Saturday 31 December 2011

There's no 'bot' like an 'old' bot @ No 10

Arturo was full of seasonal cheer. He'd gobbled up the leftovers from the New Year's Eve lunch and had a swig at the punchbowl. Now, he was ready for a joke.

"I say! I say! I say! When is a bet, not a bet?"

"When is a bet not a bet?" I asked with a sinking feeling, knowing the answer would be long and complex.

"A bet is not a bet when it's a bot-bet!!" Arturo nearly fell over laughing. "Get it?"

I did not 'get it'. So I shook my head.

"Don't you never read them newspapers, what's all over the place?" He shoved several towards me. Then pointed to a laptop screen. "Take a butchers at some of them sites, mi old pal."

Between you and me - I don't understand betting! Odds are a mystery to me! What's more, I'm not sure I know what a 'bot' is either!

It seems there is an online betting site called 'Betfair'. I looked up Wikipedia to discover this about it:
A betting exchange allows punters (gamblers) to bet at odds set and requested by other punters rather than by a bookmaker. Members can make both 'back' bets (normal bets on a selection to win) and 'lay' bets (bets on the opposite side of the Back, against the selection), thereby eliminating the traditional bookmaker...

... The Betfair interface can be seen as bearing a strong similarity to that of the stock exchange, with the 'back' and 'lay' options comparing to the buying and selling of derivatives. Indeed there are many professionals who play the Betfair market for profit, using purpose-designed software 'robots', in much the same way as a stock market trader.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Betfair

Umm! So, maybe Georgy Osborne should try his hand at this! If it's only a procedure of 'back' and 'lay', it should be a doddle, shouldn't it? Whoa there! It's not that simple, it seems. If it was then there would be nothing to stop the Italians, the Spanish, the Irish 'backing' and 'laying' their options and getting rid of all that nasty 'leverage'! So what's the deal, I asked myself. How come Arturo said, 'when is a bet not a bet?' and answered 'when it's a bot bet.'

I turned to the irishtimes.com web site. There was an article about the whole strange story.
BETFAIR HAVE confirmed a technical fault with a “bot” was to blame for the remarkable betting patterns that took place during Wednesday’s woodiesdiy.com Christmas Hurdle at the Leopardstown Christmas Festival meeting.

The betting exchange eventually voided all in-running bets on the race after one customer, whoBetfair have also confirmed was UK-based, laid easy winner Voler La Vedette for £21,474,836 at 29 (28 to 1).

This would have left the customer with a maximum liability of close to £600 million.

Thank goodness the 'customer' was not Georgy Osborne, otherwise 'Bagpuss' Pickles would have had to raise Council Taxes!

So what did this Betfair lot have to say for themselves? They were not happy bunnies, I can tell you! Their CEO was quoted on the Irish Times web site as saying:
This bet was placed by one of our UK customers trading the race via our API or Application Programming Interface (http://bdp.betfair.com/) using an automated program (a ”bot“).

Their bot had developed a fault causing it to try and place a very large number of bets on the Exchange.

These bets were large in size and mispriced. As you know, the Betfair system is designed to prevent customers betting unless they have the funds to cover their maximum liability.

In this case, the customer had less than £1,000 in their account so none of these bets should have been accepted.

However, due to a technical glitch within the core exchange database, one of the bets evaded the prevention system and was shown on the site.

This was an issue that was triggered because of a unique sequence of events that had never happened before.

The race continued and Voler La Vedette won. £822,614 of backers’ stakes were matched of the customer’s bet, resulting in a potential liability to the customer of £23 million.
http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/sport/2011/1231/1224309675181.html

All sounds very dodgy to me! Almost as dodgy as the Euro and the bankers. A 'bot' that goes berserk is a worrying spectre!

I visited some sites offering bespoke 'betting bots'. These bots, I was told, will make money for me when I sleep; when I am at work catching vermin; when I am out indulging myself. I would not have to do anything other than watch my 'cashflow' grow! Or so the botmakers tell me in flowery terms. Great PR, boys!! By now, I reckon, if I got my own 'betting bot' - I'd either be a billionaire or homeless. Odds are - I'd be homeless!

So, on this last day of 2011, what does this story tell me? Like much that has happened in the world of money since about 2007, there are some very dicey things and people out there ready to fleece the unwary. They'll sell you a mortgage you can't afford. They'll sell enough 'debt' to bankrupt countries. They'll offer you deals which will just profit their wallets not yours. They'll make you a bot that will give you nightmares not joy.

