In January I made some predictions for 2008. Let's see how I got on...
1. Gordon Brown's government will continue to unravel slowly. By the end of the year, the polls will look like Labour 28%, Lib Dems 18%, Tories 45%.
If I'd taken the snapshot in August this would have been true, the bank bail out seemed to reverse the position - though I don't think for too much longer. 1/2 point
2. The economy will slow, but avoid a recession. GDP for 2008 will be 1.5%.
Wrong. We're in recession. 0 points.
3. Interest rates will end the year on 4.5%, CPI 1.9%, RPI 3.9 %.
Wrong. Interest rates are 2%, CPI 4.1%, RPI 3.0%. 0 points.
4. Several ministers will resign, stating irreconcilable differences of opinion with the PM.
Wrong. Somehow, they all stuck in there. 0 points.
5. Charles Clarke, Alan Milburn and Stephen Byers will all pipe up asking for a real revolution in New Labour and stating that GB is not the change the country needs.
Right. They did ask for this through the beginning of the year. 1 point.
6. Nick Clegg will move the Lib Dems to the right whilst being put under pressure from his party for moving too far.
Half right, he did move the party to the right. 1/2 point.
7. Funding scandals will claim a scalp on the Labour and Conservative front benches. Probably Peter Hain, but not George Osborne.
Right. This was not the Yachtgate affair but I got this one right. 1 point.
8. Barack Obama will face John McCain and beat him to become President-Elect by the end of the year.
Spot on. When everyone though Hilary would win, and John McCain was out of it. 1 point.
9. Ken Livingstone narrowly beats Boris Johnson for Mayor of London.
Wrong, but who'd have thunk it? 0 points.
10. Kimi Raikkonen wins the F1 championship by 10 points from Lewis Hamilton. Felipe Massa comes third, Fernando Alonso fourth, Heikki Kovalainen fifth and Nick Heidfeld sixth.
Wrong. Kimi was with the fairies and Lewis claimed it in spectacular fashion. I'm glad I was wrong. 0 points.
Overall, 4 points. Not too bad but I think the events of September skewed quite a few outcomes. Tomorrow for the 2009 predictions!.
Squiffy.
Wednesday, 31 December 2008
Thursday, 18 December 2008
Could we be in store for a May/June General Election?
Many commentators are wondering if there will be an early election, possibly in February 2009. I don't think that will happen, the history of elections in cold February point to the ruling party losing out. It could be advantageous to Labour though as it's likely that the recession will get worse before it gets better, and as it gets worse the polls could swing against Labour's recovery.
I think the timing of the withdrawal of troops from Iraq may be pointing to a May or June election. Normally you wouldn't play politics with the armed services, but Gordon Brown has form - remember his visit to Iraq to announce the return of 1000 troups during the Tory Party conference of 2007?
I think Gordon Brown will want to ride the wave of gratitude to the troops on their return and put the whole error of the Iraq war behind him. After their return the pressure will be on for a full inquiry into the lead up to the war and its conduct. If he delays an election to 2010, the outcome of any inquiry could be very embarrassing at the very moment when he goes to the country.
Also, the month of May has often seen General Elections, as the season of Spring brings forward feelings of optimism. The elections of 1997 and 2005 were in May and the 2001 election probably would have be had it not been for Foot and Mouth creating a delay.
Of course there are European Elections in June, so Gordon Brown may want to combine all the elections into one and create less spending/hassle for the councils. Saving money isn't really in GB's nature though so he may still go for May.
Squiffy.
I think the timing of the withdrawal of troops from Iraq may be pointing to a May or June election. Normally you wouldn't play politics with the armed services, but Gordon Brown has form - remember his visit to Iraq to announce the return of 1000 troups during the Tory Party conference of 2007?
I think Gordon Brown will want to ride the wave of gratitude to the troops on their return and put the whole error of the Iraq war behind him. After their return the pressure will be on for a full inquiry into the lead up to the war and its conduct. If he delays an election to 2010, the outcome of any inquiry could be very embarrassing at the very moment when he goes to the country.
Also, the month of May has often seen General Elections, as the season of Spring brings forward feelings of optimism. The elections of 1997 and 2005 were in May and the 2001 election probably would have be had it not been for Foot and Mouth creating a delay.
Of course there are European Elections in June, so Gordon Brown may want to combine all the elections into one and create less spending/hassle for the councils. Saving money isn't really in GB's nature though so he may still go for May.
Squiffy.
Monday, 15 December 2008
How low can you go?
That's a question for Sterling. For the last six days the Pound has dropped to increasingly record lows against the Euro. It has now plunged by 30% in the last few months, even the drop when the currency was withdrawn from the ERM was not as great.
The worry is that the low value of sterling will create the need for higher interest rates than would be good for times in a recession. But why is the pound plunging? Because our economy is in a terrible state, and the markets know it! The huge levels of debt is creating a lack of confidence, where others such as Germany have until recently been running a surplus.
I'm afraid that the pound will continue to drop whilst the Government fanny about with small measures and extra borrowing. They need to solve the credit crunch before tinkering at the edges of VAT, the Tories' Loan Guarantee Scheme would be one such solution. Unfortunately the Government seem determined to land the future tax payers with a level of debt greater than those from World War 2. We're doomed Mr Mainwaring.
Squiffy.
The worry is that the low value of sterling will create the need for higher interest rates than would be good for times in a recession. But why is the pound plunging? Because our economy is in a terrible state, and the markets know it! The huge levels of debt is creating a lack of confidence, where others such as Germany have until recently been running a surplus.
I'm afraid that the pound will continue to drop whilst the Government fanny about with small measures and extra borrowing. They need to solve the credit crunch before tinkering at the edges of VAT, the Tories' Loan Guarantee Scheme would be one such solution. Unfortunately the Government seem determined to land the future tax payers with a level of debt greater than those from World War 2. We're doomed Mr Mainwaring.
Squiffy.
Friday, 12 December 2008
There EU go again
Not very surprising, I know, but the decision by the Irish Taoiseach, Brian Cowen, to hold a second referendum on the Lisbon Constitutional treaty just typifies why the EU doesn't do democracy. The Irish people voted against the ratification of the Lisbon treaty by a margin of 54% to 46%, but are now going to be asked to think again. I bet there wouldn't be a second referendum had they voted in favour!
It's been happening for a while now, when the EU doesn't get a result it wants from a referendum the result is simply ignored (as in the case in France over the Lisbon treaty who then ratified it) or the question is put again. The Yes camp invariably says that there was a lot of scare mongering about proposals and, true, sometimes some of the predicted horrors are some way from the truth. But both sides are culpable, the British weren't exactly told the truth about our own referendum in 1975 (when I was two years old!), little did we know that we would be put on a course of political union rather than the free tree block most thought we would be joining.
Luckily for the Irish, they at least can express a view. We have been denied ours from the Government's election manifesto. Regardless of the merits and pitfalls of the Lisbon treaty, I urge the people of Ireland to vote the treaty down to demonstrate to the faceless bureaucrats that democracy matters and ignoring the wishes of the people cannot be treated lightly.
Come forth EU democracy.
Squiffy.
It's been happening for a while now, when the EU doesn't get a result it wants from a referendum the result is simply ignored (as in the case in France over the Lisbon treaty who then ratified it) or the question is put again. The Yes camp invariably says that there was a lot of scare mongering about proposals and, true, sometimes some of the predicted horrors are some way from the truth. But both sides are culpable, the British weren't exactly told the truth about our own referendum in 1975 (when I was two years old!), little did we know that we would be put on a course of political union rather than the free tree block most thought we would be joining.
Luckily for the Irish, they at least can express a view. We have been denied ours from the Government's election manifesto. Regardless of the merits and pitfalls of the Lisbon treaty, I urge the people of Ireland to vote the treaty down to demonstrate to the faceless bureaucrats that democracy matters and ignoring the wishes of the people cannot be treated lightly.
Come forth EU democracy.
Squiffy.
Monday, 24 November 2008
It's bloody awful
The key message from today's Pre-Budget report. The amount of borrowing is truly astronomical leading to a total of £1 trillion debt.
Ok, so the answer to my previous question was that the Government doesn't care about strict rules on keeping budget details under wraps. The only major figure not leaked was the 0.5% increase in National Insurance Contributions. A tax paid by employees and employers just as they will (hopefully) be leading the country out of recession.
I'm highly sceptical that the VAT reduction will work and I also think the economy will go down before it rises again - so the timing may be all wrong for a stimulus.
Just like the last three budgets (including PBR's), I think this budget will quickly unravel. The NIC and 45% tax is a timebomb waiting to go off as the Government heads to the left.
I think this may be a game changer, but probably not in the Governments direction.
Squiffy.
Ok, so the answer to my previous question was that the Government doesn't care about strict rules on keeping budget details under wraps. The only major figure not leaked was the 0.5% increase in National Insurance Contributions. A tax paid by employees and employers just as they will (hopefully) be leading the country out of recession.
I'm highly sceptical that the VAT reduction will work and I also think the economy will go down before it rises again - so the timing may be all wrong for a stimulus.
Just like the last three budgets (including PBR's), I think this budget will quickly unravel. The NIC and 45% tax is a timebomb waiting to go off as the Government heads to the left.
I think this may be a game changer, but probably not in the Governments direction.
Squiffy.
PBR Leaks
The leaking of the cut in VAT and proposed increase in high rate tax to 45% for those earning more than £150,000 have been widely leaked. The fact that they have been picked up by most newspapers and broadcast media suggests that the leaks have come from the Government. But why?
It years gone by, this would be nearly a criminal act, but in recent years small details have been leaked to the press. It is wrong and the city takes a very dim view on it. This time big measures have been leaked - either the Government doesn't care about previous procedures, is completely incompetent with details or is trying to wrong foot George Osborne.
I wouldn't be surprised if the VAT cut is not announced and another measure takes its place. This would be almost unheard of, but they really want to knock George Osborne off his feet as his prepared response has to be ditched!
Which reason will be revealed in the next hour.
Squiffy.
It years gone by, this would be nearly a criminal act, but in recent years small details have been leaked to the press. It is wrong and the city takes a very dim view on it. This time big measures have been leaked - either the Government doesn't care about previous procedures, is completely incompetent with details or is trying to wrong foot George Osborne.
I wouldn't be surprised if the VAT cut is not announced and another measure takes its place. This would be almost unheard of, but they really want to knock George Osborne off his feet as his prepared response has to be ditched!
Which reason will be revealed in the next hour.
Squiffy.
Sunday, 23 November 2008
VAT to 15%
If the papers are to be believed, we are in for a cut of VAT to 15% in tomorrow's Pre-Budget report.
I'm not an economist, but I don't think it is going to work. Firstly, making items slightly cheaper isn't going to make everybody to rush out and buy goods when the economy looks dreadful. I also think that the drop in prices would have a bigger effect on inflation than desired.
If you're going to have fiscal stimulus package you need to put a large amount of money, a windfall, in people's hands. Some people would save the money, but a lot of people would go out and spend it.
Gordon Brown last week mentioned that the bigger threat to the economy now is deflation rather than inflation. Wouldn't the cut in VAT compound this possible problem?
What happens if none of this works? Another stimulus package, more borrowing and lots more tax later.
Squiffy.
I'm not an economist, but I don't think it is going to work. Firstly, making items slightly cheaper isn't going to make everybody to rush out and buy goods when the economy looks dreadful. I also think that the drop in prices would have a bigger effect on inflation than desired.
If you're going to have fiscal stimulus package you need to put a large amount of money, a windfall, in people's hands. Some people would save the money, but a lot of people would go out and spend it.
Gordon Brown last week mentioned that the bigger threat to the economy now is deflation rather than inflation. Wouldn't the cut in VAT compound this possible problem?
What happens if none of this works? Another stimulus package, more borrowing and lots more tax later.
Squiffy.
Wednesday, 19 November 2008
Back to the Future
The 80's are upon us, the BBC should start re-running Dallas and Dynasty. Shoulderpads will be back, along with the mullets, perms and rock ballads.
To aid us in this trip down memory lane, the two big political parties have obliged by reverting to 80's economic policies. Labour has ditched the policies of golden rules and trying to balance the books (although they did this a while ago but didn't admit it). In fact they have for the last few years been doing the old tax-and-spend tango, with a quick chassé of tax cuts before the big tax rises after the next election.
The Tories have catapulted the policy of sharing the proceeds of growth and reverted to 'sound' money, only allowing tax cuts paid for by savings in the current budget. It's back to Thatcher.
So as we listen to Duran Duran, there is now a clear dividing line in politics again. The past two elections have been fought with Labour standing in the centre and the Tories to the right - a position which it could never win from, which is why the Tories also had to move to the centre. But now the Labour party have moved to the left, and so the Tories can move to the right and still win.
I'm hoping the British public will see through the current boost for the Government and appreciate that times will be getting significantly harder with the burgeoning debt. We need 'sound' money now more than ever.
Squiffy.
To aid us in this trip down memory lane, the two big political parties have obliged by reverting to 80's economic policies. Labour has ditched the policies of golden rules and trying to balance the books (although they did this a while ago but didn't admit it). In fact they have for the last few years been doing the old tax-and-spend tango, with a quick chassé of tax cuts before the big tax rises after the next election.
The Tories have catapulted the policy of sharing the proceeds of growth and reverted to 'sound' money, only allowing tax cuts paid for by savings in the current budget. It's back to Thatcher.
So as we listen to Duran Duran, there is now a clear dividing line in politics again. The past two elections have been fought with Labour standing in the centre and the Tories to the right - a position which it could never win from, which is why the Tories also had to move to the centre. But now the Labour party have moved to the left, and so the Tories can move to the right and still win.
I'm hoping the British public will see through the current boost for the Government and appreciate that times will be getting significantly harder with the burgeoning debt. We need 'sound' money now more than ever.
Squiffy.
Thursday, 13 November 2008
Shameful
Yesterday's performance by Gordon Brown at PMQ's was shameful. To not answer David Cameron's questions about the horrible death of baby P, and then accuse the opposition leader of party politics shows just how low this man can go. Tony Blair would have handled the situation with his usual aplomb.
If anyone still believes that this man has the necessary requirements to be Prime Minister, then think again.
Squiffy.
If anyone still believes that this man has the necessary requirements to be Prime Minister, then think again.
Squiffy.
Friday, 7 November 2008
Gordon Brown's 18 percent
This week at PMQ's Gordon Brown re-iterated a figure that he used in the previous week's PMQs. He has now stated twice that UK interest rates rose to 18% on the day of Black Wednesday.
On the day of Black Wednesday, interest rates started the day at 10%, went up to 12%, then up to 15% before we withdrew from the ERM. After that decision in the evening, they went down again to 12% before diving to around 6% within several months. Gordon Brown is supposed to be a master of figures but these lapses show either that he's not up to basic economic facts, economic history, or honesty. Either way, it shows that he's not the man to guide us through troubled times.
Squiffy.
On the day of Black Wednesday, interest rates started the day at 10%, went up to 12%, then up to 15% before we withdrew from the ERM. After that decision in the evening, they went down again to 12% before diving to around 6% within several months. Gordon Brown is supposed to be a master of figures but these lapses show either that he's not up to basic economic facts, economic history, or honesty. Either way, it shows that he's not the man to guide us through troubled times.
Squiffy.
