Who's lying?

The talk from last night's programme about the foundation of the coalition is of who was lying when David Cameron told his backbenchers that Labour had offered AV without a referendum.

In an Agatha Christie Whodunitt style, we have David Cameron in the committee room stating that Labour was ready to do the deal and bouncing his party into accepting an AV referendum in his impatience to get the coalition running. We have Nick Clegg in Admiralty House, telling DC that Labour had offered the deal, knowing that wasn't the case. In the bunker we have Gordon Brown on the phone to Nick Clegg offering the deal without anyone else knowing about, and then saying he didn't (although no one has seen GB since to check on this - maybe he'll come back as his own twin brother!).

It's not clear any one was lying, there were so many private conversations that it would not be inconceivable that senior Lib Dem spoke to senior Labour man, Labour man said it might be an idea, it becomes possible to Lib Dem, to probably to the Lib Dem negotiating team, and a certainty to the Tory negotiating team. It's how rumours start!

So, I'm not sure about whether anyone lied deliberately or by mistake. From last night's programme, though, you'd have to think though that DC was adamant and so was Ed Balls/Peter Mandelson, which leaves the person in the middle using words like "perception" to explain himself. I'll let you make your own mind up.

Squiffy.

Is this the most radical Government since Attlee?

Possibly. Everyone who thought that coalition Governments would mean a managerial administration must be astounded by the reforming change that has been born out of the first ten weeks of this Government.

Look at this list of major reforms:

- Office for Budget Responsibility
- Free Schools
- NHS GP fund-holding
- Welfare reform
- Voting reform

These are big areas where the previous Government tinkered but didn't bite the bullet until it was too late. I'm feeling very enthusiastic this morning to Iain Duncan Smith's ideas about welfare reform. Here's a man who was roundly made to look a fool by his party when he was leader, but came back with radical ideas for reform.

I really like the idea of a simple benefit which tapers as the recipient earns more. If the taper occurs at such a rate so that as the recipient earns more they still take greater money home after tax then it will be a fantastic result.

At the moment our benefits system makes it seem more worthwhile to stay on benefits than go out to work. How often do you hear "If I went to work I'd lose most of my benefits and would be worse off"? Many times, and although you'd hope that self-respect would make people want to work - the extra cash is a much bigger incentive!

It does need radical change, and IDS is the man to do it. Let's hope that the bean counters don't get in his way too much on this set of changes.

Squiffy.

Ferrari look a bit silly

I thought that Ferrari's management of team orders was rubbish. So, apparently, did the FIA, who gave them a small fine and referred them to the World Motorsports Council. After, obviously, using team orders to then deny it was foolish.

In my opinion, the team orders rule is practically unworkable. But given that the rule exists, the FIA should enforce it. Either ban them for a race, strip them of the points gained or take away Alonso's points.

At the end of the season, they should sort out the rule to something like "team orders can be used as long as they don't bring the sport into disrepute, as deemed by the stewards."

You had to feel for Massa and Rob Smedley, yesterday. Alonso is being very prima-donna-ish these days and is doing himself no favours. Afterwards he had the cheek to suggest that the circuit made it difficult to overtake. Nonsense, Hockenheim is one of the easiest, he just wasn't as fast as he wanted to believe.

Squiffy.

Question Time, no bias - not

I've just started watching last night's Question Time. Usually, there's a Tory, a Labour person, a Lib Dem, one other politician from another party and then some celeb/commentator.

Tonight, we have two Labour people (Andy Burnham & Sally Bercow) and one ex-Labour MP (George Galloway), one Tory (Francis Maude) and one commentator (Nick Ferrari). Is Question Time being run by the Labour party these days?

Squiffy.

F1 - mid-season 2010 - Bulls in a china shop

It's mid-season, and I though I'd do a little look at how the season is panning out.

So far, we've had an outstanding car, an outstanding team, some outstanding drives and an outstanding season. After Bahrain, it looked like the season was going to be boring, far from it. Five drivers have led the championship, but it shouldn't be as close as it is.

Red Bull has the outstanding car. It's super fast and it's getting more reliable. No-one can really come close in qualifying trim, and barring a few reliability problems at the beginning of the season this car should be leading the championship by some way. It isn't. The drivers are at war, and the team are joining in.