Arturo and I have hidden the sites and papers about this betting bot scam! You see Georgy Osborne and 'Boy David' Cameron are so obsessed with debt and 'leverage' that they might get funny ideas as to how they could solve their problems. Though they're both PR men, PR men fall for stories like anyone else!

So Arturo and I wish everyone a Happy 2012 which is bot-free and leverage-free.

'Bye' from us both.


Tuesday 27 December 2011

Poor old Larry @ No 10

"Blimey, O'Riley!" Arturo said with feeling. "They're at it again!"

"Who's at what?" I asked.

"The media and your 'Boy David' Cameron are at poor old Larry - the crowned Downing Street cat."

As usual, Arturo was right. When they can't get at the MPs and Ministers or the Opposition, because they're on their jolly old hols - then the media seek a scapegoat.

We had been watching Norman Smith on BBC Parliament Review of the Year 2011 (episode 3: Politics). It was all very interesting. Arturo and I were quite enjoying ourselves. Then - out of the blue just after Norman Smith said 'It has been a difficult year for Downing Street' there was an image of old Larry - our upstairs cat.

We nodded in approval, though he is no particular friend of ours, he has certain things going for him:
1. He is a cat
2. He is a Downing Street cat
3. He ain't no pedigree cat but a mere moggy like us

So, imagine our shock when the voice of Norman Smith announced that:
Lazy Larry just spent his days snoozing! Poor Larry, you're going to have to do better than that in the next twelve months ..
http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b018wzy9/Review_Review_2011_Episode_3/

"Or what?" Arturo asked. "What will 'Boy David' Cameron and Samantha do? Kick him out? Isn't that just typical!"

I tried to explain that 'Boy David' Cameron is a PR man par excellence - he wouldn't like the publicity of being shown to kick a cat out into the cold! Particularly seeing as how he selected him, in the first place. It would be worse than kicking 'Wailing Lad' Clegg out of the post of Deputy Prime Minister!

We had only just got our breath back, at the injustice of it all - when wait for it - another story about Larry!!

In the Mirror, there was a headline:
Larry the Downing Street cat is barred from new apartment in No 10

The story was by James Lyons. He wrote a story to tear at your heartstrings - if you have a heart:
LARRY the Downing Street cat is banned from the flat lavishly refurbished by David Cameron, insiders revealed.

The Prime Minister publicly welcomed the tabby to No 10 earlier this year but he is not allowed in the family’s living quarters, even though they are plagued by mice.

Do you note the words 'lavishly furnished'! Huh! And Huh again! It's all right for the bloomin' mice to sniff their way round the luxurious tables and chairs but I bet poor old Larry is barred in case he gets cat hair on the seats!

Of course, the Mirror reports the excuses made by the 'usual sources':
... a No 10 spokesman insisted he is kept out for practical reasons as the flat is locked during the day.

He said: “David and his children are very keen on Larry. But it is a flat within an office so it is difficult.

“If he was in it, he wouldn’t be able to get into the rest of the building where he has the run of the place. He wouldn’t be able to access the rats.”

Actually - Arturo and I heard a rumour that 'Boy David' Cameron has bought himself a dart-board and does regular target practice. Why? Because during a dinner with Ministers:
the PM was reduced to throwing a fork at a mouse seen running across the floor during a dinner with Cabinet ministers last month.
http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/politics/2011/12/27/larry-the-downing-street-cat-is-barred-from-new-apartment-in-no-10-115875-23661175/#ixzz1hlISUACg

We cats have to stick together! Maybe, Arturo and I are mere under-stairs cats but we are brothers under the fur! We cats will stand by old Larry! We'll do our best to rid No 10 Downing Street of vermin - of all shapes and sizes.

So - like the Dwarfs but without Snow White - it's off to work we go!!

'Bye' from us both.



Sunday 25 December 2011

Christmas Greetings @ No 10

From London Town

Arturo and I would like to wish all our many friends - especially our political admirers

A Very Happy Christmas
to one and all

The Military Wives Choir in Downing Street

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bxQsQO8D85M&feature=youtu.be

Saturday 24 December 2011

All I want for Christmas @ No 10

Arturo and I found a box with
Post your letters to Santa

The letters were gold glitter and the box was bright red. We were curious. Arturo put his paw inside and pulled out several letters. We sneaked a look.

Dear Santa
All I want for Christmas is for my Beloved Leader to go on liking me - just a little. Please make this possible. Yours Nick

Wow! So all 'Wailing Lad' Clegg wants is to be loved! We thought he loved himself so very much that there was no room for any other love - still, it just goes to show how wrong you can be!

"Let's look at the next one." Arturo said mischievously!

Dear Santa
My 'want' for Christmas is quite simple and easily deliverable. Make sure those developers get their hands on some decent land fit for development.