Tuesday, 4 November 2008
My Presidential Prediction
Tonight it's the US general election and I'm still sticking to my prediction of a win for Barrack Obama. I'm predicting a popular vote of 52% for Obama and 44% for McCain, and 340 electoral votes for Obama with the remaining votes going to McCain.
If this happens it will be consistent with my prediction for the election from the beginning of the year. Back then I predicted an Obama vs McCain fight with Obama coming out on top - this was when Hillary Clinton was the overwhelming favourite for the Democratic nomination and McCain was out of it for the Republicans.
A strange fact was unearthed in the Times this week. In all Presidential elections, apart from 1960, a Democrat has won the presidency when a Brit has won the F1 world championship!
Squiffy.
If this happens it will be consistent with my prediction for the election from the beginning of the year. Back then I predicted an Obama vs McCain fight with Obama coming out on top - this was when Hillary Clinton was the overwhelming favourite for the Democratic nomination and McCain was out of it for the Republicans.
A strange fact was unearthed in the Times this week. In all Presidential elections, apart from 1960, a Democrat has won the presidency when a Brit has won the F1 world championship!
Squiffy.
Sunday, 2 November 2008
Wow!
As an avid Formula 1 fan, I'm really glad that I got my prediction wrong at the start of the year. I thought that Kimi Raikkonen would be even stronger this year after finally winning the championship in 2007. I was wrong, gladly.
The race today, in Brazil, was fantastic. Even if Felipe Massa had won, the race would have been momentous. Massa would have been a great champion, but as a Brit I'm ecstatic that Lewis Hamilton won. After missing out with bad luck (from a dodgy gearbox) last year, this year he deserved it after some fantastic drives in Monaco and Silverstone. Also he deserved to win after losing a total of 7 points to Massa after being penalised unfairly by the FIA at Spa (overtaking Raikkonen) and Fuji (Bourdais being penalised for Massa's dodgy move).
The race was brilliant and heart stopping. After sitting in despair with two laps to go, thinking how could it go wrong again - just like last year - to complete elation on the last corner before checkered flag.
The champagne is flowing tonight.
Squiffy.
The race today, in Brazil, was fantastic. Even if Felipe Massa had won, the race would have been momentous. Massa would have been a great champion, but as a Brit I'm ecstatic that Lewis Hamilton won. After missing out with bad luck (from a dodgy gearbox) last year, this year he deserved it after some fantastic drives in Monaco and Silverstone. Also he deserved to win after losing a total of 7 points to Massa after being penalised unfairly by the FIA at Spa (overtaking Raikkonen) and Fuji (Bourdais being penalised for Massa's dodgy move).
The race was brilliant and heart stopping. After sitting in despair with two laps to go, thinking how could it go wrong again - just like last year - to complete elation on the last corner before checkered flag.
The champagne is flowing tonight.
Squiffy.
Thursday, 30 October 2008
Those golden (chipboard) rules
Alistair Darling has announced that the Government is not going to be applying the golden rule (to keep borrowing below 40% of GDP) and the sustainable investment rule (to balance the books over an economic cycle) rigidly. Well you could blow me down with a feather, the Government stopped following the rules rigidly in 2001 when they started plowing money into this and that.
At first, the Government created PFI projects which took debt off the books (although the future debt will be with us for years). They took the nationalisation of Network Rail off the public books, the nationalisation of Northern Rock and Bradford & Bingley are likely to be taken off too. Public sector pension liabilities have also been removed. If you add all that up the borrowing is well above 100% of GDP. Bye Bye golden rule.
As the Government borrowed more money while the economy was growing, the sustainable investment rule looked under threat. So the Government changed the start point of what is termed the economic cycle. All the while stating that they had got rid of boom and bust, so they really didn't believe that the economic cycle still existed. The present oncoming recession has now changed all that. The economic cycle has reasserted itself - it had never really gone away.
So never mind that the Government didn't understand when the economic cycle started, they didn't understand the economic cycle. Full Stop. Which is why we're in such a mess; investors have decided that UK Plc is a bad bet and are selling Sterling and buying Dollars at a startling rate. Bye Bye sustainable investment rule.
The Government keep saying that the current economic turbulence started in America which is true. Unfortunately they don't say that over the last 10 years, politicians have believed their own statements of "no more boom and bust" and allowed the economy to be built on a house of (credit) cards, it only needed one shock to bring the whole edifice falling down. The US Government bringing down Lehman Brothers was that shock.
The Government is culpable for letting borrowing get out of control in a boom, and they think spending more of our money on the tick is the answer. Borrowing always increases in a recession, but usually from a low base - this time it's from high levels and will need some strict management to get the books balanced again when the economy starts to recover. This Government doesn't understand basic housekeeping, they only understand how to spend other people's money. Will somebody rid us of this turbulent Government?
Squiffy.
At first, the Government created PFI projects which took debt off the books (although the future debt will be with us for years). They took the nationalisation of Network Rail off the public books, the nationalisation of Northern Rock and Bradford & Bingley are likely to be taken off too. Public sector pension liabilities have also been removed. If you add all that up the borrowing is well above 100% of GDP. Bye Bye golden rule.
As the Government borrowed more money while the economy was growing, the sustainable investment rule looked under threat. So the Government changed the start point of what is termed the economic cycle. All the while stating that they had got rid of boom and bust, so they really didn't believe that the economic cycle still existed. The present oncoming recession has now changed all that. The economic cycle has reasserted itself - it had never really gone away.
So never mind that the Government didn't understand when the economic cycle started, they didn't understand the economic cycle. Full Stop. Which is why we're in such a mess; investors have decided that UK Plc is a bad bet and are selling Sterling and buying Dollars at a startling rate. Bye Bye sustainable investment rule.
The Government keep saying that the current economic turbulence started in America which is true. Unfortunately they don't say that over the last 10 years, politicians have believed their own statements of "no more boom and bust" and allowed the economy to be built on a house of (credit) cards, it only needed one shock to bring the whole edifice falling down. The US Government bringing down Lehman Brothers was that shock.
The Government is culpable for letting borrowing get out of control in a boom, and they think spending more of our money on the tick is the answer. Borrowing always increases in a recession, but usually from a low base - this time it's from high levels and will need some strict management to get the books balanced again when the economy starts to recover. This Government doesn't understand basic housekeeping, they only understand how to spend other people's money. Will somebody rid us of this turbulent Government?
Squiffy.
Saturday, 18 October 2008
Wednesday, 1 October 2008
The party season
Apologies for it being so long to make a post, it's been a very busy time for me. Working hard, getting married and then a honeymoon.
Unfortunately, I missed the Lib Dem conference as I was still away. I did manage to catch Nick Clegg's speech, however, and he was trying to do the same as David Cameron last year - unfortunately I saw the autocue at the back of the conference hall.
The speech seemed to be fine, and secured his place as Lib Dem leader. Promising tax cuts is a great idea, although looks highly optimistic in the current economic turmoil. Especially as Vince Cable's plan for any bank in trouble is Nationalisation.
The Labour Party conference seemed less fevered than I expected, although I was not in the bars and meeting rooms afterwards. The speeches were not very exciting, although the happy chipmunk - Hazel Blears - made a good speech.
Gordon Brown did his best speech ever, and came up with the best line of the conference season - "No time for a novice". He still manages, though, to make me want to throw something at the TV screen when he tells some mis-truths. His whole little section on universal and women's suffrage was full of inaccuracies (being generous) or lies (being truthful).
I think he has secured his position for the time being, the financial situation seems to have given him a new narrative as the man of experience. The talk of 'change' on the steps of 10 Downing Street on becoming PM, must now be fully consigned to the dustbin - he is now the man of continuity.
The Conservative party conference has had to content with the backdrop of dire financial turmoil and this has made it difficult to be heard. Nevertheless, I believe the tone has been right - sober but sound, non-complacent but confident.
David Cameron's hastily written little speech on Tuesday was a masterstroke, he looked statesmanlike offering bipartisan co-operation. All that is pretty irrelevant, but ensuring 2 minutes on the daily news cycle after the bailout package was voted down by Congress was brilliant.
Today's speech by David Cameron was again excellent and fitted the mood of conference. It was on a par with last year's fantastic effort but against a completely different set of circumstances - showing that he catch the mood when necessary.
At the current moment the polls show that the Tory party lead is down to roughly 10 points, but as Mike Smithson says on the PoliticalBetting.com the Labour party always gets a 7% boost after conference. I do believe that within a week, the polls will be similar to those before the conference season - only changes by the economic turmoil will sustain through the polling period.
Let's see what happens next week.
Squiffy.
Unfortunately, I missed the Lib Dem conference as I was still away. I did manage to catch Nick Clegg's speech, however, and he was trying to do the same as David Cameron last year - unfortunately I saw the autocue at the back of the conference hall.
The speech seemed to be fine, and secured his place as Lib Dem leader. Promising tax cuts is a great idea, although looks highly optimistic in the current economic turmoil. Especially as Vince Cable's plan for any bank in trouble is Nationalisation.
The Labour Party conference seemed less fevered than I expected, although I was not in the bars and meeting rooms afterwards. The speeches were not very exciting, although the happy chipmunk - Hazel Blears - made a good speech.
Gordon Brown did his best speech ever, and came up with the best line of the conference season - "No time for a novice". He still manages, though, to make me want to throw something at the TV screen when he tells some mis-truths. His whole little section on universal and women's suffrage was full of inaccuracies (being generous) or lies (being truthful).
I think he has secured his position for the time being, the financial situation seems to have given him a new narrative as the man of experience. The talk of 'change' on the steps of 10 Downing Street on becoming PM, must now be fully consigned to the dustbin - he is now the man of continuity.
The Conservative party conference has had to content with the backdrop of dire financial turmoil and this has made it difficult to be heard. Nevertheless, I believe the tone has been right - sober but sound, non-complacent but confident.
David Cameron's hastily written little speech on Tuesday was a masterstroke, he looked statesmanlike offering bipartisan co-operation. All that is pretty irrelevant, but ensuring 2 minutes on the daily news cycle after the bailout package was voted down by Congress was brilliant.
Today's speech by David Cameron was again excellent and fitted the mood of conference. It was on a par with last year's fantastic effort but against a completely different set of circumstances - showing that he catch the mood when necessary.
At the current moment the polls show that the Tory party lead is down to roughly 10 points, but as Mike Smithson says on the PoliticalBetting.com the Labour party always gets a 7% boost after conference. I do believe that within a week, the polls will be similar to those before the conference season - only changes by the economic turmoil will sustain through the polling period.
Let's see what happens next week.
Squiffy.
Monday, 21 July 2008
Will the re-writing of the rules be the real Black Wednesday moment?
There has been a lot of speculation surrounding the re-writing of the two fiscal rules that Gordon Brown has used to underpin the economy for the last eleven years. The speculation stems from the fact that the Government does not have enough money to handle the downturn without breaking the Golden Rule.
There has also been past talk of Gordon Brown's Black Wednesday, from myself too. I suspect that if the rules get re-written we will really witness the Black Wednesday moment. It will be the point in time when the Government's economic policy is destroyed completely.
If only the Government had actually stuck to it's rules and planned for the bad times, their policy would have worked. But they didn't - so it won't. And another thing, I'm not an economist, but how can the current economic cycle be ending now and have started in 1997? In 1997 the economy had been growing for 4 years and was looking towards 11 years more growth - surely the cycle started in 1990 when we were heading into recession! Maybe that's why I'm not an economist.
Anyway, watch out for the Brown Wednesday when the rules get re-written. It will happen.
Squiffy.
There has also been past talk of Gordon Brown's Black Wednesday, from myself too. I suspect that if the rules get re-written we will really witness the Black Wednesday moment. It will be the point in time when the Government's economic policy is destroyed completely.
If only the Government had actually stuck to it's rules and planned for the bad times, their policy would have worked. But they didn't - so it won't. And another thing, I'm not an economist, but how can the current economic cycle be ending now and have started in 1997? In 1997 the economy had been growing for 4 years and was looking towards 11 years more growth - surely the cycle started in 1990 when we were heading into recession! Maybe that's why I'm not an economist.
Anyway, watch out for the Brown Wednesday when the rules get re-written. It will happen.
Squiffy.
Thursday, 10 July 2008
And as if by magic
A month or so ago I railed against new yellow markings at Kilburn tube station showing where the doors would be when a train stopped.
I disliked the way that the only advantage that the trod upon London commuter had in knowing where the doors were had been taken away, as well as the possibility for accident on a crowded platform of everyone surrounding small areas.
On Monday night, YouGov asked me what I would suggest as policies for Boris Johnson to pursue. Imagine my surprise on Tuesday when all the yellow markings had disappeared. Someone out there is listening - not to me though probably.
Also, incidentally, I asked for Boris to scrap bin taxes (although it's not in his power) and encourage council tax rebates for recycling. Two days later, George Osbourne announced a similar policy. Common sense seems to be prevailing.
Squiffy.
I disliked the way that the only advantage that the trod upon London commuter had in knowing where the doors were had been taken away, as well as the possibility for accident on a crowded platform of everyone surrounding small areas.
On Monday night, YouGov asked me what I would suggest as policies for Boris Johnson to pursue. Imagine my surprise on Tuesday when all the yellow markings had disappeared. Someone out there is listening - not to me though probably.
Also, incidentally, I asked for Boris to scrap bin taxes (although it's not in his power) and encourage council tax rebates for recycling. Two days later, George Osbourne announced a similar policy. Common sense seems to be prevailing.
Squiffy.
Friday, 13 June 2008
Come on Ireland
The initial signs from the Irish Referendum on the EU Constitution Lisbon Treaty are that it has been rejected. Hurrah!
It will be a good kick in the teeth for all those Governments, including our own, that reneged on their pledge to provide a referendum.
Unfortunately, this will not be the end of it. In an earlier post, I talked about the modus operandi that occurs in the EU. We will be able to watch it again. I would be surprised if the Irish are not given a second chance...to vote 'correctly' this time. If that does not happen or they vote 'No' for a second time, then the provisions in the treaty will find their way into law by other channels. The EU has form on this.
For all the talk of reform to Europe, there has been none. If only they took this as a chance to listen and find out from the EU citizens what we really want from the EU then they could provide referenda that we would happily pass. Alas, the political Elite think they know best and that we have no idea. So watch it all happen again.
I'll just have to revel (hopefully) in the EU's discomfort while I can!
Squiffy.
It will be a good kick in the teeth for all those Governments, including our own, that reneged on their pledge to provide a referendum.
Unfortunately, this will not be the end of it. In an earlier post, I talked about the modus operandi that occurs in the EU. We will be able to watch it again. I would be surprised if the Irish are not given a second chance...to vote 'correctly' this time. If that does not happen or they vote 'No' for a second time, then the provisions in the treaty will find their way into law by other channels. The EU has form on this.
For all the talk of reform to Europe, there has been none. If only they took this as a chance to listen and find out from the EU citizens what we really want from the EU then they could provide referenda that we would happily pass. Alas, the political Elite think they know best and that we have no idea. So watch it all happen again.
I'll just have to revel (hopefully) in the EU's discomfort while I can!
Squiffy.
Thursday, 12 June 2008
A surreal kind of day
It's been an unusual day. Last night I had some drinks with a group of friends, so I wasn't on top form today, but the day went a bit weird at around 12.50 today.
