (it was a global recession for crying out loud, the clue is in the name) we are all going to pay. After all, we are all in this together!

"Above all it will be a government that is built on some clear values. Values of freedom, values of fairness, and values of responsibility."

Copyright Nick Clegg, 2010.

"This is going to be hard and difficult work. A coalition will throw up all sorts of challenges."

I told you this co-operation thing is nonsensical. And it would've been fine if it weren't for those pesky Scots...

"Thank you very much."

Uberlölz.

But that's my opinion. I'm sure he'll do just great!

DC

x

A Political Football.

Hey,

So, I was on twitter the other day, as you do, when I noticed this tweet, regarding Chelsea winning the Premiership. It read like this;

"Congrats to Chelsea tho Im just not sure First Past the Post is the best system for the Premiership any more".

A funny tweet it was, but it made me think (which is worrying in its own accord). Sporting clichés and metaphors have been exhausted in this campaign. In his opinion piece in The Times Frank Skinner suggested that undecided voters should imagine the Conservatives as Chelsea and Labour as Portsmouth in the FA Cup final. Days before the election Sir Alex Ferguson compared it the end of season race for the Premiership.

I'm guilty of using these clichés; in a previous blog entry I likened the resurrection of Labour (or the fall of the Conservatives, depending on your outlook) with a Rocky movie. The coverage of the events, in particular the debates, has been equal to that of a Champions League match, with the option of even watching it in HD (thanks, Sky). I can't quite see the appeal of seeing Adam Boulton's bead of sweat fall down the right side of his face. But it's nice I have the option to do so. Monday night football has been replaced with Thursday night debate, albeit it may be temporary. The last time I had stayed up to watch TV before the election was when England were playing in Australia. In many senses politics went through a sort of "sportification" if you will during this election; parties were seen more as "teams" as such. Could the Liberal Democrats break into the Champions League places? Could the Tories win thanks to their millionaire backer, Roman Abramashcroft? Will the BNP ever change their transfer policy regarding foreign players?

But what is interesting is that, despite this, sport hasn't really been the focus of policy scrutiny, when perhaps it should of been. The next Government, regardless of who it is, will have the Olympics, the Commonwealth Games, an Ashes series and a Champions League final at Wembley. All of these events have impacts on people and the economy; after all, what will the new Olympic Stadium be used for post-2012? West Ham might buy it, but that's only a might. Does Glasgow really need a velodrome in the east end of the city? Should the Ashes be screened on terrestrial TV, the way Wimbledon is and the way it used to be?

Now I know you will argue that there were other priorities in this election, such as the economy, the NHS, the deficit. And you are right. They are more important. But in an election in which a woman who doesn't know where Eastern European's are "flocking from" (the clue is in the name, Mrs Duffy) it should have been given greater precedent. Duffy-gate, ironically, could be compared to a third-round FA Cup upset away to Rochdale for Manchester United, if you are still lapping up the Sun-level puns on show. You are? Grand.

DC

x

Fort in doing-ok-shock!

Fort William had traditionally been seen as a bit of a joke when it came to football. A dead weight at the bottom of the Highland League and a seasonal goal difference of minus-100 or more, they have struggled to be taken seriously. Even a plan for an American reality TV show about the club was scrapped.



Yet in November last year Fort William travelled to Turniff United – and won 2-1. To everyone who follows the Highland League this was a major surprise; not only was this three points, but it was also three points away from their fortress (for want of a better word) of Claggan Park. A fluke it was, many argued. For Fort William to win a match was merely a case of mathematical probabilities.



The formbook suggested otherwise, however. “The Fort” were losing more games than winning as before, but instead of losing 10-0, 9-1, 7-0, they were losing by smaller margins. Most defeats were by the odd-goal, or from losing a late goal whilst pushing for an equaliser. For the first time in years Fort William were being competitive, and not looking like the misfits they had been branded before.



And then, in the middle of April, it all clicked. A deserved 3-1 win away at Huntly was followed by a 2-0 win away to Brora Rangers four days later. Due to the vastness of the Highland region, the team bus clocked up 476 miles in search of these victories, a possible reason for losing their next game 4-1 at home to Formartine United. They bounced back to win 3-2 on Saturday at home to Inverurie Locos, a decent outfit from the north east of Scotland who reached the fourth round of the Scottish Cup last season. With three games to play Fort William are sitting a vertigo-inducing third from bottom of the Highland League, with five wins and fifteen more points than last season already; they have sixteen points.