Wednesday 21 December 2011

Sour Pickles @ No 10

"It's end of term fever." Arturo announced. "They're off on yet more jolly old hols and in a rush to get away. You mark my words: 'There'll be tears before bedtime'."

He said this a couple of days ago before the House of Commons had finished its business for the Christmas break. Already, his forecast is pretty accurate. Remember the big strike we had on 30 November? Since then, unions have been in negotiations with various politicians, mainly Danny Alexander. On Tuesday, it looked as if there was success and that there would be no repeat of strike action.

By 20 December, several unions seemed content with the new arrangements they had been discussing. They had set off happily to inform their members of the new offer.

Oliver Wright of The Independent, under the heading: Public sector workers close to pension deal, commented:
... TUC general secretary Brendan Barber said last night that "a new atmosphere" had been apparent in negotiations since the strike.

"We have reached a stage where the emphasis in most cases is in giving active consideration to the new proposals that have emerged rather than considering the prospect of further industrial action," he said.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/public-sector-workers-close-to-pension-deal-6279487.html

It seemed that among the unions, Unison representatives were going back to their members to discuss the new arrangements. Only Mark Serwotka, general secretary of the Public and Commercial Services union, remained unconvinced. He felt that nothing had changed. Serwotka obviously has a Sixth Sense. He sniffed the air and said to himself - someone or some thing is lurking in the wings!

Our 'Little Boy Lost' Danny Alexander was so pleased with himself that he announced to Parliament in his guise as Chief Secretary to the Treasury:
I am pleased to report that heads of agreement have now been established with most unions in the local government, health, civil service and teachers’ schemes. It will of course now be for union executives and memberships to decide their response.

The heads of agreement deliver the Government’s key objectives in full, and do so with no new money since our November offer. In future, scheme pension ages will match the state pension age and schemes will be on a career average basis; all the agreements are within the cost ceiling that I set in November, and will save the taxpayer tens of billions of pounds over the decades to come.

Because heads of agreement have been reached, the better offer that I made in November has been secured by trade unions for their members, including the “no change” guarantee for workers 10 years from retirement. The heads of agreement also deliver a number of the key objectives set out by the trade unions during the talks. Negotiations on them are now concluded, and we and the unions agree that this is the best outcome that can be achieved by negotiation. It is the Government’s final position, and we will bring forward legislation to the House in due course.
http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201011/cmhansrd/cm111220/debtext/111220-0001.htm#11122052000033

Even 'Weasel' Maude was quite upbeat about the 'heads of agreement'. And that is saying something!

Then, out of the blue, the Beast from the Deep emerged. The creature whom Serwotka had sensed was manifest. First came rumours of nobbling! Yes! Nobbling! Who was doing the nobbling? I'll give you two guesses. No - not 'Apple schnapps' Shapps.
No - not 'Disgusting' Clark. Surely, you must have guessed by now - it was the eminence grise who lumbers around behind the backs of unsuspecting, inexperienced Ministers and MPs whispering dark thoughts into their conch-like ears. The one whose smile makes stout men's hearts turn to stone. Yes! You've guessed right. It was the Communities and Local Government Secretary - none other than 'Bagpuss' Eric Pickles.

One needs, of course, to remember that it is Panto season and in 'Bagpuss' Pickles you have Captain Hook and Widow Twanky combined!

So what had evil old Eric been and gone and done?

Just as the applause for the Principal Boy - Danny - was dying down, there were boos and hisses from, among others, Unison. 'Look behind you!', 'He's behind you!' they shouted. Sure enough our Eric was there waving a letter.

What was in the letter? It seems he wanted to add several new caveats to the agreement. The most pernicious one for the unions was the suggestion that the councils’ pension contributions would be capped. In other words, the employer contributions to local government pensions would not be as generous as the original agreement had implied.

As soon as the union negotiators caught the whiff coming from the letter - all hell broke loose!

On the web site of the public service union, their head of local government, Heather Wakefield, was quoted as saying:
The announcement from Eric Pickles undermines trust and confidence in the relationship with the government over negotiations surrounding the LGPS. In order to re-establish confidence, and a way forward, we hope that ministers will meet us as a matter of great urgency in order to get negotiations back on track
(http://www.publicservice.co.uk/news_story.asp?id=18363)

Oh dear! After all the cheering and excitement too. So what is our Eric going to do? According to the public service union web site:
A Department for Communities and Local Government spokesman said: "We are in discussion with the unions to resolve any misunderstanding and reassure them that our intentions have not changed. It would seem the unions have read more into the letter than we intended. We are not imposing any new conditions. To iron out any ambiguity we will issue a new letter. We are confident this can be quickly resolved to the satisfaction of all parties."