At that time the news came that David Davis had resigned as an MP. I was shocked, was there a personal skeleton in the closet? Had he become sickened by last nights vote on 42 days detention? Was he going to stand again?
After listening to Radio 5 live I found the truth. His speech was heart warming and resonated with everything I feel about civil liberties. I felt that here we had a courageous man who would put the good of the country before his own betterment. As the day wore on, it just started to feel strange. I can't remember anyone else doing this.
I just wonder that if Labour do not field a candidate, and it's not hard to think that they will be gutless, it will be a pointless gesture. Watching coverage on the telly, it looks like there is a focus on possible differences with David Cameron. Maybe it will blow over and the civil liberties discussion will re-invigorate politics. I hope so, but I fear that he might have made a big error. Which would be a shame as he's a very likeable politician.
Squiffy.
At that time the news came that David Davis had resigned as an MP. I was shocked, was there a personal skeleton in the closet? Had he become sickened by last nights vote on 42 days detention? Was he going to stand again?
After listening to Radio 5 live I found the truth. His speech was heart warming and resonated with everything I feel about civil liberties. I felt that here we had a courageous man who would put the good of the country before his own betterment. As the day wore on, it just started to feel strange. I can't remember anyone else doing this.
I just wonder that if Labour do not field a candidate, and it's not hard to think that they will be gutless, it will be a pointless gesture. Watching coverage on the telly, it looks like there is a focus on possible differences with David Cameron. Maybe it will blow over and the civil liberties discussion will re-invigorate politics. I hope so, but I fear that he might have made a big error. Which would be a shame as he's a very likeable politician.
Squiffy.
Friday, 23 May 2008
Raise a clog to Mr Timpson
Well done Mr Timpson on your by-election victory. The scale of the majority was in excess of what I predicted (roughly 5000), so I must congratulate you, David Cameron and the Tory team for making the victory so emphatic.
Maybe the Tory party can now learn from this for future by-elections and test it out again in Henley. They should hope to increase their majority.
It does seem that New Labour has now ceased to be the force it once was. There will now be open back-biting and Gordon Brown is living on borrowed time. It's over.
Squiffy.
Maybe the Tory party can now learn from this for future by-elections and test it out again in Henley. They should hope to increase their majority.
It does seem that New Labour has now ceased to be the force it once was. There will now be open back-biting and Gordon Brown is living on borrowed time. It's over.
Squiffy.
Thursday, 22 May 2008
How can the Labour Party turn this around?
How can the Labour Party improve its fortunes? I think the only way to do this is to start with the premise that Gordon Brown won't be able to do it. They also need to take a look at the route the Tories took.
Firstly, they need to recognise another coronation will not be able to do it. It got better for Michael Howard but the Tories still lost the election. The public will probably not take to a second unelected Prime Minister. Secondly, there needs to be an image switch away from the characters of the old guard from the Blairite/Brownite division.
The best way to do this would be to have an election in the same way the Tories did after the 2005 defeat. Although David Cameron was relatively unknown, the leadership election gave the Tories some great coverage and gave DC momentum to win - a momentum that carried him through when he gained the leadership. There needs to be an open debate about direction.
Only then will the Labour Party recover, but will they do this? I doubt it. The Labour Party does not regicide, so GB will probably trundle on. If it does do the unthinkable, they will probably go with someone associated with the past, Jack Straw maybe?
One thing that I find ironic in recent history, the Tory party splits along policy lines but has the will to depose it's leader. The Labour party splits along personality and characters, but will not get rid of their leader.
Squiffy.
Firstly, they need to recognise another coronation will not be able to do it. It got better for Michael Howard but the Tories still lost the election. The public will probably not take to a second unelected Prime Minister. Secondly, there needs to be an image switch away from the characters of the old guard from the Blairite/Brownite division.
The best way to do this would be to have an election in the same way the Tories did after the 2005 defeat. Although David Cameron was relatively unknown, the leadership election gave the Tories some great coverage and gave DC momentum to win - a momentum that carried him through when he gained the leadership. There needs to be an open debate about direction.
Only then will the Labour Party recover, but will they do this? I doubt it. The Labour Party does not regicide, so GB will probably trundle on. If it does do the unthinkable, they will probably go with someone associated with the past, Jack Straw maybe?
One thing that I find ironic in recent history, the Tory party splits along policy lines but has the will to depose it's leader. The Labour party splits along personality and characters, but will not get rid of their leader.
Squiffy.
Tuesday, 20 May 2008
Crewe & Nantwich
It's been fascinating watching the Crewe & Nantwich by-election campaign. I'm 35 years old and I've never seen the Tories gain a seat off another party at a by-election, but this time it seems like it might happen.
The Labour campaign has been disgusting. Apart from the Tory Toff's element, there has also been the raising of immigration and I read that they were saying that Edward Timpson was a friend of paedophiles because he had defended some in his job as a barrister.
When Labour is defeated on Thursday, the recriminations will fly. It's going to get even more rocky for Gordon Brown. Rumours today said that Alan Milburn is going to challenge for the leadership if Labour do spectacularly badly.
Each week seems to bring bad news for Gordon Brown and Labour. It feels more febrile than the dog days of John Major. How much longer before he is ousted?
Squiffy.
The Labour campaign has been disgusting. Apart from the Tory Toff's element, there has also been the raising of immigration and I read that they were saying that Edward Timpson was a friend of paedophiles because he had defended some in his job as a barrister.
When Labour is defeated on Thursday, the recriminations will fly. It's going to get even more rocky for Gordon Brown. Rumours today said that Alan Milburn is going to challenge for the leadership if Labour do spectacularly badly.
Each week seems to bring bad news for Gordon Brown and Labour. It feels more febrile than the dog days of John Major. How much longer before he is ousted?
Squiffy.
Monday, 5 May 2008
Well Done Boris
After a short break, I'm back. Congratulations to Boris Johnson for winning the London Mayoralty, I said to a friend that it would be a 6% lead and it proved to be correct.
The country's mood has changed and it is irreparable for Gordon Brown. We will now see his Government collapse like a flan in a cupboard. The knives are already beginning to show.
I think Boris Johnson will prove to be much better than we first thought, and be an effective Mayor. There will be a blaze of announcements over the next few days.
The Tories are officially back in business.
Squiffy.
The country's mood has changed and it is irreparable for Gordon Brown. We will now see his Government collapse like a flan in a cupboard. The knives are already beginning to show.
I think Boris Johnson will prove to be much better than we first thought, and be an effective Mayor. There will be a blaze of announcements over the next few days.
The Tories are officially back in business.
Squiffy.
Friday, 2 May 2008
BBC calls it a 20% lead for the Tories
So, it's 44% Tory, 24% Labour and 25% LibDem. It show's the recent opinion polls have been roughly right and that this is the nadir of Labour's support. It is just like 1995. Even being beaten into third.
More than 200?
The Tories have taken Southampton and are now up by 49 seats. Amazing! It's only 0:49 am.
Wow, 200+ for the Tories
It was seen as difficult for the Tories to gain 200 seats. It now looks plausible. It's looking bad for Labour and so-so for the Lib Dems.
Squiffy.
Squiffy.
Thursday, 1 May 2008
Love it!
Election day, and I'm excited. I really like election day, and I'm going to try and watch the election night special on BBC 1. It's just started and I think Boris is going to win by 6%, Tories gain 170 seats, Labour lose 150 and Lib Dems lose 20.
Should be fun!
Squiffy.
Should be fun!
Squiffy.
Sunday, 27 April 2008
Tuesday, 22 April 2008
Are we watching 1990 to 1997 replayed in double speed?
It struck me the other day that the similarities between the present Government's problems and the problems of John Major's Government are similar but being played out a double speed.
Both leaders came into office after a coup had forced out the previous thrice election winning incumbent, and quickly saw their initial popularity wane as they were deemed useless compared to their illustrious predecessor. But the similarity does not end there...
After John major's election as leader of the Tory party, that he became a very popular figure for a short while and was able to pull off the spectacular coup of a fourth Tory election victory. There could be a similarity here with Gordon Brown's initial popularity which lasted a short 5 months.
There then followed an economic upheaval as Britain was forced (thankfully) out of the ERM. For Brown, this could be deemed his Northern Rock moment. From that moment on, Major's and Brown's popularity plummeted.
John Major then had to pass the Maastrict treaty against some rebels in his party, the Constitution anybody?
For John Major, the following Budget brought in tax rises in a very unpopular way. The addition of VAT to fuel was in the words of Sir Humphrey, 'Courageous' as it hit the poorest hardest, and had to be amended (halved) for the tax proposals to pass. Are you seeing the abolition of the 10% tax rate yet?
By this point, the Tories were backstabbing, inward-looking, and not interested in unity any more. John Major had to plead for loyalty. Maybe someone should tell the PLP.
John Major had seven years in office before being booted out, at most Gordon Brown has three years. The similarities are striking. I don't think Labour will recover.
Squiffy.
Both leaders came into office after a coup had forced out the previous thrice election winning incumbent, and quickly saw their initial popularity wane as they were deemed useless compared to their illustrious predecessor. But the similarity does not end there...
After John major's election as leader of the Tory party, that he became a very popular figure for a short while and was able to pull off the spectacular coup of a fourth Tory election victory. There could be a similarity here with Gordon Brown's initial popularity which lasted a short 5 months.
There then followed an economic upheaval as Britain was forced (thankfully) out of the ERM. For Brown, this could be deemed his Northern Rock moment. From that moment on, Major's and Brown's popularity plummeted.
John Major then had to pass the Maastrict treaty against some rebels in his party, the Constitution anybody?
For John Major, the following Budget brought in tax rises in a very unpopular way. The addition of VAT to fuel was in the words of Sir Humphrey, 'Courageous' as it hit the poorest hardest, and had to be amended (halved) for the tax proposals to pass. Are you seeing the abolition of the 10% tax rate yet?
By this point, the Tories were backstabbing, inward-looking, and not interested in unity any more. John Major had to plead for loyalty. Maybe someone should tell the PLP.
John Major had seven years in office before being booted out, at most Gordon Brown has three years. The similarities are striking. I don't think Labour will recover.
Squiffy.
Saturday, 19 April 2008
10% tax, 90% trouble
Gordon Brown is in a right pickle over the abolition of the 10% tax rate. It's a problem entirely of his own making.
For some reason, Gordon Brown forgot his own Labour principles when he announced with a fanfare the decrease in the basic tax rate from 22% to 20%. He pushed principles aside to get a quick headline, achieving what Margaret Thatcher had always wanted. As usual with GB the detail was in the 2007 budget red book, and not in his speech. He had quietly forgot to mention the scrapping of the 10% tax band.
It was Gordon Brown, in 1999, who introduced the 10% tax band. It was a good measure to decrease tax for all, but was of disproportionate benefit to those on lower incomes. He now claims that he wants to simplify the tax system! It was he of course who complicated the tax system in the first place. Had GB decreased the basic rate of tax in 1999, all would have benefited and he would not be in his present mess.
Gordon Brown has made much play of his help to low earning families, but he forgets all those who don't have a child. He wants to take as much money as he can, then he give it back to you in state aid through tax credits and benefits. He knows best - or should I say - knew best. I think he has shown that his earlier political instincts have deserted him and shown him as a political opportunist. Unfortunately for Britain, he's crap at it and he's making poorer people's lives worse.
Squiffy.
For some reason, Gordon Brown forgot his own Labour principles when he announced with a fanfare the decrease in the basic tax rate from 22% to 20%. He pushed principles aside to get a quick headline, achieving what Margaret Thatcher had always wanted. As usual with GB the detail was in the 2007 budget red book, and not in his speech. He had quietly forgot to mention the scrapping of the 10% tax band.
It was Gordon Brown, in 1999, who introduced the 10% tax band. It was a good measure to decrease tax for all, but was of disproportionate benefit to those on lower incomes. He now claims that he wants to simplify the tax system! It was he of course who complicated the tax system in the first place. Had GB decreased the basic rate of tax in 1999, all would have benefited and he would not be in his present mess.
Gordon Brown has made much play of his help to low earning families, but he forgets all those who don't have a child. He wants to take as much money as he can, then he give it back to you in state aid through tax credits and benefits. He knows best - or should I say - knew best. I think he has shown that his earlier political instincts have deserted him and shown him as a political opportunist. Unfortunately for Britain, he's crap at it and he's making poorer people's lives worse.
Squiffy.
Friday, 18 April 2008
Gwyneth
It's so sad to hear of the news of Gwyneth Dunwoody's death. There's not many MPs you can appreciate across the political divide, but some can gain your respect through steadfastness and a sense of purpose - and not giving in to the prevailing wind.
Gwyneth Dunwoody was such a person, and as the chairman of the Transport select committee showed her brilliance in asking awkward questions of ministers from her own Government. She would, frequently, show her independence of spirit and would often entertain by not towing the party line.
Tonight, I feel much poorer for her passing. Heaven has gained a new straight-talking angel.
Squiffy.
Gwyneth Dunwoody was such a person, and as the chairman of the Transport select committee showed her brilliance in asking awkward questions of ministers from her own Government. She would, frequently, show her independence of spirit and would often entertain by not towing the party line.
Tonight, I feel much poorer for her passing. Heaven has gained a new straight-talking angel.
Squiffy.
Saturday, 12 April 2008
Will Brown be ousted?
The short answer is No. It is practically impossible to remove a Labour Prime Minister, whereas it is easier to remove a Labour leader in opposition.
The fact that we are even beginning to ask this question must be shocking to Labour MPs, and no less to Mr Brown himself. It seems like an age ago when Mr Brown was crowned leader of the party and country, seemed at ease with himself, and had the country in the palm of his hand with his sureness of touch in dealing with initial troubles.
Since October, his political acumen has alluded him. He now does not seem like Prime Ministerial material, he is surrounded by political pygmies, and looks like he is not enjoying the job. After the non election, he asked to be given time to explain his vision. We are still waiting. After the abolition of the 10 pence tax rate, even Labour MPs are beginning to ask what is the purpose of this Government.
Today, the Guardian's leader has mentioned the PM in trouble, there are open leadership questions and Polly Toynbee now thinks that GB has not got the necessary qualities. When your former backers are now posing problems you can tell that you are in deep do do. Ask John Major.
I think we are watching Labour's endgame (for now) being played out. Only a change of leadership will raise their fortunes, but I cannot see it happening.
Squiffy.
The fact that we are even beginning to ask this question must be shocking to Labour MPs, and no less to Mr Brown himself. It seems like an age ago when Mr Brown was crowned leader of the party and country, seemed at ease with himself, and had the country in the palm of his hand with his sureness of touch in dealing with initial troubles.
Since October, his political acumen has alluded him. He now does not seem like Prime Ministerial material, he is surrounded by political pygmies, and looks like he is not enjoying the job. After the non election, he asked to be given time to explain his vision. We are still waiting. After the abolition of the 10 pence tax rate, even Labour MPs are beginning to ask what is the purpose of this Government.
Today, the Guardian's leader has mentioned the PM in trouble, there are open leadership questions and Polly Toynbee now thinks that GB has not got the necessary qualities. When your former backers are now posing problems you can tell that you are in deep do do. Ask John Major.
I think we are watching Labour's endgame (for now) being played out. Only a change of leadership will raise their fortunes, but I cannot see it happening.
Squiffy.