Why Fort William have done better this season could be down to many reasons; Calum MacLean, the long-suffering manager, has been given time to get things right with a small group of players (Fort William have a budget roughly a quarter the size of most Highland League clubs). The finding of a striker with some potency in the Inverness amateur ranks, Sam Urquhart, has helped strengthen the team also. What can be deemed a factor is the expansion of the league from fifteen to eighteen teams (Turniff United, Strathspey Thistle and Formartine United the new teams) with Strathspey sitting below Fort William in the division. The recovery of Fort William is all of their own doing.



With Fort William doing so average just now (trust me, it’s a compliment) the only downside is that the television cameras may never return to Claggan Park in search of diabolical football. The middle of the table is where the team set their sights for next season, and no one is complaining. 

Rupert Murdoch won't decide this election. Neither will I.

Hey,

One last point. You may have noticed a slight feeling of angst surrounding owner of football/FOX/dark arts Rupert Murdoch. I don't hate him really, honest. OK, just a little. I just want to share this advert from The Independent. They've gone up a lot in my estimations now. And all it took was one poster.

Who's the gullible one now?

DC

x

ELECTION '10 DEBATE-A-THON! (Part Three) + plus "Bigotgate" and all that nonsense.

Hey,

Election debate number three is over and done with then, and David Cameron "won" this debate, supposedly. Well so say the polls. I don't think we have cared this much about the polls since 1939.

I doubt you can take polls seriously, I really don't. I say polls. I mean Sky News. The polls that Sky News used on Thursday night were The Sun/YouGov poll and The Times poll, both of which had the same percentage increases for Cameron and decreases for Brown. The Times and The Sun are owned by News International. News International is owned by Rupert Murdoch, who also owns Sky News. Now, Murdoch is a very influential man, and is also a supporter of the Conservatives, and there just seems to be far too many coincidences.

Now, I know I said last week I don't mind bias, and I will stay by that judgement. As I said last week, if Murdoch was backing similar views to me, then I would be lapping it up. To be honest, Brown is walking into so many catastrophes that Murdoch doesn't need to do much to sabotage the Labour campaign.

Brown hasn't had a good week. Firstly, "Bigotgate". Not ideal to be calling your supporters things like that. In some regards though, he was merely just blowing off steam and partly just calling a spade a spade. She did ask the question, "where are all these Eastern European flocking from?". Erm, the clue is in the name, surely? A very, very, very, very basic knowledge of geography is required to answer that one. She was also concerned about university funding for her grandchildren. Fair enough you may say. But her grandchildren are ten and twelve years old. Even if they were going to University, they will be literally going after the next election. Perhaps "bigoted" was the wrong thing to say. But ignorant? Possibly.

Then, the debate itself. What did we learn? For a start, all three leaders believe in work. Gives you self-esteem and self-respect apparently. Good to know. I'd be surprised if Clegg burst out saying "work is prostitution of the soul, man!".

Secondly, and here is where the polls and I disagree, I think Gordon Brown won the debate on Thursday. His plans on the economy were astute and positive, he had genuine statistical evidence to support his claims (as oppose to Clegg's "600, 000" amnesty thing, not quite sure what that was about). Nick Clegg was not the voice of change, rather the voice of a tired little protester. He looked rather ill, in my opinion and his catchphrase, something about "the two parties" is sooo two weeks ago. Also ironic that the Liberals are older than the Labour Party, technically. I found Cameron, the "winner" in the proceedings, rather good at avoiding awkward questions. Every time a question regarding the inheritance tax (pay-offs for the richest 3000 people) and the corporate tax (leniency towards bankers) was raised he responded with "Thirteen years of a Labour Government" followed by some gibberish about his kids going to state school or how he met somebody who was working class and from the North. This avoidance won him the debate, I worry it will win him the election.

And then, the car crash at the Labour gathering yesterday. A metaphor, perhaps. Yet what was interesting was seeing all of Labour's "big guns" on the campaign trail. "MILIBAND! BALLS! DARLING! MANDELSON! AND BLAIR! YES BLAIR!"

Now, some will see this as a sign of desperation, and it could well be, because offending a member of the public didn't boost the ratings, surprisingly. But what is interesting is that nearly all of the Conservative electioneering is Cameron-based. This could be because Cameron is the only one who is properly trained at answering/avoiding awkward questions. How much have we seen of George Osbourne, potentially the next Chancellor? Next to none, because he is a blunder waiting to happen. It's as if they spent all of their PR budget on Cameron alone, like a naive player of Football Manager spending his four year transfer budget on Ronaldinho. Guilty of that one. Then again, I was 12. David Cameron is, err, not 12 I think?

DC

x