One wonders whether our Eric will be burning the midnight oil re-drafting his letter. I guess that Cameron and our 'Little Lost Boy' Danny will be desperate for 'Bagpuss' to find the right words!

Arturo has bought a box of tissues in readiness for those tears he forecast! And after it all seemed to be going so well too!

'Bye'


Monday 19 December 2011

A bloomin' miracle @ No 10

"Where's the abacus?" Arturo yelled.
"Use a calculator!" I replied. "Anyway, what do you need to work out?"

Arturo has grave concerns over government figures. Not Georgy's calculations, for once, but 'Boy David' Cameron's somewhat overblown maths.

On 15 December, he announced at the Sandwell Christian Centre in Oldbury, that the government had plans for dealing with the country's 'problem families'. Very laudable too. In this time of crisis, all families need help. Problem families need more help than most. The No 10 web site announces:
Tackling troubled families: new plans unveiled - Number 10
So one cannot help but listen to a man with a plan!

Here is some of Cameron's speech:
... today, I want to talk about troubled families.
Let me be clear what I mean by this phrase.
Officialdom might call them 'families with multiple disadvantages'.
Some in the press might call them 'neighbours from hell'.
Whatever you call them, we've known for years that a relatively small number of families are the source of a large proportion of the problems in society.
Drug addiction. Alcohol abuse. Crime. A culture of disruption and irresponsibility that cascades through generations.
We've always known that these families cost an extraordinary amount of money...
...but now we've come up the actual figures.
Last year the state spent an estimated £9 billion on just 120,000 families...
...that is around £75,000 per family.
http://www.number10.gov.uk/news/troubled-families-speech/

Now - that is a lot of dosh - £75,000 on 120,000 families! And what returns were there? Well, not much, it seems. Our 'Boy David', with a little help from his friends, is going to put it to rights.

One of these pals is none other than old 'Bagpuss' Pickles. Cameron said there is to be a :
Troubled Families Unit in Eric Pickles' department

Now, that will come as a relief to all 'troubled' families! Uncle Eric will be there to stand by them!

So what will Pickles' department do exactly?
We're not prescribing a single response.
But we are demanding results from councils in return for support.
For many of the most troubled families, there will be a family worker - a single point of contact for the first time for particular families - working out what the family needs, where the waste is and lining up the right services at the right time.
When the front door opens and the worker goes in, they will see the family as a whole and get a plan of action together, agreed with the family.
http://www.number10.gov.uk/news/troubled-families-speech/

Ummm! Pardon me - but haven't social services already been doing this type of work for many years? And isn't it the case that these same social services are now being cut? Yet this new 'plan' sounds like more - not less - work!

Our PM went on:
We can only act if we know where troubled families live.
Up to now we've talked in terms broad numbers - 120,000 troubled families across the country.
Today we are announcing, council by council, our estimate from data, mapping where these families are.
To give you an idea of the scale of the problem, there are an estimated 4,500 of these families in Birmingham, 2,500 in Manchester, and 1,115 here in Sandwell.
But setting out the data is just the start.
http://www.number10.gov.uk/news/troubled-families-speech/

Ah ha! Getting some real data here. Arturo will love it! Hang on a minute! Didn't a person called Henry Mayhew and someone called Charles Dickens say a thing or two about families like these - over a hundred years ago?

But here are the facts as Cameron et al have given us - 120,000 problem or 'troubled' families. Of course, we don't know how large or small each individual family is. Some may have one parent and one child. Others may have two parents, two grandparents and seven children. Who knows? One thing we do know is that they have 'troubles' and/or 'problems'.

So - how much dosh is this generous government going to throw at these families?

Some more Cameron talk coming your way:
So today I can announce the financial firepower we're putting behind this task.
We are committing £448 million to turning around the lives of 120,000 troubled families by the end of this Parliament.
This money has got to do its job.
Our offer to councils is that we will fund 40 per cent of the cost if they match this with 60 per cent. And crucially this payment depends on results.
http://www.number10.gov.uk/news/troubled-families-speech/

Just love the sound-bite, 'Boy David'! 'Financial firepower' - it sounds better than the 'big bazooka' he wanted Merkozy to start firing!