Thursday, 3 April 2008
The travails of the commuter
I arrived this morning at Kilburn tube station, just like normal, to find that the platform has yellow squares painted onto it. The idea is to show where the doors will be when the train stops. Nice idea. But please, London Transport, stop now. One of the only bonuses of being a commuter in this city is having the insider knowledge, i.e. knowing where the doors will be. Don't give away our secrets.
While I'm having this rant, I want to make a few other points. During peak hours, please stop all the announcements. I know I shouldn't smoke, there's signs everywhere. I know that I should tap my oyster card in and out. I know that Baker Street comes after St John's Wood. I know Bond Street has a change to the central line. I know to mind the gap. I know to stay behind the yellow line.
I don't need to be told every 30 seconds! Maybe this information is useful for tourists, but if they're travelling around at 8 in the morning and 6 in the evening then they must be mad.
Just like the earlier post about street furniture, please trust us to know what we're doing.
Squiffy.
While I'm having this rant, I want to make a few other points. During peak hours, please stop all the announcements. I know I shouldn't smoke, there's signs everywhere. I know that I should tap my oyster card in and out. I know that Baker Street comes after St John's Wood. I know Bond Street has a change to the central line. I know to mind the gap. I know to stay behind the yellow line.
I don't need to be told every 30 seconds! Maybe this information is useful for tourists, but if they're travelling around at 8 in the morning and 6 in the evening then they must be mad.
Just like the earlier post about street furniture, please trust us to know what we're doing.
Squiffy.
Get rid of street furniture
I'm interested in the idea of removing street furniture to make our roads a safer place. As a perennial pedestrian I can see some great merits in the idea.
For the pedestrian, there's too many barriers stopping your from crossing the road at convenient points.
I can see that drivers speed as fast as they can between green traffic lights, hoping to make some progress before they hit the inevitable red. Given these overriding thoughts it's no wonder that drivers aren't paying too much attention to the pedestrians on the pavement, and accidents do happen.
The idea of removing barriers, traffic lights and a multitude of other signage is to make everybody a first class citizen of the road, and give everyone an equal chance to move at a sensible speed. It may sound mad, but experiments in the Netherlands have shown that people get to their destination quicker and accidents are reduced. As well as that, roads are clearer and it costs councils less.
A trial is going to happen in Kensington & Chelsea. I hope it's a success.
Squiffy.
For the pedestrian, there's too many barriers stopping your from crossing the road at convenient points.
I can see that drivers speed as fast as they can between green traffic lights, hoping to make some progress before they hit the inevitable red. Given these overriding thoughts it's no wonder that drivers aren't paying too much attention to the pedestrians on the pavement, and accidents do happen.
The idea of removing barriers, traffic lights and a multitude of other signage is to make everybody a first class citizen of the road, and give everyone an equal chance to move at a sensible speed. It may sound mad, but experiments in the Netherlands have shown that people get to their destination quicker and accidents are reduced. As well as that, roads are clearer and it costs councils less.
A trial is going to happen in Kensington & Chelsea. I hope it's a success.
Squiffy.
Max Mosley should go
It is time for Max Mosley to resign. That is quite obvious. Now that BMW, Mercedes and Honda have criticised him, it is clear that he has lost the support of the major F1 teams.
It's interesting to note that Jean Todt has just stepped back from the front line and is being mentioned as a possible successor. Given that the FIA has been accused of Ferrari bias, is this wise? It is also to be noted that this week Ron Dennis has been giving his views on the future of F1 and interesting reading it makes.
To try to bring some balance back to F1, let's hear a cheer for Ron Dennis, President of the FIA.
Squiffy.
It's interesting to note that Jean Todt has just stepped back from the front line and is being mentioned as a possible successor. Given that the FIA has been accused of Ferrari bias, is this wise? It is also to be noted that this week Ron Dennis has been giving his views on the future of F1 and interesting reading it makes.
To try to bring some balance back to F1, let's hear a cheer for Ron Dennis, President of the FIA.
Squiffy.
Tuesday, 18 March 2008
Has the Brown bubble now completely disappeared?
The latest opinion polls have shown the Tories with double digit leads. It seems that something seismic has occurred in the political world. It all started with the election that never was, that burst the Brown bubble, but now it seems that political good will has now evaporated.
Last week, the Budget did what was expected of it. It was the most boring budget in years, not much happened. I think, though, that it showed that in the present crisis this Government has no ideas on how to move forward and that it had boxed itself in. It has finally dawned on the public that this Government has mismanaged the economy, and has nowhere to go.
I think last Wednesday will in future be seen as this Government's Black Wednesday. The day the Government's competence was seen to be lost.
From now on, this Government is on borrowed time.
Squiffy.
Last week, the Budget did what was expected of it. It was the most boring budget in years, not much happened. I think, though, that it showed that in the present crisis this Government has no ideas on how to move forward and that it had boxed itself in. It has finally dawned on the public that this Government has mismanaged the economy, and has nowhere to go.
I think last Wednesday will in future be seen as this Government's Black Wednesday. The day the Government's competence was seen to be lost.
From now on, this Government is on borrowed time.
Squiffy.
What a race!
The Australian GP was fantastic. Not only did Lewis Hamilton win in great style, withstanding 3 safety car periods similarly to his maiden win in Canada, but the Ferrari drivers were made look pretty ordinary. Apart from Raikkonen's middle stint, he was out of sorts for most of the weekend. He made several unforced errors and nearly joined Felipe Massa in the wall.
There were several surprises. The McLaren seemed to be as fast, if not faster, than the Ferrari. The Honda was better than expected, as was the BMW. I think the biggest surprise, though, was that the cars looked twitchy without traction control - and quite a handful.
F1 is back, and better.
Squiffy.
There were several surprises. The McLaren seemed to be as fast, if not faster, than the Ferrari. The Honda was better than expected, as was the BMW. I think the biggest surprise, though, was that the cars looked twitchy without traction control - and quite a handful.
F1 is back, and better.
Squiffy.
Saturday, 15 March 2008
Hamilton on Pole, nearly Pole on Pole
It was great to see Hamilton start the season on pole, but what a surprise to see Robert Kubica on the 2nd spot. He just missed out, and if he hadn't had a small excursion on the grass he may have made it to pole.
Looking forward to the race now.
Squiffy.
Looking forward to the race now.
Squiffy.
F1 2008 is here (part 2)
Completing the round up of F1.
Williams
I am a big fan of the Williams team, ever since they had Nigel Mansell driving for them. They are true racers; Frank Williams and Patrick Head are honest down to earth petrol heads and have not been persuaded, thus far, to allow a corporation to buy into their team. Maybe that was a mistake, as the team have not been close to the front for a few year, but I respect them for it.
Unfortunately, Williams suffered greatly when Adrian Newey left during 1996, and have only added one more driver's title since (and that car would have had Newey's imprint). They have won races, but apart from 2003 and not come close to their heyday. Last year they recovered from their appalling 2006 season, when they finished 8th, to rise to 4th.
Sam Michael, the technical director, seems to have settled into his role and now that the wind tunnel is calibrated correctly, has produced a promising car for this year. So far, the car looks fast and may be in the running for 3rd spot.
Nico Rosberg is a driver with a large amount of talent and hopefully should thrive with a good car underneath him. He seems to enjoy the atmosphere at the team, and personifies the 'Williams' racer. Kazuki Nakajima also shows a turn of speed if somewhat erratic. He will need to calm down and not try too hard, as once labelled as accident prone - the tag will not leave.
Renault
The Renault team should be advancing this year, after a lacklustre 2007. They will have Fernando Alonso back in the fold and that should be a boost, even if he is only around for a year. Renault lost their way last year; after having designed cars around the Michelin tyres they did not effectively change their design for the Bridgestones and suffered badly.
With a great engine and aero team behind them, Alonso and Nelson Piquet Jr should be able to run up front, although a third championship for Alonso looks unlikely. Fernando has to undo some of the damage that he did to his reputation last year and buckle down to some stellar performances. Piquet Jr was narrowly beaten to the GP2 championship in 2006 by Lewis Hamilton and so should be competitive, although I doubt whether he will be able to provide Alonso with the headaches from last year.
Toro Rosso
The Red Bull 'B' team will be starting the year with last year's car. This may give them an advantage at the start of the season as they will know the car inside out, and with the reliability problems sorted out they may outgun the 'A' team. The team will move up to the RB4 for the Turkish GP, by which time niggles with the new car should have been laid to rest. I would expect them to drop back at this point before coming back after a few races.
Sebastian Vettel will be at Toro Rosso for a full season. He's a great talent and will no doubt be plucked by one of the bigger teams at the end of the year, maybe alongside Webber at the 'A' team? After watching him at the Race of Champions it's clear that he's a future race winner.
His namesake, Sebastian Bourdais is a 4 times Champ car champion and finally gets his F1 chance. It's a shame that it has taken him so long to achieve his ambition, and I feel that he may struggle after being out of European single seaters for a while. He will have tough competition from Vettel and may find himself eclipsed.
Force India
It's been sad to see the old Jordan team going from championship contenders in 2000 to tail enders via some changes in ownership. It would be great to have EJ back in the frame, maybe as the successor to Max Mosley.
After Midland and Spyker, the team has now become Force India. It should be on the up, Mike Gasgoyne is back as technical director with Mark Smith as chief designer. Vijay Mallya is the millionaire behind Kingfisher lager and a petrol head, since buying the team he's injected money and renewed optimism. Hopefully this will lead the team back up the grid.
Giancarlo Fisichella is back at the team, for a third spell, and will provide some experience alongside the accident prone but fast Adrian Sutil. I expect Fisichella to be a star, bringing the car home higher than it should. How is it that Fisichella excels in middling teams and disappoints in front running teams? I think this will be his last team though. Sutil needs to calm down and show his speed without the excursions on the grass, if he proves to be close to Fisichella he will deserve his place in F1.
Honda
The Honda team had a diabolical 2007. The car was awful, it gave the drivers conflicting feedback and left them not knowing whether the next corner would demonstrate understeer or oversteer. Honda have suffered from Geoff Willis's departure (what a mistake to make) and upheaval in the engineering department. It looked like Honda may go the same way as Toyota with management by committee, but fortunately they wrestled Ross Brawn from Ferrari. This should be the key to Honda's resurgence. Mr Brawn is extremely talented and should help the team to thrive by setting a good direction for development.
After last year's recalcitrant RA107, the RA108 looks marginally better. Honda have gone back to first principles and developed a plain looking chassis. This is a good step, they need to get to understand their car again before making complicated aero upgrades. Last year, they were throwing parts at the car in the hope that it would help. Hopefully, they will be able to make leaps this year.
It's been terrible to see Jenson Button get so close to having a car which can show his talents (in 2006) and then stumble back. He's super smooth and deserves better, Honda have to deliver soon otherwise it will be a talent wasted. This will probably be Rubens Barrichello's last year, and I don't think he'll be quite as fast as Jenson, but it's great to see that enthusiasm is still there when it would have been so easy to lose heart.
Super Aguri
A few weeks ago it looked like the team would not make it to Melbourne, but thankfully some investment has enabled them to make the flight. They will be using last year's Honda, so I wouldn't expect any fireworks from the team.
Takuma Sato is looking better these days, but was shaded by Anthony Davidson towards the end of last year. In fact Davidson looked the better of the pair overall, but was unlucky to earn less points. Let's hope for better this year, but the RA107 is less than likely to deliver.
Squiffy.
Williams
I am a big fan of the Williams team, ever since they had Nigel Mansell driving for them. They are true racers; Frank Williams and Patrick Head are honest down to earth petrol heads and have not been persuaded, thus far, to allow a corporation to buy into their team. Maybe that was a mistake, as the team have not been close to the front for a few year, but I respect them for it.
Unfortunately, Williams suffered greatly when Adrian Newey left during 1996, and have only added one more driver's title since (and that car would have had Newey's imprint). They have won races, but apart from 2003 and not come close to their heyday. Last year they recovered from their appalling 2006 season, when they finished 8th, to rise to 4th.
Sam Michael, the technical director, seems to have settled into his role and now that the wind tunnel is calibrated correctly, has produced a promising car for this year. So far, the car looks fast and may be in the running for 3rd spot.
Nico Rosberg is a driver with a large amount of talent and hopefully should thrive with a good car underneath him. He seems to enjoy the atmosphere at the team, and personifies the 'Williams' racer. Kazuki Nakajima also shows a turn of speed if somewhat erratic. He will need to calm down and not try too hard, as once labelled as accident prone - the tag will not leave.
Renault
The Renault team should be advancing this year, after a lacklustre 2007. They will have Fernando Alonso back in the fold and that should be a boost, even if he is only around for a year. Renault lost their way last year; after having designed cars around the Michelin tyres they did not effectively change their design for the Bridgestones and suffered badly.
With a great engine and aero team behind them, Alonso and Nelson Piquet Jr should be able to run up front, although a third championship for Alonso looks unlikely. Fernando has to undo some of the damage that he did to his reputation last year and buckle down to some stellar performances. Piquet Jr was narrowly beaten to the GP2 championship in 2006 by Lewis Hamilton and so should be competitive, although I doubt whether he will be able to provide Alonso with the headaches from last year.
Toro Rosso
The Red Bull 'B' team will be starting the year with last year's car. This may give them an advantage at the start of the season as they will know the car inside out, and with the reliability problems sorted out they may outgun the 'A' team. The team will move up to the RB4 for the Turkish GP, by which time niggles with the new car should have been laid to rest. I would expect them to drop back at this point before coming back after a few races.
Sebastian Vettel will be at Toro Rosso for a full season. He's a great talent and will no doubt be plucked by one of the bigger teams at the end of the year, maybe alongside Webber at the 'A' team? After watching him at the Race of Champions it's clear that he's a future race winner.
His namesake, Sebastian Bourdais is a 4 times Champ car champion and finally gets his F1 chance. It's a shame that it has taken him so long to achieve his ambition, and I feel that he may struggle after being out of European single seaters for a while. He will have tough competition from Vettel and may find himself eclipsed.
Force India
It's been sad to see the old Jordan team going from championship contenders in 2000 to tail enders via some changes in ownership. It would be great to have EJ back in the frame, maybe as the successor to Max Mosley.
After Midland and Spyker, the team has now become Force India. It should be on the up, Mike Gasgoyne is back as technical director with Mark Smith as chief designer. Vijay Mallya is the millionaire behind Kingfisher lager and a petrol head, since buying the team he's injected money and renewed optimism. Hopefully this will lead the team back up the grid.
Giancarlo Fisichella is back at the team, for a third spell, and will provide some experience alongside the accident prone but fast Adrian Sutil. I expect Fisichella to be a star, bringing the car home higher than it should. How is it that Fisichella excels in middling teams and disappoints in front running teams? I think this will be his last team though. Sutil needs to calm down and show his speed without the excursions on the grass, if he proves to be close to Fisichella he will deserve his place in F1.
Honda
The Honda team had a diabolical 2007. The car was awful, it gave the drivers conflicting feedback and left them not knowing whether the next corner would demonstrate understeer or oversteer. Honda have suffered from Geoff Willis's departure (what a mistake to make) and upheaval in the engineering department. It looked like Honda may go the same way as Toyota with management by committee, but fortunately they wrestled Ross Brawn from Ferrari. This should be the key to Honda's resurgence. Mr Brawn is extremely talented and should help the team to thrive by setting a good direction for development.