In Turkey, the collision between Vettel and Webber was a disaster and lead to bad blood. That could have been handled, but the Red Bull side of the garage pointed the finger at Mark Webber when most thought it was probably 60% Vettel's fault. It surely, made Webber feel unloved. This weekend's decision to take the front wing off Webber's car and give to Vettel, to replace his broken wing, just before qualifying was a bad decision. It did show favouritism, and Christian Horner's explanation of it going to the person with most points in the championship didn't hold true, when a new part was fitted to Vettel's car before Webber's when Webber was leading the championship.

The team is in danger of losing this championship because of bad driver management, and that would be a tragedy.

The outstanding team has been McLaren. Without the fastest car, they are leading both championships, and with a driver harmony unparalleled for a team with two champions. They are playing catch up and if they can make the blown diffuser work for Hockenheim they may be able to compete on pace and tear apart the Red Bull team. Both drivers are driving beautifully. Lewis Hamilton has got a new maturity, learnt from Button no doubt, that will make him the most formidable opponent on the grid. Button has won two brilliant wet/dry races and is performing much better against Lewis than I dared hope!

Each of the four drivers at the top have driven brilliantly, but Alonso and Massa have been a disappointment. They've both made bug mistakes, and the team seems to be falling back into it's pre-Todt mould of making bad decisions and blaming everyone else. After Alonso's outburst at Valencia, I couldn't help but laugh when he got a penalty at Silverstone, but when the safety car came out, the outcome was disastrous for him. But he should have handed the place back to Kubica. Lewis Hamilton was stripped of a win in Spa 2008, even when he did hand back a place, so talk of an unfair penalty does not hold up.

Schumacher is a disappointment, he doesn't seem to have the same race craft - but can we ever remember him being good in the mid-field? No, because he was never there! Maybe the fact that he was always in a good car let him get rusty, way before his three year absence.

I'm liking that Williams are having a resurgence and that Lotus are doing best of the new teams.

It's been a great season so far, and I think it will get even better!

Squiffy.

Blogging has been light of late: an explanation

Apologies to anyone who reads my blog. Go on, there has to be at least two of you! I've not posted that much since the election, mainly due to my life being a lot busier (for no real reason) and a certain amount of contentment.

I usually blog when I've heard an interview or read an article which makes me so mad that I have to get things off my chest. Recently, though, with the new Government in charge and Labour having the dullest election campaign ever (even the LibDem one was more fun) I've not had enough ooomph to make me want to write.

I think things are changing, and not because I'm getting angry with the Government - to be honest - I couldn't be happier with the future direction. No, I'm just getting really annoyed with the Labour leader hopefuls who seem to be denying they would have/would ever propose any cuts. And those that do say they would, a tiny tiny bit, would not say in any way where the axe would fall.

Anyway, on the positive, let's consider:

- Abolition of HIPS
- The brilliant budget
- Free schools
- No bin taxes
- Stop and search review, getting rid of section 44
- The OBR being set up
- Constitutional reform
- Cancelling a lot of unnecessary funding for random projects
- NHS rethink

The last item was a pleasant surprise, I thought that the Tories had been scared off changing the NHS, but they've decided to be bold and early. That's why I'll give my Minister of the month award to Andrew Lansley.

Not everything is to my liking but it's about 85% right.

Now, to Ed Balls. Yesterday he said that it was wrong to promise to cut the deficit in half. He wanted us to continue borrowing, and keep topping it up with taxes. If he likes Greece so much, why doesn't he bloody move there? For God's sake, this man was supposed to be an economic powerhouse and he has no understanding of debt markets! I really hope he becomes Labour Leader, it would be a disaster for them.

I was wondering whether to buy Peter Mandelson's book, on the strength of the Times articles so far I won't bother. There's nothing really new. One thing I did like, was an article in today's Daily Bile by David Blunkett on the subject where he says:

This was reflected most tragically in his avoidable resignations. In both cases, Peter failed to see the trouble for himself that he would easily have spotted in others.

Hello, avoidable resignations? This from the only other man to have two resignations from Tony Blair's cabinet for silly reasons.

Squiffy.