In a separate section of the No 10 web site, there is another document. It is 'Tackling Troubled families: New Plans unveiled' In this, the government's 'financial firepower' is spelled out in more detail:
Under the new plans the Government will offer up to 40 per cent of the cost of dealing with these families to local authorities – but on a payment-by-results basis when they and their partners achieve success with families.
http://www.number10.gov.uk/news/tackling-troubled-families-new-plans-unveiled/

Ouch! And ouch again! The phrases
up to 40 per cent
and
'but on a payment-by-results basis when they and their partners achieve success with families'
sound dodgy! Very dodgy indeed! Supposing, local authorities 'and their partners' work their socks off, spend loads of money providing services only to find that their 'troubled' families don't meet the targets!

Does this mean that they don't get any slice of the £448 million? Who will pay for the work already done?

Anyone who has worked with 'troubled' or 'problem' families knows that they cannot be turned around in a short time. Social workers, teachers and youth workers sometimes work for years with groups only to achieve success - if things go well - after many months or years!

In any case, let's get out Arturo's calculator. The end of this Parliament is Thursday 7 May 2015. Therefore, local authorities 'and their partners' have roughly 3½ years, give or take a week or so, to put right the 'troubled' families. Let's get the figures clear, shall we?

Government will contribute £448 million (40%) IF there are results!
Therefore, presumably the Local Authorities will contribute £672 million (60%) from their budgets!

"Sounds like a rum deal to me!" Arturo said.

The whole scheme would leave some councils sweating blood! How will they raise this money? Already social services are being cut by many struggling councils. Others have vowed that they will not increase council tax! So where's the dosh for Cameron's master plan coming from?

"This speech from our PM is just smoke and mirrors!" Arturo declared. "He's a great one for the sound bite, is 'Boy David'. He's trying to convince us that he's a bloomin' miracle worker!"

I knew what he meant! Of course, when I went on to read just two more lines from Cameron's speech, all became clear:
I'm grateful to Eric Pickles for leading the way...
...and to Ken Clarke, Michael Gove, Andrew Lansley, Theresa May and Iain Duncan Smith...
...for contributing not just the time to make this work but hard cash from their budgets.
http://www.number10.gov.uk/news/troubled-families-speech/

Wonder why he didn't add in:
Bill Brewer, Jan Stewer, Peter Gurney,
Peter Davy, Dan’l Whiddon, Harry Hawk,
Old Uncle Tom Cobley and all
Old Uncle Tom Cobley and all

With what Arturo inimically calls a 'bunch of geezers' like the ones Cameron thanked - how could things possibly be anything other than miraculous!

I'm off for a snooze.

'Bye'


Thursday 15 December 2011

BIG bazookas @ No 10

"We'd better call up Wellington and Nelson!" Arturo said gleefully. "Looks like we'll need those Martello Towers again!"

It seems that 'Boy David' Cameron's little stomp in Brussels, last week caused 'big bazookas' against 'le Royaume Uni' to be fired from La Belle France. The bazooka shots are particularly violent from paranoid Sarkozy and from Christian Noyer, Governor of the Bank of France. Mr Sarkozy is even reported to have called Cameron 'an obstinate kid'. One wonders what he calls him in private!

As anyone who has even the vaguest knowledge of European history knows, France is the 'Old Enemy'. Not for nothing are they known as the 'froggies'. Our 'old' ally was Prussia. In fact, it was Prussian general, Gebhard von Blücher, who really won Waterloo for us! (Don't tell, Cameron!!).

The French breathed a consolidated sigh of relief when they no longer alighted from Eurostar at Waterloo. But - oh boy - didn't the Brits enjoy the discomfort until then!!

Of course, to the Froggies, the British have always been La Perfide Albion 'Perfidious Albion' or as Dr. Richard B. Spence would say:
Perfidious Albion – “Treacherous England,” “Faithless England,” or, if you prefer, “Dirty, Low-down, Sneaky England” – is commonly assumed to derive from the French La Perfide Albion. The epithet’s best known appearance is in the 1793 poem “L’ere de Francais” by the Marquis de Ximenez.
http://www.newdawnmagazine.com/articles/perfidious-albion-an-introduction-to-the-secret-history-of-the-british-empire

Ah! That was long ago and far away! But Sarkozy and Noyer feel the supposed perfidy intensely today.

Sarkozy is livid with Cameron. First, Cameron supposedly tried to destroy the unity of Europe in its valiant attempts to stave off disaster. Secretly - hush! hush! - we heard that really Sarkozy was only too keen for the Brits to be ousted! Indeed, some whisper that Cameron fell into a dastardly French trap!!

But now, it seems, our 'Boy David' has been wooing other slight wobblers in the EU. In other words, those who agreed to the enticements of Merkozy but who didn't really know to what they were agreeing!! Interesting phenomenon that! So typical of the Europeans, don't you agree?!!