After last year's recalcitrant RA107, the RA108 looks marginally better. Honda have gone back to first principles and developed a plain looking chassis. This is a good step, they need to get to understand their car again before making complicated aero upgrades. Last year, they were throwing parts at the car in the hope that it would help. Hopefully, they will be able to make leaps this year.
It's been terrible to see Jenson Button get so close to having a car which can show his talents (in 2006) and then stumble back. He's super smooth and deserves better, Honda have to deliver soon otherwise it will be a talent wasted. This will probably be Rubens Barrichello's last year, and I don't think he'll be quite as fast as Jenson, but it's great to see that enthusiasm is still there when it would have been so easy to lose heart.
Super Aguri
A few weeks ago it looked like the team would not make it to Melbourne, but thankfully some investment has enabled them to make the flight. They will be using last year's Honda, so I wouldn't expect any fireworks from the team.
Takuma Sato is looking better these days, but was shaded by Anthony Davidson towards the end of last year. In fact Davidson looked the better of the pair overall, but was unlucky to earn less points. Let's hope for better this year, but the RA107 is less than likely to deliver.
Squiffy.
Wednesday, 13 February 2008
Pity the poor children
The news that the Government are going to try to give every child in the land 5 hours a week of cultural activities, should be a good thing. Unfortunately it isn't, they just don't get it - do they? To give up smoking you have to want to give up. It's no good being told that it's bad for you, and it's really expensive because you know all that already. You have to want to. Similarly, with cultural activities, you must have to want to go and see a play, see an art exhibition or go to a museum.
The point of teaching is to provide the foundations of learning for the rest of your life. To encourage pupils to see a play, they need to do be encouraged to read eye-opening literature and be encouraged to do drama classes. To get an interest in art, they need to be doing some drawing, painting or sculpture themselves. For a museum, the kids need to be taught the basics of history and encouraged to find out more.
All these things should be taught in school anyway. If they are not, why aren't they? They were when I was a kid. They've probably been pushed out by more trendy things like Parenting and Citizenship classes. At school we only had one nonsense lesson a week, Personal Skills Development - it was such a joke. None of the kids took it seriously. Similarly, forcing kids into 5 hours of cultural activities a week will be seen as a joke, time to mess about.
Give the £200 million to schools directly (it's £15 per pupil - maybe one decent play a year) to be used by teachers to supplement an English Literature, Drama, Art or History course when a topic is of interest to the kids. If the Government gets involve it'll be a disaster, think Millenium Dome as opposed to Tate Modern.
Squiffy.
The point of teaching is to provide the foundations of learning for the rest of your life. To encourage pupils to see a play, they need to do be encouraged to read eye-opening literature and be encouraged to do drama classes. To get an interest in art, they need to be doing some drawing, painting or sculpture themselves. For a museum, the kids need to be taught the basics of history and encouraged to find out more.
All these things should be taught in school anyway. If they are not, why aren't they? They were when I was a kid. They've probably been pushed out by more trendy things like Parenting and Citizenship classes. At school we only had one nonsense lesson a week, Personal Skills Development - it was such a joke. None of the kids took it seriously. Similarly, forcing kids into 5 hours of cultural activities a week will be seen as a joke, time to mess about.
Give the £200 million to schools directly (it's £15 per pupil - maybe one decent play a year) to be used by teachers to supplement an English Literature, Drama, Art or History course when a topic is of interest to the kids. If the Government gets involve it'll be a disaster, think Millenium Dome as opposed to Tate Modern.
Squiffy.
Be afraid, very afraid
With the news that Jack Straw is going to attempt to start the processing of writing a Constitution for Britain, I have become more than a little agitated.
This Government has presided over a mass of ill thought out legislation which has needed to be revisited many times. How many Criminal Justice Bills have there been? How many times have organisations been re-organised and the re-reorganised back into something similar to original plan, NHS anyone?
The thought of this lot, no matter how good their intentions are, framing the basis for the relationship between the individual and the state is laughable. Almost as much as Tony Blair being announced as the peace envoy to the Middle East. They cannot seriously think that we trust them with individual liberties, this the most authoritarian of Governments in modern history.
A written constitution would have to provide a flowing prose describing British values. I don't believe this Government can provide anything in a flowing manner, more of a dithered sentence of PR speak. My English isn't fantastic, but the oratory required of the Queen when opening the yearly session of Parliament leads me to believe that a reasonably good G.C.S.E. student could do better. The country that gave the world Shakespeare, Dickens, Keats, Tennyson and Winston Churchill deserves so much better.
I only hope that they realise the futility of it all, before they spend a vast amount of money on pointless consultation exercises and focus groups. With any luck this will be dropped along with any proposed 'motto', before the Government commits any more un-British acts.
Long live the unwritten Constitution.
Squiffy.
This Government has presided over a mass of ill thought out legislation which has needed to be revisited many times. How many Criminal Justice Bills have there been? How many times have organisations been re-organised and the re-reorganised back into something similar to original plan, NHS anyone?
The thought of this lot, no matter how good their intentions are, framing the basis for the relationship between the individual and the state is laughable. Almost as much as Tony Blair being announced as the peace envoy to the Middle East. They cannot seriously think that we trust them with individual liberties, this the most authoritarian of Governments in modern history.
A written constitution would have to provide a flowing prose describing British values. I don't believe this Government can provide anything in a flowing manner, more of a dithered sentence of PR speak. My English isn't fantastic, but the oratory required of the Queen when opening the yearly session of Parliament leads me to believe that a reasonably good G.C.S.E. student could do better. The country that gave the world Shakespeare, Dickens, Keats, Tennyson and Winston Churchill deserves so much better.
I only hope that they realise the futility of it all, before they spend a vast amount of money on pointless consultation exercises and focus groups. With any luck this will be dropped along with any proposed 'motto', before the Government commits any more un-British acts.
Long live the unwritten Constitution.
Squiffy.
Tuesday, 12 February 2008
Time to get rid of Ken
The latest controversy to hit the Mayor of London is his plan to increase the congestion charge to £25 for gas-guzzlers. I have no particular sympathy for people who drive big cars in London, for the most part it's not needed when the public transport can adequately (not always on time and with comfort) transfer you to your destination, but this is a tax that is going too far.
Cuddly Ken has been mired recently in a series of controversies regarding his relationship with some of his staff and the financial dealings of the London Development Agency (LDA). He accepts that he uses the public purse to launch attacks on his opponents and accepts that public money is channeled through the LDA to some organizations which have nothing to show for it. To most people this would be the trigger for resignation, but not Ken. He wears it as a badge of pride. For some reason the public seem to let him off with it too.
When Mr Livingstone launched the congestion charge in 2003, only 5 years ago, the price was £5 to drive into central London. The majority of the profits were due to go into public transport. Ken announced that there were no plans to increase the charge, but soon increased it to £6. A proposed extension of the charge zone into West London was put out to consultation, but when the results indicated that the majority did not want the extension Ken trampled all over the exercise and imposed it anyway.
A second increase in the fare to £8 has since occurred, with the prospect of £10 not far away. And now £25 for bigger cars, for anyone short on Maths that's £125 in a week and £500 per month. It's nearly extortion! The original proposal was to reduce congestion, but recent evidence shows that congestion is now back to pre-charge levels. The scheme's profits have been minimal, the money has mainly gone into the administration of the scheme. Improvements to public transport have been marginal.
This is what happens when the public allow Socialists to get their hand on a new tax. It may seem reasonable at first but soon becomes an albatross around the public's neck. Give an inch and they'll take a mile. It is now time to set Ken free.
Squiffy.
Cuddly Ken has been mired recently in a series of controversies regarding his relationship with some of his staff and the financial dealings of the London Development Agency (LDA). He accepts that he uses the public purse to launch attacks on his opponents and accepts that public money is channeled through the LDA to some organizations which have nothing to show for it. To most people this would be the trigger for resignation, but not Ken. He wears it as a badge of pride. For some reason the public seem to let him off with it too.
When Mr Livingstone launched the congestion charge in 2003, only 5 years ago, the price was £5 to drive into central London. The majority of the profits were due to go into public transport. Ken announced that there were no plans to increase the charge, but soon increased it to £6. A proposed extension of the charge zone into West London was put out to consultation, but when the results indicated that the majority did not want the extension Ken trampled all over the exercise and imposed it anyway.
A second increase in the fare to £8 has since occurred, with the prospect of £10 not far away. And now £25 for bigger cars, for anyone short on Maths that's £125 in a week and £500 per month. It's nearly extortion! The original proposal was to reduce congestion, but recent evidence shows that congestion is now back to pre-charge levels. The scheme's profits have been minimal, the money has mainly gone into the administration of the scheme. Improvements to public transport have been marginal.
This is what happens when the public allow Socialists to get their hand on a new tax. It may seem reasonable at first but soon becomes an albatross around the public's neck. Give an inch and they'll take a mile. It is now time to set Ken free.
Squiffy.
Sunday, 10 February 2008
Charles Clark enters the fray
An extraordinary interview by Charles Clark appeared in the Daily Mail yesterday.
It's not surprising that CC has made comments about Gordon Brown, in fact I thought he would (see my 2008 predictions). But to do so this early in the year and with the ferocity shown is quite astonishing.
I suppose a re-entry into the Cabinet is now out of the question.
Squiffy.
It's not surprising that CC has made comments about Gordon Brown, in fact I thought he would (see my 2008 predictions). But to do so this early in the year and with the ferocity shown is quite astonishing.
I suppose a re-entry into the Cabinet is now out of the question.
Squiffy.
Friday, 8 February 2008
What's a manifesto worth?
Stuart Bower, a former police officer, and a former constituency secretary for Hove Labour Party has brought a court case against the Government for breach of contract with regards to the ditching of the referendum on the European Constitution Treaty.
It would be amazing if he won the court case, but very unlikely. It is fascinating though to hear that the defence for the Government stated "manifesto pledges are not subject to legitimate expectation". Blimey! I know that we are all sceptical about manifesto commitments but to hear such a statement from a representative of the Government shows how in little regard they hold the public.
A manifesto is a commitment to what a party would do if elected. As such, any mention in the published manifesto for an elected party is given an easy ride through Parliament. By convention, opposition parties do not vote down measures on which the public have directly had their say. Of course opposition is made to the proposals, but it will eventually end up on the statue book.
When the next election comes around, I hope that the opposition parties remember this betrayal and mention many times that a manifesto commitment from Labour is not worth the glossy paper it is written on. If we're unfortunate to have another 5 years of Labour (heaven help us), then I would not expect the opposition to give the Government such an easy time on manifesto commitments. After all "manifesto pledges are not subject to legitimate expectation".
Squiffy.
It would be amazing if he won the court case, but very unlikely. It is fascinating though to hear that the defence for the Government stated "manifesto pledges are not subject to legitimate expectation". Blimey! I know that we are all sceptical about manifesto commitments but to hear such a statement from a representative of the Government shows how in little regard they hold the public.
A manifesto is a commitment to what a party would do if elected. As such, any mention in the published manifesto for an elected party is given an easy ride through Parliament. By convention, opposition parties do not vote down measures on which the public have directly had their say. Of course opposition is made to the proposals, but it will eventually end up on the statue book.
When the next election comes around, I hope that the opposition parties remember this betrayal and mention many times that a manifesto commitment from Labour is not worth the glossy paper it is written on. If we're unfortunate to have another 5 years of Labour (heaven help us), then I would not expect the opposition to give the Government such an easy time on manifesto commitments. After all "manifesto pledges are not subject to legitimate expectation".
Squiffy.
Tuesday, 5 February 2008
Come on over Frank, Kate & Gisela
Apparently there are threats to expel Frank Field, Kate Hoey and Gisela Stuart from the Parliamentary Labour Party for their stance in standing up for the Labour party's manifesto commitment to hold a referendum on the EU constitution treaty.
I hope that the threats are the the final nail in the coffin for their Labour party membership. Cross the floor, each of you, and find a place on the other benches where your views will be respected.
Squiffy.
I hope that the threats are the the final nail in the coffin for their Labour party membership. Cross the floor, each of you, and find a place on the other benches where your views will be respected.
Squiffy.
Zero Tolerance
The Zero Tolerance rhetoric is bandied about quite regularly in relation to policing. I also believe in Zero Tolerance for MPs. They are the only body who set their own wages and allowances, they are exempt from libel laws, they set-up committees iof MPs to investigate themselves (the latest being 3 MPs chosen to investigate the implications of the Conway affair).
There should be Zero Tolerance of MPs' financial affairs. An external body should set the rules for MPs, it should monitor that the rules are upheld and also have the power to fire an MP, triggering a by-election. The MP could stand again and face the public. There should only be one register of member's interest to clarify the current rules.
While I'm at it, how about one secretary on a full-time wage hired by the Commons and also one researcher part-time? They would be in the employ of Parliament. Family members can apply but would be scrutinised by the House authorities. Also, why not scrap allowances. Give a bigger salary, with a weighting for distance from London, so that MPs get more money for living away and having to travel.
Squiffy.
There should be Zero Tolerance of MPs' financial affairs. An external body should set the rules for MPs, it should monitor that the rules are upheld and also have the power to fire an MP, triggering a by-election. The MP could stand again and face the public. There should only be one register of member's interest to clarify the current rules.
While I'm at it, how about one secretary on a full-time wage hired by the Commons and also one researcher part-time? They would be in the employ of Parliament. Family members can apply but would be scrutinised by the House authorities. Also, why not scrap allowances. Give a bigger salary, with a weighting for distance from London, so that MPs get more money for living away and having to travel.
Squiffy.
Tuesday, 29 January 2008
Well done Cameron
No sooner had I posted that David Cameron should withdraw the whip from Derek Conway, he did just that. Well done Mr Cameron. What a contrast to the dithering by Gordon Brown.
Squiffy.
Squiffy.
Derek Conway, another fool
It appears Derek Conway has been very foolish, maybe even fraudulent, in paying at least one son a wage totalling £44,000 to work as an aide in his office when the son was actually studying at Newcastle University. The parliamentary standards committee have ordered Mr Conway to give £13,000 pounds back, and be suspended from the House of Commons for 10 days. There maybe a police investigation too.
For David Cameron this is the moment when he must display the decisiveness that he claims Gordon Brown lacks. He must make sure that Derek Conway loses the Conservative whip. The likelihood is that he will be de-selected by the local party at the next election.
Tony Blair claimed, when coming into office, that his party would be "whiter than white, purer than pure", a foolish claim but one which looked utterly stupid and disingenuous when he let minister after minister cling on while investigations were carried out. He stood by several ministers even when misdeeds were proven.
Mr Cameron has not been so silly to make the same claim, but he should achieve a more robust reputation by acting decisively now. The voters will praise him for his actions. Come on Mr Cameron, throw him out.
Squiffy.
For David Cameron this is the moment when he must display the decisiveness that he claims Gordon Brown lacks. He must make sure that Derek Conway loses the Conservative whip. The likelihood is that he will be de-selected by the local party at the next election.
Tony Blair claimed, when coming into office, that his party would be "whiter than white, purer than pure", a foolish claim but one which looked utterly stupid and disingenuous when he let minister after minister cling on while investigations were carried out. He stood by several ministers even when misdeeds were proven.