Who are these wobblers? Well, The Guardian reported:
Over the past few days, Cameron has spoken to his counterparts in non-euro states Denmark, Sweden and the Czech Republic, all of whom are said to have concerns about the compact, as well as with Enda Kenny of eurozone member Ireland, who has warned he may have to put it to a referendum.

It went on:
Cameron's spokesman rejected reports that the PM was agitating against the agreement. "He has been speaking to a number of different European leaders in recent days and will continue to do so in the coming days, with the objective in mind of making clear that we want to engage constructively," said the spokesman.

"There is an inter-governmental agreement and a discussion about how to implement that inter-governmental agreement and we are seeking to engage constructively in that discussion.

"You would expect him to speak to a number of different European leaders in the coming days."

Innocent chit-chat? Depends on where you are sitting! Sarkozy prides himself on being the diplomat's diplomat. He longs for the French language to be the 'Lingua Franca' of all European diplomacy, is highly suspicious.

However, it is Christian Noyer who is, excuse the phrase, the eminence grise in this anti-Brit campaign. According to the same article in The Guardian:
Tensions between London and Paris were heightened further on Thursday after the head of France's central bank suggested that the UK was a candidate for a credit rating downgrade.

France is bracing itself for the potential loss of its coveted AAA rating after two credit agencies last week indicated they were considering marking down countries in the eurozone.

But Bank of France governor Christian Noyer said they should instead be looking at the UK because of the scale of debt and inflation and the poor levels of growth and bank lending on this side of the Channel.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2011/dec/15/france-eurozone-row-uk-credit-downgrade

In Le Télégramme, Dapper Mr Noyer is quoted as saying of Standard and Poor's consideration of downgrading certain European AAA ratings:
Ou alors, il faudrait qu'elles commencent par dégrader le Royaume Uni qui a plus de déficits, autant de dettes, plus d'inflation, moins de croissance que nous et dont le crédit s'effondre.
http://www.letelegramme.com/ig/generales/france-monde/france/christian-noyer-l-accord-de-bruxelles-est-bon-15-12-2011-1534967.php?xtmc=Noyer&xtcr=1

To put it into English:
Then perhaps, they should start by degrading the United Kingdom's standing. They have more deficits, are as much in debt, have more inflation and less growth than we have and their credit is collapsing

However, Noyer is deeply anxious that France's rating should not be downgraded.

So there you have it! 'Il vous l'avez!' 'Boy David' Cameron has finished his House of Commons fisty-cuffs with Ed Miliband. Now he is doing a re-run of the Napoleonic War! Next year isn't 1812 - it's 2012! Where are you Tchaikovsky!

'Bye'


Tuesday 13 December 2011

From Bulldog to Plonker @ No 10

Arturo and I watched 'Boy David' Cameron's performance at the House of Commons yesterday. He seemed tremendously pleased with himself. His orange face was aglow with pleasure as various of his backbenchers rushed to praise their lord and master.

"One way to get noticed and get promotion," Arturo whispered in my ear, "is to lick his boots! And they're all licking so hard, their tongues will fall off!"

He was right! Loyal backbencher after loyal backbencher assured him of their admiration. We browsed through Hansard and found some of the contributions captured for ever for Cameron to cherish.
http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201011/cmhansrd/cm111212/debtext/111212-0001.htm

Here for example we have Sir Peter Tapsell (Louth and Horncastle). He declared his:
admiration and full-hearted support for my right hon. Friend at this definitive moment in his first premiership ...

"Well," said Arturo, "he's bursting with sycophancy!"

Then, we had that desperate hanger-on Mr John Redwood (Wokingham). He almost stumbled over his words of praise:
I congratulate my right hon. Friend on his excellent statesmanship. Does he agree that Britain has much more negotiating strength today, because Europe knows that it is dealing with a Prime Minister who will say no if he needs to, than when we had two Prime Ministers who gave in to bad deal after bad deal, including giving away our rebate for no good reason?

"Now! That's what I call 'Telling 'em!' He learnt a thing or two from his time with the Iron Lady!" Arturo giggled.

Who else partook of this kow-towing fest? There were so many that I cannot include them all! Here is just a sample:

Mr Bernard Jenkin (Harwich and North Essex) who said:
May I congratulate my right hon. Friend on sticking to a very simple principle of fairness in the European Union: that the institutions for the 27 are there for the 27? May I also remind him and those on the Opposition Benches—and, indeed, the BBC—that he has the support not only of the Conservative party but of the British people for what he has just done?

Note the dig at the poor old BBC! The journalists there need to keep their heads down - 'Boy David' Cameron's allies have got snipers strategically positioned! They are ready to fire when they perceive adverse comments against 'beloved' leader!