Mr Cameron has not been so silly to make the same claim, but he should achieve a more robust reputation by acting decisively now. The voters will praise him for his actions. Come on Mr Cameron, throw him out.
Squiffy.
Saturday, 26 January 2008
Gordon Brown, economic genius?
The Prime Minister's record on the economy has come under scrutiny recently due to turmoil in the stock markets and the impending downturn. Many commentators have been drawing on the successes of Mr Brown's chancellorship to provide a contrast to the latest difficulties, let's take a closer look at the 10 years.
Mr Brown declared in PMQ's this week that he inherited difficult economic conditions from the Tories in 1997. This is not true, the economy had been growing healthily for 4 years. Although there was a budget deficit, this was diminishing and due to go into surplus by 1998 - which it did. Mr Brown's policy was to keep to the Tory spending plans for the first 2 years of Labour in power. Surely this was to make sure that the thought of Labour in power would not frighten the horses! So rather than follow his own beliefs, he followed his opponent's plans which led to some reasonable surpluses.
His first decision, which has been rightly applauded, was to make the Bank of England independent. Although according to Mr Blair, in The Blair Years, he claims that it was his idea.
Mr Brown then started to reform the benefits system, bringing in the tax credit system. Tax credits are a reasonable system to get money to those in need, but the implementation has lead to major problems with overpayments, underpayments and attempts to reclaim money from people who need it most. Several billion pounds have been wasted.
Between 1999 and 2002 Mr Brown sold off half of Britain's gold reserves at a price of $215 per ounce, it now stands at around $800 per ounce. Not a great deal.
In the 2001 election campaign Mr Blair announced that NHS funding would increase to the EU average. His bounced Gordon Brown into it, who then allegedly stormed into number 10 saying, 'You stole my f***ing budget'. It just so happens that this was around the time that the dotcom bubble burst. So with a budget surplus and an election commitment, billions of pounds were pumped into the economy - effectively fighting off the prospect of recession.
After economic growth was secured, GB continues pumping money into the economy - leading to a large budget deficit. Now that we're facing the prospect of another downturn, the cupboard is bare.
So after 10 years, I think the verdict is that the early decision to make the BoE independent was a good idea - whether it was GB's we don't know. When GB went against his own instincts, staying to Tory spending plans then being bounced into spending by TB he has managed to keep the economy growing.
I think the best that can be said is that he didn't mess it up, but in the end all Labour chancellors run out of money. Which he has now. He has left a very complicated tax system which haemorrhages money through the tax credit system, he has run down our gold reserves, he's increased our taxes. Finally, his reform to the tripartite financial monitoring system, using the Treasury, Bank of England and Financial Services Authority has been found wanting with respect to monitoring of Northern Rock.
So I don't think the record is as good as people say, and we now have a problem. The chickens have come home to roost.
Squiffy.
Mr Brown declared in PMQ's this week that he inherited difficult economic conditions from the Tories in 1997. This is not true, the economy had been growing healthily for 4 years. Although there was a budget deficit, this was diminishing and due to go into surplus by 1998 - which it did. Mr Brown's policy was to keep to the Tory spending plans for the first 2 years of Labour in power. Surely this was to make sure that the thought of Labour in power would not frighten the horses! So rather than follow his own beliefs, he followed his opponent's plans which led to some reasonable surpluses.
His first decision, which has been rightly applauded, was to make the Bank of England independent. Although according to Mr Blair, in The Blair Years, he claims that it was his idea.
Mr Brown then started to reform the benefits system, bringing in the tax credit system. Tax credits are a reasonable system to get money to those in need, but the implementation has lead to major problems with overpayments, underpayments and attempts to reclaim money from people who need it most. Several billion pounds have been wasted.
Between 1999 and 2002 Mr Brown sold off half of Britain's gold reserves at a price of $215 per ounce, it now stands at around $800 per ounce. Not a great deal.
In the 2001 election campaign Mr Blair announced that NHS funding would increase to the EU average. His bounced Gordon Brown into it, who then allegedly stormed into number 10 saying, 'You stole my f***ing budget'. It just so happens that this was around the time that the dotcom bubble burst. So with a budget surplus and an election commitment, billions of pounds were pumped into the economy - effectively fighting off the prospect of recession.
After economic growth was secured, GB continues pumping money into the economy - leading to a large budget deficit. Now that we're facing the prospect of another downturn, the cupboard is bare.
So after 10 years, I think the verdict is that the early decision to make the BoE independent was a good idea - whether it was GB's we don't know. When GB went against his own instincts, staying to Tory spending plans then being bounced into spending by TB he has managed to keep the economy growing.
I think the best that can be said is that he didn't mess it up, but in the end all Labour chancellors run out of money. Which he has now. He has left a very complicated tax system which haemorrhages money through the tax credit system, he has run down our gold reserves, he's increased our taxes. Finally, his reform to the tripartite financial monitoring system, using the Treasury, Bank of England and Financial Services Authority has been found wanting with respect to monitoring of Northern Rock.
So I don't think the record is as good as people say, and we now have a problem. The chickens have come home to roost.
Squiffy.
Thursday, 24 January 2008
Prodi has also resigned
Romano Prodi, the Prime Minster of Italy has been forced to resign after a junior coalition party pulled out of the Government leading to a vote of confidence.
If there were to be another election, Silvio Berlusconi is well placed to lead a new centre-right coalition back to power. It does look like Italy has fallen back into its habit of having short term Governments paralysed by electoral mathematics. Although a parliamentary term runs for 5 years, no Government has achieved such a long time (!) in office.
The most recent long term Government was Berlusconi's from 2001 to 2006, elected under a first past the post system. Unfortunately, Berlusconi changed the system to PR and, hey presto, we're back to instability. The PR system in Italy (pre-1993) led to a proliferation of small parties which formed centre-left and centre-right coalitions. FPTP usually leads to a smaller set of parties but Italian politics was too fragmented for too long for FPTP to have an effect. It now looks like the smaller parties will continue.
If there was ever an argument against PR, Italy is it.
Squiffy.
If there were to be another election, Silvio Berlusconi is well placed to lead a new centre-right coalition back to power. It does look like Italy has fallen back into its habit of having short term Governments paralysed by electoral mathematics. Although a parliamentary term runs for 5 years, no Government has achieved such a long time (!) in office.
The most recent long term Government was Berlusconi's from 2001 to 2006, elected under a first past the post system. Unfortunately, Berlusconi changed the system to PR and, hey presto, we're back to instability. The PR system in Italy (pre-1993) led to a proliferation of small parties which formed centre-left and centre-right coalitions. FPTP usually leads to a smaller set of parties but Italian politics was too fragmented for too long for FPTP to have an effect. It now looks like the smaller parties will continue.
If there was ever an argument against PR, Italy is it.
Squiffy.
So Hain has gone
It was only a matter of time for him to do the decent thing. It's such a shame that Gordon Brown saw fit to keep him in position for so long after the many revelations. So the cabinet has lost another big hitter, there's not many left.
As some commentators have pointed out, we are now be ruled by political pigmies. The Tory party front bench is now looking a lot more qualified to do the job, even the Lib Dems don't look too bad. Just look at the big jobs:
Brown vs Cameron
Darling vs Osborne
Miliband vs Hague
Smith vs Davis
Browne vs Fox
Will this resignation now lead to other scalps, Harriet Harman for instance? Will the next resignation follow quickly. It certainly seems as though the Brown Government is looking more doomed than ever.
Squiffy.
As some commentators have pointed out, we are now be ruled by political pigmies. The Tory party front bench is now looking a lot more qualified to do the job, even the Lib Dems don't look too bad. Just look at the big jobs:
Brown vs Cameron
Darling vs Osborne
Miliband vs Hague
Smith vs Davis
Browne vs Fox
Will this resignation now lead to other scalps, Harriet Harman for instance? Will the next resignation follow quickly. It certainly seems as though the Brown Government is looking more doomed than ever.
Squiffy.
Max Mosley says that the next cheating team wil be thrown out
Max Mosley, the head of the FIA, has pronounced that the next team to be caught cheating will most definitely be thrown out of the F1 championship.
It didn't happen with Renault, but McLaren faced a similar punishment. I'm guessing if the next team to be caught were Williams, they would be thrown out, but if it happened to be Ferrari they'd get a small slap.
Consistency eh? Don't you just love it.
Squiffy.
It didn't happen with Renault, but McLaren faced a similar punishment. I'm guessing if the next team to be caught were Williams, they would be thrown out, but if it happened to be Ferrari they'd get a small slap.
Consistency eh? Don't you just love it.
Squiffy.
John Prescott lives on
And he's changed sex, from the Today programme this morning.
"It won’t be hypothetical if and when it occurs. We are not legislating now on the basis that we are bringing it in now for something that might happen in the future; we are bringing it in now for something that might happen in the future; we are bringing in a position for if it becomes unhypothetical. If, unfortunately I and many other experts are right and we do need it in the future it is in place."
Step forward Ms Jackie Smith. I nearly swallowed my toothbrush when she said she was an expert!
Squiffy.
P.S. Well done on inventing the word unhypothetical.
"It won’t be hypothetical if and when it occurs. We are not legislating now on the basis that we are bringing it in now for something that might happen in the future; we are bringing it in now for something that might happen in the future; we are bringing in a position for if it becomes unhypothetical. If, unfortunately I and many other experts are right and we do need it in the future it is in place."
Step forward Ms Jackie Smith. I nearly swallowed my toothbrush when she said she was an expert!
Squiffy.
P.S. Well done on inventing the word unhypothetical.
Tuesday, 22 January 2008
The Lib Dems and Europe
I've just watched Nick Clegg on the Daily Politics discussing the Lib Dem position on the EU referendum. Apparently, the Lib Dem manifesto commitment at the last election to hold a referendum was not about the details of the provisions in the EU constitution, but because it encompassed all the other treaties; it was a de-facto in or out.
That's not how the public sees it. We want a chance to say no to never ending integration but keep the trading block and global measures to combat climate change.
Nick Clegg knows that he won't for a referendum, but may abstain or vote against. He'll vote against if he doesn't get a promise to hold an in/out referendum from the Government. Erm, hello, there is no chance. The Government are terrified of any referendum on Europe - so it won't happen.
Again, the Lib Dem leader is missing the point of the referendum. Some people want to keep integrating, some people want out. The vast majority want to stop where we are and this was the opportunity to have our say.
Fortunately, there may be dissent in the Lib Dem ranks. Some of them can see sense!
Squiffy.
That's not how the public sees it. We want a chance to say no to never ending integration but keep the trading block and global measures to combat climate change.
Nick Clegg knows that he won't for a referendum, but may abstain or vote against. He'll vote against if he doesn't get a promise to hold an in/out referendum from the Government. Erm, hello, there is no chance. The Government are terrified of any referendum on Europe - so it won't happen.
Again, the Lib Dem leader is missing the point of the referendum. Some people want to keep integrating, some people want out. The vast majority want to stop where we are and this was the opportunity to have our say.
Fortunately, there may be dissent in the Lib Dem ranks. Some of them can see sense!
Squiffy.
Monday, 21 January 2008
The EU conveyor belt
I've not made my feelings known about the EU yet, but the time has come to muse about this never ending process. The Lisbon treaty is just about to go through the House of Commons for its second reading.
The EU issue has been burning through Britain's psyche for years. The British public have been lied to, misled and treated with contempt year after year.
For a start, when Britain went into the EEC back in 1973, the general consensus was that this was to be a trading block more powerful and close nit than Efta. Maybe, if we'd studied the treaty of Rome more closely we would have known what to expect. Unfortunately, our politicians did not make it clear. Probably because they didn't know how far the integration would go and what they were letting themselves in for.
The referendum, the only referendum we've had on this important issue, did not state in the question that it would be for "ever closer union". It was "in" or "out", and so the public voted for it.
Since that referendum, every few years there is a new inter-governmental conference where further powers are ceded from national governments to Brussels. Although our Governments have been reluctant to whole heartedly support further integration, for they know that the British public are sceptical, they have been dragged further in. They also know that to put each treaty to the British public would effectively kill it, and harm the relationship with the other European countries.
At each IGC, the EU partners compromise a little bit to bring the British Government in on the act. The Government then jumps through hoops to get it ratified in Parliament, and the British Government becomes complicit in the stitch up.
When any country actually does have a referendum and decides to reject the treaty, the EU decides to do one of two things. Either it thinks that the public of that country have got it wrong and then they have the same referendum later. Alternatively, it re-words the treaty and removes some aspects of the treaty - just enough to get it passed. The referendum is then either put to the people again, or jettisoned and passed by the country's parliament. No matter, the controversial aspects will come back in the next treaty, only there will be even more controversial measures to be argued over.
The political class rules over us and ignores us, again and again. When we protest, we are told that we are wrong. When we ask for the facts, we are told lies. When we are promised something, the promise is reneged (the current treaty for instance).
I am nearly 35, and I have never had the chance to have a say on the never ending conveyor belt. Nobody under the age of 50 has had a say. It is wrong, plain wrong. I want the EU to return to a trading block, with a focus on fighting global poverty and climate change. Unfortunately the politicians at the centre want more power and to move the public as far away as possible, so that we can't get in the way of their plans.
So please, can someone allow us a say? A referendum with a question such as a) Never ending integration, b) Return to Economic trading and global issues and c) Out altogether.
Squiffy.
The EU issue has been burning through Britain's psyche for years. The British public have been lied to, misled and treated with contempt year after year.
For a start, when Britain went into the EEC back in 1973, the general consensus was that this was to be a trading block more powerful and close nit than Efta. Maybe, if we'd studied the treaty of Rome more closely we would have known what to expect. Unfortunately, our politicians did not make it clear. Probably because they didn't know how far the integration would go and what they were letting themselves in for.
The referendum, the only referendum we've had on this important issue, did not state in the question that it would be for "ever closer union". It was "in" or "out", and so the public voted for it.
Since that referendum, every few years there is a new inter-governmental conference where further powers are ceded from national governments to Brussels. Although our Governments have been reluctant to whole heartedly support further integration, for they know that the British public are sceptical, they have been dragged further in. They also know that to put each treaty to the British public would effectively kill it, and harm the relationship with the other European countries.
At each IGC, the EU partners compromise a little bit to bring the British Government in on the act. The Government then jumps through hoops to get it ratified in Parliament, and the British Government becomes complicit in the stitch up.
When any country actually does have a referendum and decides to reject the treaty, the EU decides to do one of two things. Either it thinks that the public of that country have got it wrong and then they have the same referendum later. Alternatively, it re-words the treaty and removes some aspects of the treaty - just enough to get it passed. The referendum is then either put to the people again, or jettisoned and passed by the country's parliament. No matter, the controversial aspects will come back in the next treaty, only there will be even more controversial measures to be argued over.
The political class rules over us and ignores us, again and again. When we protest, we are told that we are wrong. When we ask for the facts, we are told lies. When we are promised something, the promise is reneged (the current treaty for instance).
I am nearly 35, and I have never had the chance to have a say on the never ending conveyor belt. Nobody under the age of 50 has had a say. It is wrong, plain wrong. I want the EU to return to a trading block, with a focus on fighting global poverty and climate change. Unfortunately the politicians at the centre want more power and to move the public as far away as possible, so that we can't get in the way of their plans.
So please, can someone allow us a say? A referendum with a question such as a) Never ending integration, b) Return to Economic trading and global issues and c) Out altogether.
Squiffy.
Why don't the spin doctors learn?
The Home Secretary has had a tough weekend.
I admire her for stating the truth, that she would be afraid to walk down a street in Hackney late at night. I think I would too. Unfortunately she did go on to say that after 10 years of a Labour the streets are safer. I know that nobody feels that way, no matter what the statistics say.
It could have been left at that, but up pops some aide to tell the press that "only the other night Ms Smith had a late night kebab in Peckham". Obviously she would have had a bodyguard with her, she is the home secretary after all, it now transpires that there is a new definition for late night. Apparently 4pm is now late night, as the owner of Katie's Kebab, Mr Ender Ginel, says that's when she appeared for a kebab. She stayed inside to eat the kebab, without chips, before leaving.
So, she wasn't quite facing the same apprehension that the rest of us face when we have a kebab at the real late night of midnight then!
Squiffy.
I admire her for stating the truth, that she would be afraid to walk down a street in Hackney late at night. I think I would too. Unfortunately she did go on to say that after 10 years of a Labour the streets are safer. I know that nobody feels that way, no matter what the statistics say.
It could have been left at that, but up pops some aide to tell the press that "only the other night Ms Smith had a late night kebab in Peckham". Obviously she would have had a bodyguard with her, she is the home secretary after all, it now transpires that there is a new definition for late night. Apparently 4pm is now late night, as the owner of Katie's Kebab, Mr Ender Ginel, says that's when she appeared for a kebab. She stayed inside to eat the kebab, without chips, before leaving.
So, she wasn't quite facing the same apprehension that the rest of us face when we have a kebab at the real late night of midnight then!
Squiffy.
Saturday, 19 January 2008
F1 2008 is here
We're halfway through January and F1 has started to create a buzz again. We've had team launches from Ferrari, McLaren, BMW, Toyota and Red Bull. So far all of the teams are buoyant with enthusiasm, and there are a lot of positive comments. So let's assess what is happening with the first teams out of starting block for 2008.
Ferrari
Ferrari must start this year as favourites. They had the fastest car in 2007, even if it lost some of it's well known reliability. The car had a few limitations, it did not handle slow and twisty tracks well (Monaco and Hungary), and its suspension gave it problems at bumpy tracks or those where riding kerbs is a must (Canada and Italy). To combat these shortcomings, they have gone for a slightly shorter wheelbase and changed the suspension. They have also tackled some of the problems in getting heat into their tyres which caused some problems in qualifying.
The car is an evolution of F2007, but if Ferrari have done a good job, and there is no reason to believe that they won't the F2008 will be a more rounded performer and the car to beat.
I expect Kimi Raikkonen to perform even better than last year. After his first win, he had a slump while he was getting on top of the new Bridgestones. This year he should hit the ground running. He knows the team now, and they respect him, so he is the man to beat. I see Felipe Massa as a David Coulthard type figure, he can be unbelievably fast and will win a lot of races, and every year will go into the season thinking (and saying) that he's much stronger than last year and can win the world championship. Unfortunately, he still doesn't seem able to keep the consistency going and wilts a little when not leading. If he starts the season by beating Kimi then I think the situation could change however.
McLaren
McLaren had some incredible highs and lows last year. A very strong team, a fantastic rookie and a great car for the first time since 1999 (2005 was good but way too fragile). But the team tore itself apart, lost all its constructor points and lost a drivers world championship that seemed like a certainty with two races to go.
The good points were that they did have a great car, and a fantastic driver which they take into 2008. McLaren have changed their philosophy on car building recently. They used to push for absolute speed (under the guidance of Adrian Newey) at the expense of reliability, and the cars would quite often be a revolution rather than evolution. This lead to a great but fragile car followed by a consolidating year making the concept more reliable. They are now changing to look for speed but also reliability, last year the car was bullet proof for the first time since at least 1988 (even then there were more failures). This year looks like more of the same.
If the Ferrari had characteristic problems at some tracks, McLaren lived in the alternate universe where their car would be slow at fast sweeping and smooth tracks (Australia, Barcelona, Belgium). They had great qualifying pace but could eat their tyres up more. So, McLaren with the new MP4-23 have gone for the reverse changes to Ferrari. Slightly longer wheelbase, softer suspension, improved aero efficiency and softer on the tyres.
Lewis Hamilton will be an even better driver this year, with more confidence and
experience. I don't think we'll see him slide off the road at China this year - he will call to the pits and make sure they change his tyres! He will put up a great fight with Kimi. I expect to see Heikki Kovalainen perform better this year. He says he's happier now than at any other time in his career, and McLaren have been good to Finns. He should come close to Lewis on several occassions.
Although Ferrari and McLaren both had great cars last year, they were approaching the same problems from two sides and came up with diametrically opposite car characteristics. So even with a close title fight, we had too few close track battles. If both teams have done a great job, both cars should be approaching the same happy medium, and expect sparks to fly!
BMW
The BMW squad have done a great job to be snapping at the heals of McLaren and Ferrari. They seem to have tackled some of the perceived weaknesses of the old Sauber team and can develop a car through the year. The new BMW, the F1.08, seems to be an evolution of last year's car and needs to push the development in order to make up the 0.5 second deficit to the two top teams.
The new car will have a longer wheelbase, tighter sculpted sidepods and some interesting wings sprouting from the engine cover. Also, there are improvements to mechanical grip, in order to gain stability, downforce and keep a good balance.
Nick Heidfeld and Robert Kubica are great drivers, and will both need to push really hard to get BMW their first win. I think it will be possible but difficult to break through to the winners circle, but if the first two teams have problems then it may be possible.
Red Bull
It will be the fourth Red Bull car this year, the RB4. The new design from Adrian Newey is an evolution from the RB3 but is physically very similar. The RB3 was fast but unreliable, a particular trait of Adrian Newey I'm afraid. Red Bull seems to have taken on board the characteristic development ethos of McLaren under Newey's technical directorship. The addition of Geoff Willis, though, may bring some focus back to reliability and it may be for this reason why the RB4 seems a little less ambitious than other new cars.
Both Mark Webber and David Coulthard are good drivers and evenly matched, Mark goes well in qualifying and David does better in races. It's possible this maybe David's last year in F1, so he really needs to remind people of his previous victories with some memorable drives if he is to appear on the grid in 2009.
This year Mark Webber needs to stamp his authority in the races, he needs to out-race DC and become a consistent front runner. Webber looked an exciting prospect a few years ago but has been marginalised by the new rookies making a splash. This year he will have to push his way back into the paddock's consciousness.
Toyota
On paper, Toyota should be winning races regularly. They have a big budget and a good motor racing history in the WRC and IndyCar/Champcar. So far, they have not broken out of the midfield. Their best season was 2005 and the 2006 and 2007 cars have followed the same design philosophy. Unfortunately, this has meant that they have not made big strides and fallen back.
The new TF108 looks like a more radical approach, and has poached some ideas from the other teams. Unfortunately, design does not look entirely consistent. I think Toyota suffer from 'management by committee' without a strong technical leadership focusing everyone is a specific direction. Losing Mike Gascoyne in 2006 was a big error, and they seem not to have recovered yet. Noises from Japan are saying that Toyota have another two years to start making the big strides to regularly fight for podiums. Undoubtedly, this car will be an improvement, but it's looking like fairy steps to me.
On the driver front, losing Ralf Schumacher was a good decision. He's great when out front but is a bit wayward when in the midfield. I'm glad to see Jarno Trulli keep his place, as changing both drivers would be a big mistake, but he needs to be more consistent to earn a place for 2009. Timo Glock looks good, and as the current GP2 champion should help to push the team forward. I'm not expecting the same kind of hype as Nico Rosberg and Lewis Hamilton however, which is a shame.
More from the other 6 teams later.
Squiffy.
Ferrari
Ferrari must start this year as favourites. They had the fastest car in 2007, even if it lost some of it's well known reliability. The car had a few limitations, it did not handle slow and twisty tracks well (Monaco and Hungary), and its suspension gave it problems at bumpy tracks or those where riding kerbs is a must (Canada and Italy). To combat these shortcomings, they have gone for a slightly shorter wheelbase and changed the suspension. They have also tackled some of the problems in getting heat into their tyres which caused some problems in qualifying.
The car is an evolution of F2007, but if Ferrari have done a good job, and there is no reason to believe that they won't the F2008 will be a more rounded performer and the car to beat.
I expect Kimi Raikkonen to perform even better than last year. After his first win, he had a slump while he was getting on top of the new Bridgestones. This year he should hit the ground running. He knows the team now, and they respect him, so he is the man to beat. I see Felipe Massa as a David Coulthard type figure, he can be unbelievably fast and will win a lot of races, and every year will go into the season thinking (and saying) that he's much stronger than last year and can win the world championship. Unfortunately, he still doesn't seem able to keep the consistency going and wilts a little when not leading. If he starts the season by beating Kimi then I think the situation could change however.
McLaren
McLaren had some incredible highs and lows last year. A very strong team, a fantastic rookie and a great car for the first time since 1999 (2005 was good but way too fragile). But the team tore itself apart, lost all its constructor points and lost a drivers world championship that seemed like a certainty with two races to go.
The good points were that they did have a great car, and a fantastic driver which they take into 2008. McLaren have changed their philosophy on car building recently. They used to push for absolute speed (under the guidance of Adrian Newey) at the expense of reliability, and the cars would quite often be a revolution rather than evolution. This lead to a great but fragile car followed by a consolidating year making the concept more reliable. They are now changing to look for speed but also reliability, last year the car was bullet proof for the first time since at least 1988 (even then there were more failures). This year looks like more of the same.
If the Ferrari had characteristic problems at some tracks, McLaren lived in the alternate universe where their car would be slow at fast sweeping and smooth tracks (Australia, Barcelona, Belgium). They had great qualifying pace but could eat their tyres up more. So, McLaren with the new MP4-23 have gone for the reverse changes to Ferrari. Slightly longer wheelbase, softer suspension, improved aero efficiency and softer on the tyres.
Lewis Hamilton will be an even better driver this year, with more confidence and
experience. I don't think we'll see him slide off the road at China this year - he will call to the pits and make sure they change his tyres! He will put up a great fight with Kimi. I expect to see Heikki Kovalainen perform better this year. He says he's happier now than at any other time in his career, and McLaren have been good to Finns. He should come close to Lewis on several occassions.
Although Ferrari and McLaren both had great cars last year, they were approaching the same problems from two sides and came up with diametrically opposite car characteristics. So even with a close title fight, we had too few close track battles. If both teams have done a great job, both cars should be approaching the same happy medium, and expect sparks to fly!
BMW
The BMW squad have done a great job to be snapping at the heals of McLaren and Ferrari. They seem to have tackled some of the perceived weaknesses of the old Sauber team and can develop a car through the year. The new BMW, the F1.08, seems to be an evolution of last year's car and needs to push the development in order to make up the 0.5 second deficit to the two top teams.
The new car will have a longer wheelbase, tighter sculpted sidepods and some interesting wings sprouting from the engine cover. Also, there are improvements to mechanical grip, in order to gain stability, downforce and keep a good balance.
Nick Heidfeld and Robert Kubica are great drivers, and will both need to push really hard to get BMW their first win. I think it will be possible but difficult to break through to the winners circle, but if the first two teams have problems then it may be possible.
Red Bull
It will be the fourth Red Bull car this year, the RB4. The new design from Adrian Newey is an evolution from the RB3 but is physically very similar. The RB3 was fast but unreliable, a particular trait of Adrian Newey I'm afraid. Red Bull seems to have taken on board the characteristic development ethos of McLaren under Newey's technical directorship. The addition of Geoff Willis, though, may bring some focus back to reliability and it may be for this reason why the RB4 seems a little less ambitious than other new cars.
Both Mark Webber and David Coulthard are good drivers and evenly matched, Mark goes well in qualifying and David does better in races. It's possible this maybe David's last year in F1, so he really needs to remind people of his previous victories with some memorable drives if he is to appear on the grid in 2009.
This year Mark Webber needs to stamp his authority in the races, he needs to out-race DC and become a consistent front runner. Webber looked an exciting prospect a few years ago but has been marginalised by the new rookies making a splash. This year he will have to push his way back into the paddock's consciousness.
Toyota
On paper, Toyota should be winning races regularly. They have a big budget and a good motor racing history in the WRC and IndyCar/Champcar. So far, they have not broken out of the midfield. Their best season was 2005 and the 2006 and 2007 cars have followed the same design philosophy. Unfortunately, this has meant that they have not made big strides and fallen back.
The new TF108 looks like a more radical approach, and has poached some ideas from the other teams. Unfortunately, design does not look entirely consistent. I think Toyota suffer from 'management by committee' without a strong technical leadership focusing everyone is a specific direction. Losing Mike Gascoyne in 2006 was a big error, and they seem not to have recovered yet. Noises from Japan are saying that Toyota have another two years to start making the big strides to regularly fight for podiums. Undoubtedly, this car will be an improvement, but it's looking like fairy steps to me.
On the driver front, losing Ralf Schumacher was a good decision. He's great when out front but is a bit wayward when in the midfield. I'm glad to see Jarno Trulli keep his place, as changing both drivers would be a big mistake, but he needs to be more consistent to earn a place for 2009. Timo Glock looks good, and as the current GP2 champion should help to push the team forward. I'm not expecting the same kind of hype as Nico Rosberg and Lewis Hamilton however, which is a shame.
More from the other 6 teams later.
Squiffy.
Wednesday, 16 January 2008
Note to the God of Conspiracy
Dear God of Conspiracy
Why is it that when a deadline looms something goes wrong with your PC? As you know, I have a deadline to submit a document for review today, so why was it that yesterday you chose to make my PC lose its profile? You know that I keep my current working documents on my desktop, so making my desktop folder inaccessible was the best way to screw up my plans! And you know that giving me problems with my PC would put me in the hands of those other Gods, the I.S. department.
Thankfully, I.S. have fixed my PC (hopefully my e-mail will be fixed today), so I could recover my document and continue working on it at home last night. It still needs some tweaks, so I decided to wake up early and go into work early to finish it. How come whenever I decide to go to work early, not very often I admit, you deem it necessary to give the Jubilee line problems? Either it has major problems every day, or just the days I travel on it early. Normally, as you know, if the tube is busy I'll wait for the next one. But when I have switched off the alarm clock early, I'd rather get the benefit of it!
So there I am, with my nose up someone's arm pit on a slow train. Lovely. If I was Alanis Morissette I'd write a song about it, although mine would be about ironies rather than minor annoyances.
So could you please give me a break.
Squiffy.
P.S. What's with the Princess Di and 9/11 stuff?
Why is it that when a deadline looms something goes wrong with your PC? As you know, I have a deadline to submit a document for review today, so why was it that yesterday you chose to make my PC lose its profile? You know that I keep my current working documents on my desktop, so making my desktop folder inaccessible was the best way to screw up my plans! And you know that giving me problems with my PC would put me in the hands of those other Gods, the I.S. department.
Thankfully, I.S. have fixed my PC (hopefully my e-mail will be fixed today), so I could recover my document and continue working on it at home last night. It still needs some tweaks, so I decided to wake up early and go into work early to finish it. How come whenever I decide to go to work early, not very often I admit, you deem it necessary to give the Jubilee line problems? Either it has major problems every day, or just the days I travel on it early. Normally, as you know, if the tube is busy I'll wait for the next one. But when I have switched off the alarm clock early, I'd rather get the benefit of it!