Now, we come to the contribution from the Peroxide Boudicca, Nadine Dorries (Mid Bedfordshire):
Over the weekend it was impossible to meet a resident of Mid Bedfordshire who was not full of praise and admiration for what the Prime Minister had done in Brussels, but does he share my concern about the fact that the most cowardly and negative attacks over the weekend came not from the Labour party—which is incapable of opposition—but, unfortunately, from the Liberal Democrats?...

Oh Boy!! Dodgy, dodgy! What's she up to? Arturo and I guess she's trying to wreck the Coalition! With 'Wailing Lad' Clegg gone missing - who can stop her? She is known as a loose cannon and loose cannons can wreck. Though she adores 'Boy David', at the moment, she is a one-woman fusillade! He needs to be wary of her compliments.

Next up in the 'I love you, Cameron' brigade was Andrew Rosindell (Romford):
If there were ever any doubt before, may I tell the Prime Minister that there is none today in the minds of the British people that we are led by a Prime Minister with the courage to put our country’s interests first? I thank him for displaying the bulldog spirit in Brussels last week ...

This 'bulldog spirit' was abounding in the kennels of the admirers!

Anyone who tweets knows of the 'amazing' Mrs Bone! Her adoring husband did not let her down in the admiration stakes being run yesterday. Mr Peter Bone (Wellingborough) said:
I have received an important message to pass on to the Prime Minister: “The efforts of the Prime Minister on Thursday night gave me great pleasure. Yours ever, Mrs Bone.”

There were even more sick-making contributions! Take this one from David Rutley (Macclesfield):
I should like to pass on the hugs, best wishes and kisses from people in Macclesfield, who are very grateful for the stance that the Prime Minister took last week. ...

However, there was someone, admittedly not of the Conservative persuasion, who gifted us with a different atmosphere. It was Mr Dennis Skinner (Bolsover)
Is this not the same Prime Minister who month after month has been castigating working people for not staying at meetings to deal with pensions? He has walked out, without using his veto; he has walked out, without getting a rebate like Mrs Thatcher; and he has walked out without a couple of opt-outs like Major. As Del Boy would say, what a plonker!

So - there we have it - from bulldog to plonker in one afternoon!

We're off to chew on some sardines. 'Bye' from us both!



Monday 12 December 2011

What a difference a day makes ... @ No 10

"He liked the idea on Friday!" Arturo exclaimed.

"Who liked what?" I asked.

"'Wailing Lad' Clegg, of course! On Friday, he said that 'Boy David' Cameron had no alternative but to use his veto - now he's up the pole about it."

Arturo was right, of course. 'Wailing Lad' Clegg who has been looking increasingly glum over the last few weeks has disappeared completely, today! Maybe, he was spirited away back to Brussels, his natural home. Why do I say he 'disappeared'? Well, today, our PM, Cameron was in the House of Commons giving an account of his so-called European negotiations! His deputy, 'Wailing Lad' was not to be seen. There were cries from the less than sympathetic MPs of:
Where's Nick?

'Wailing Lad' was not even a spectre. He was akin to the 'Dead Parrot'; he was defunct! At least he was as far as the House of Commons was concerned.

Poor 'Wailing Lad', he is the Europhile supreme. Indeed, he is the most Euro-friendly leader there has been in the UK Parliament.

The dilemma was created for him in the early hours of Friday morning. At 4 am to be precise. 'Wailing Lad' received a phone call from 'Boy David' Cameron telling him that he had used the veto in the EU negotiations! At that hour of the morning when the chill cold of reality is kept at bay by the warmth of the duvet - 'Wailing Lad' was not in a fit state to take in what Cameron was saying! Who can blame him? Cameron can be incoherent at noon, let alone at 4 am!

By Sunday, however, one assumes the Spanish wife had shaken some degree of awareness into 'Wailing Lad's' delicate ear! By the time he sat down in front of Andrew Marr on his morning TV show, 'Wailing Lad' was in snarling mood! No longer had his leader, Cameron, been in the position of being 'unable to do anything else'! Now, Clegg described the result of the negotiations as being:
“bad for Britain”

Oh dear! What a change around! Not at all the words that 'Boy David' Cameron expected to hear!

Furthermore, once into his stride, 'Wailing Lad' seemingly could not stop - Arturo thinks that his mouth runs away with him and he self-applauds! A very dangerous tendency when you are the Deputy PM in a Coalition government!

In an article in the Daily Telegraph by Christopher Hope, Clegg's comments were described in the following way:
Mr Clegg criticised Conservative Eurosceptics, warning that to see the result as a “triumph” was “spectacularly misguided”. Mr Clegg complained that he had been warning “for weeks” that the summit could end in division because France “would not have shed a tear if Britain was pushed”.