So there I am, with my nose up someone's arm pit on a slow train. Lovely. If I was Alanis Morissette I'd write a song about it, although mine would be about ironies rather than minor annoyances.
So could you please give me a break.
Squiffy.
P.S. What's with the Princess Di and 9/11 stuff?
Monday, 14 January 2008
2008 Predictions
A bit late, but here's my predictions for the coming year.
Squiffy.
- Gordon Brown's government will continue to unravel slowly. By the end of the year, the polls will look like Labour 28%, Lib Dems 18%, Tories 45%.
- The economy will slow, but avoid a recession. GDP for 2008 will be 1.5%.
- Interest rates will end the year on 4.5%, CPI 1.9%, RPI 3.9 %.
- Several ministers will resign, stating irreconcilable differences of opinion with the PM.
- Charles Clarke, Alan Milburn and Stephen Byers will all pipe up asking for a real revolution in New Labour and stating that GB is not the change the country needs.
- Nick Clegg will move the Lib Dems to the right whilst being put under pressure from his party for moving too far.
- Funding scandals will claim a scalp on the Labour and Conservative front benches. Probably Peter Hain, but not George Osborne.
- Barack Obama will face John McCain and beat him to become President-Elect by the end of the year.
- Ken Livingstone narrowly beats Boris Johnson for Mayor of London.
- Kimi Raikkonen wins the F1 championship by 10 points from Lewis Hamilton. Felipe Massa comes third, Fernando Alonso fourth, Heikki Kovalainen fifth and Nick Heidfeld sixth.
Squiffy.
Hain and Osborne
To me it seems that the similarities between Peter Hain's and George Osborne's funding problems are tenuous, other than their timing.
It would appear that Peter Hain ran a shambolic deputy leadership campaign and could not vouch for those in his campaign raising money for him. One of them found a way to channel money to him through an unthinking think-tank, which looks suspicious.
Mr Hain says that he was too busy to get involved in the money raising and aspects of his campaign. It doesn't wash, especially after the various funding problems that have appeared over the years. He has a duty to care about the funding of his campaign, just as any M.P. has to justify their additional earning and spending.
Mr Hain has refused to answer questions from the press, and the various underlings answering questions on his behalf have not given any reason for the strange think tank. They also state that Peter Hain came forward, but only after he had been found out for declaring to the Parliament late.
The case surrounding Mr Osborne is different. There is a similarity in the fact that some money was channelled. But it was channelled from benefactors into the Conservative Party central office with a wish for some of the money to be directed into the office of the Shadow Chancellor. The donations were declared to the Electoral Commission. George Osborne asked the Commons Authorities whether the donations should be declared, the advice given was not very clear. The print of the letter on Guido's blog shows that the advice is confusing. It appears that Mr Osborne tried to do the right thing.
Unlike Mr Hain, George Osborne has made himself open to questions from the media. Whereas Mr Hain looks like he has something to hide.
Squiffy.
It would appear that Peter Hain ran a shambolic deputy leadership campaign and could not vouch for those in his campaign raising money for him. One of them found a way to channel money to him through an unthinking think-tank, which looks suspicious.
Mr Hain says that he was too busy to get involved in the money raising and aspects of his campaign. It doesn't wash, especially after the various funding problems that have appeared over the years. He has a duty to care about the funding of his campaign, just as any M.P. has to justify their additional earning and spending.
Mr Hain has refused to answer questions from the press, and the various underlings answering questions on his behalf have not given any reason for the strange think tank. They also state that Peter Hain came forward, but only after he had been found out for declaring to the Parliament late.
The case surrounding Mr Osborne is different. There is a similarity in the fact that some money was channelled. But it was channelled from benefactors into the Conservative Party central office with a wish for some of the money to be directed into the office of the Shadow Chancellor. The donations were declared to the Electoral Commission. George Osborne asked the Commons Authorities whether the donations should be declared, the advice given was not very clear. The print of the letter on Guido's blog shows that the advice is confusing. It appears that Mr Osborne tried to do the right thing.
Unlike Mr Hain, George Osborne has made himself open to questions from the media. Whereas Mr Hain looks like he has something to hide.
Squiffy.
Friday, 11 January 2008
It's the economy stupid
Today the Tories are launching an attack on Gordon Brown's stewardship of Britain's economy. It may be the right time to do so. In years gone by, the Conservatives have been saying that there has been too much borrowing, but with an economy ticking away nicely nobody has been interested.
Now that the forecasts are for a difficult year ahead maybe the chickens will come home to roost. I really hope that the economy does not suffer a serious downturn, as it will not be a pleasant experience. In fact, I find it puzzling that Gordon Brown and Alistair Darling keep mentioning the difficult times ahead. I always thought that talking about downturns (and the dreaded R word) made it more likely that it would occur.
George Osborne is making the point that when the economy is doing well, it's the Government's duty to repay debt, reduce borrowing and try to save some money for any bad times. It's what sensible people do with their household finances so they don't get caught out when the unexpected happens, such as the trip to the other side of the world to visit a dying relative. Unfortunately, even though we've had uninterrupted growth for the last 15 years the Government has been borrowing ever larger sums to meet its inflated needs. There have been
odd windfalls such as on the utilities and the sale of mobile 3G licenses to pay back some debt but not a concerted effort to tackle the underlying bad borrowing figures.
Now, with a possible squeeze on the public finances the cupboard is bare. We should not borrow even more, but we may have to. I half expect GB and AD to turn up on an Ocean Finance type add on channel 5, GB turning to AD saying "How much was it we want to borrow again Darling? 250 Billion. That's right". The country's finances are in a very sorry state and we don't really have a rainy day fund to bail us out. It is for this reason that he is resisting calls for public pay increases over 2% - he simply does not have the money, it has nothing to do with inflation!
Gordon Brown knows all this, so does George Osborne. The Prime Minister's strategy seems to be to highlight the foreseeable problems now (even if it makes the downturn more likely), just after the problems in the American sub-prime market so that he can link the two and say that "it's not my fault, guv". Mr Osborne is trying to head this strategy off at the pass, highlighting
the PM's failure to plan ahead for the inevitable downturn and that he is complicit in the bad state of the public finances.
It now depends on the public, which message will resonate more?
Squiffy.
Now that the forecasts are for a difficult year ahead maybe the chickens will come home to roost. I really hope that the economy does not suffer a serious downturn, as it will not be a pleasant experience. In fact, I find it puzzling that Gordon Brown and Alistair Darling keep mentioning the difficult times ahead. I always thought that talking about downturns (and the dreaded R word) made it more likely that it would occur.
George Osborne is making the point that when the economy is doing well, it's the Government's duty to repay debt, reduce borrowing and try to save some money for any bad times. It's what sensible people do with their household finances so they don't get caught out when the unexpected happens, such as the trip to the other side of the world to visit a dying relative. Unfortunately, even though we've had uninterrupted growth for the last 15 years the Government has been borrowing ever larger sums to meet its inflated needs. There have been
odd windfalls such as on the utilities and the sale of mobile 3G licenses to pay back some debt but not a concerted effort to tackle the underlying bad borrowing figures.
Now, with a possible squeeze on the public finances the cupboard is bare. We should not borrow even more, but we may have to. I half expect GB and AD to turn up on an Ocean Finance type add on channel 5, GB turning to AD saying "How much was it we want to borrow again Darling? 250 Billion. That's right". The country's finances are in a very sorry state and we don't really have a rainy day fund to bail us out. It is for this reason that he is resisting calls for public pay increases over 2% - he simply does not have the money, it has nothing to do with inflation!
Gordon Brown knows all this, so does George Osborne. The Prime Minister's strategy seems to be to highlight the foreseeable problems now (even if it makes the downturn more likely), just after the problems in the American sub-prime market so that he can link the two and say that "it's not my fault, guv". Mr Osborne is trying to head this strategy off at the pass, highlighting
the PM's failure to plan ahead for the inevitable downturn and that he is complicit in the bad state of the public finances.
It now depends on the public, which message will resonate more?
Squiffy.
Wednesday, 9 January 2008
Gordon Brown tells a lie
Ok, so it's only over a small thing. Yesterday, in GB's monthly press conference he was asked whether he was going to have a meeting with David Beckham. GB replied that he had "no specific plans". Yesterday evening, who was it who turned up at Number 10? None other than David Beckham for a "private" meeting with the Prime Minister. "Private" because there was one journalist from the Daily Mirror there. Meetings with the Prime Minister of Great Britain are surely planned in advance so he must have known.
Why did Gordon Brown tell a lie? I cannot see a reason for it, unless he needed some advice on how to deal with Northern Rock.
The meeting isn't really important here, but it goes to show the nature of the man who is now presiding over Great Britain. Even over the smallest matter, he cannot bring himself to tell the truth. When he said that he wouldn't call a General Election even if Labour were 5 points ahead in key marginals we knew that he'd been "economic with the actualité", but this is politics so we accept it. This time it is just bare-faced.
Squiffy.
Why did Gordon Brown tell a lie? I cannot see a reason for it, unless he needed some advice on how to deal with Northern Rock.
The meeting isn't really important here, but it goes to show the nature of the man who is now presiding over Great Britain. Even over the smallest matter, he cannot bring himself to tell the truth. When he said that he wouldn't call a General Election even if Labour were 5 points ahead in key marginals we knew that he'd been "economic with the actualité", but this is politics so we accept it. This time it is just bare-faced.
Squiffy.
Saturday, 5 January 2008
The third rail
The other day many people were stranded at London Euston and Liverpool Street stations due to engineering works overrunning after Christmas. I, myself, had a rubbish journey up to Yorkshire just before Christmas having to change onto a bus at Hatfield, back to train at Peterborough, then again at Doncaster. Not nice, especially with a hangover!
The cause of the problems came from a lack of skilled maintenance engineers being booked to carry out the work. Inevitably, this has lead to a renewed discussion of the merits of Privatisation and Nationalisation of the nation's railways.
The Labour Opposition in 1996 (another of Prezza's pronouncements) stated that they would re-nationalise the railways. Of course, they did no such thing - it would have cost them a fortune to buy all the Railtrack shares and untangle the Train Operating Company (TOC) contracts. In the end, they were able to re-nationalise by default when Railtrack went into Administration.
John Major's Government failure was not to privatise the railways but to do it such a cack-handed way so as to separate track from train. It may have looked ok on paper, and boy, how much paper? Contract after Contract after Contract. Probably the most complicated privatisations in history. One too far for Margaret Thatcher anyway!
So how to get out of this mess? I don't believe full scale nationalisation will improve matters. One of the good things to come out of privatisation has been a wealth of new rolling stock, I believe we'd still have slam door trains if we had the old BR. We do, however, need to tie track back to train.
Before nationalisation there four big train companies, LNER (London and North Eastern), LMS (London, Midland and Scottish), GWR (Great Western) and Southern. We should return to the same sort of regional private companies which control some services and the tracks for an area. There should then be a secondary level of private railway company, these would operate on the tracks provided by the regional companies and pay for the privilege (a similar arrangement to now). This would allow for competition on the railway (ORR would still enforce fair rates) and mean that the train companies have a good reason for providing good tracks (as they would be penalised by overruns too) and trains.
There would still need to be some public subsidy, of course, that will not change. But we could witness the re-birth of Britain's railway.
Squiffy.
The cause of the problems came from a lack of skilled maintenance engineers being booked to carry out the work. Inevitably, this has lead to a renewed discussion of the merits of Privatisation and Nationalisation of the nation's railways.
The Labour Opposition in 1996 (another of Prezza's pronouncements) stated that they would re-nationalise the railways. Of course, they did no such thing - it would have cost them a fortune to buy all the Railtrack shares and untangle the Train Operating Company (TOC) contracts. In the end, they were able to re-nationalise by default when Railtrack went into Administration.
John Major's Government failure was not to privatise the railways but to do it such a cack-handed way so as to separate track from train. It may have looked ok on paper, and boy, how much paper? Contract after Contract after Contract. Probably the most complicated privatisations in history. One too far for Margaret Thatcher anyway!
So how to get out of this mess? I don't believe full scale nationalisation will improve matters. One of the good things to come out of privatisation has been a wealth of new rolling stock, I believe we'd still have slam door trains if we had the old BR. We do, however, need to tie track back to train.
Before nationalisation there four big train companies, LNER (London and North Eastern), LMS (London, Midland and Scottish), GWR (Great Western) and Southern. We should return to the same sort of regional private companies which control some services and the tracks for an area. There should then be a secondary level of private railway company, these would operate on the tracks provided by the regional companies and pay for the privilege (a similar arrangement to now). This would allow for competition on the railway (ORR would still enforce fair rates) and mean that the train companies have a good reason for providing good tracks (as they would be penalised by overruns too) and trains.
There would still need to be some public subsidy, of course, that will not change. But we could witness the re-birth of Britain's railway.
Squiffy.
Tuesday, 1 January 2008
Will the real Mr Brown please stand up?
I have just read an article in the Times quoting Tessa Jowell asking Mr Brown to start being himself. She says that courting popularity is a bad thing.
Up to now we have seen two sides to Mr Brown, but according to people who know him well there is another side we have not yet seen.
Apparently outside of politics there is a joyful, happy, funny (!) Mr Brown, quick witted with a fast riposte. This is the person that the friendly politicians like Ed Balls and Ed Miliband see. The second side to Mr Brown is the politician tactician, always looking for an upswing in the polls and looking for a masterplan to confound the Tories. The third side is the Tony Blair wannabe, trying to create the listening GOAT (Government Of All Talents), the one who is the father of the nation, a paternal figure we can all look up to.
For the first three months of his premiership we saw the Paternal figure looking after the nation in our time of troubles, the second three months saw a return to the calculating politician. The general public have never seen the the funny, joyful side to Mr Brown. Until he can let a glimpse of this side of his personality to slip out, the public will be left with a personality swing between the other two. Unfortunately it appears that the calculating politician is the default mode and the protective father of the nation is an aberration, to be seen in extraneous circumstances.
Until GB can resolve these conflicts in the personality that he projects, I think Tessa Jowell will have to wait and count her majority.
Squiffy.
Up to now we have seen two sides to Mr Brown, but according to people who know him well there is another side we have not yet seen.
Apparently outside of politics there is a joyful, happy, funny (!) Mr Brown, quick witted with a fast riposte. This is the person that the friendly politicians like Ed Balls and Ed Miliband see. The second side to Mr Brown is the politician tactician, always looking for an upswing in the polls and looking for a masterplan to confound the Tories. The third side is the Tony Blair wannabe, trying to create the listening GOAT (Government Of All Talents), the one who is the father of the nation, a paternal figure we can all look up to.
For the first three months of his premiership we saw the Paternal figure looking after the nation in our time of troubles, the second three months saw a return to the calculating politician. The general public have never seen the the funny, joyful side to Mr Brown. Until he can let a glimpse of this side of his personality to slip out, the public will be left with a personality swing between the other two. Unfortunately it appears that the calculating politician is the default mode and the protective father of the nation is an aberration, to be seen in extraneous circumstances.
Until GB can resolve these conflicts in the personality that he projects, I think Tessa Jowell will have to wait and count her majority.
Squiffy.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