He suggested that he would never have vetoed the treaty if he had been in Brussels, and blamed Tory Eurosceptics for forcing the Prime Minister’s hand.

Clegg was quoted again:
If I’d been at the summit, things would have been different. I’m not under the same constraints from my parliamentary party that clearly David Cameron is.

And yet again:
A Britain that leaves the EU will be considered irrelevant by Washington and will be a pygmy in the world when I want us to stand tall in the world

Christopher Hope added:
Mr Clegg said he would be doing “everything I can to ensure this setback does not become a permanent divide” with Europe.

Our old friend, give him a big hand (and I do mean BIG hand), 'Bagpuss' Pickles had to stick his oar in. Being the Cameron toady that he is, Pickles had to show his irritation with 'Wailing Lad' Clegg. Christopher Hope noted:
Eric Pickles, the Local Government Secretary, criticised Mr Clegg’s description of Eurosceptic Tories as being “spectacularly misguided”.

“We needed to ensure that there wouldn’t be a presumption in favour of any particular currency,” he said. “We needed to protect our financial institutions, and I think we feel more comfortable being able to do that as not part of a treaty renegotiation.”
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/nick-clegg/8949920/Nick-Clegg-attacks-Camerons-EU-treaty-veto-as-bad-for-jobs-and-families.html

Now it appears, 'Wailing Lad' Clegg is trying to justify his non-appearance in the Commons. He says it would have been a distraction from what the PM had to say!! If you believe that - you'll believe anything!

Arturo and I reckon he was in a quiet corner wailing to himself whilst waiting for a reassuring pat on the shoulder from 'Invincible' Cable.

The lyrics of
What a difference a day makes
Twenty-four little hours
need to be rewritten for the Clegg-Cameron saga.

What a difference a day makes
Twenty-four little hours
My lonely nights are still here, dear
Skies above are getting real stormy!

Arturo and I await the coming weeks with great interest!

'Bye' from us both



Thursday 8 December 2011

'NO we do not. Sorry ... YES, we do' @ No 10

"Cor Blimey, Butch!! They're in a right old mess in No 10. They don't seem to know whether they do or whether they don't." Arturo said.

"Do, or don't, what?" I tried not to seem stupid.

"Go and read the Independent - last two or three days - then you'll know what I'm on about. I haven't time to tell you the full story."

So, I did what Arturo said - don't I always? This is just part of what I discovered.

The Independent has done some investigations into a firm called Bell Pottinger. In an article written by Melanie Newman and Oliver Wright entitled: Revelations: How lobbyists' tentacles spread throughout the Government the journalists relate the story of how the government has become ensnared by this over-active lobbying group. They write:
Senior executives at Bell Pottinger claimed they could arrange meetings with the Business Secretary's special adviser on behalf of a client.

Tim Collins, managing director of Bell Pottinger Public Affairs, told undercover reporters that the best way to get to Vince Cable was through his political adviser Giles Wilkes. And Mr Collins's colleague suggested that as a result of Bell Pottinger's intervention, Mr Cable had visited a factory owned by one of the firm's clients that was looking for Government assistance.

Well, you might say, no real harm done there. It's what any lobbyist group would do, isn't it? But there's more. The article continues:
David Wilson, chairman of Bell Pottinger Public Relations, said: "We've just started work with Lotus cars who have got a massive investment from Malaysia through Proton, their owner. And we helped orchestrate a visit from Vince Cable on Monday because of the investment that's going in because they are looking for grant aid to develop new factories, which would create new jobs."

Again, you might say, it's a bit on the dodgy side but then this is politics and business can become an explosive mix!

The article continues with a catalogue of boasting from Tim Collins about who he knows and how he can manipulate them. Various quoted government 'spokesmen' fall over themselves to deny there was anything sinister in the meetings.

Shadow Cabinet Office minister Jon Trickett was quoted in the article as saying of the present government that it was:
"too close to corporate interests. We have been calling on the Government to implement a statutory register of lobbyists. We need reform".

'Boy David' Cameron was incensed by this and a spokesman was quoted as commenting:
I simply do not accept that there was undue access.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/article6273280.ece

However, one has to make a comment to the Shadow Cabinet Office Minister. Why didn't Labour think of dealing more robustly with lobbyists when it was in power? We might then have avoided the situation created by the Licensing and Gambling legislation.

But that is not the end of the Bell Pottinger lobbying story - no, sirree!

The Independent had another story this time written by Matthew Norman: Do unethical lobbyists feel any pain at the dirty, seedy role they play in politics?

The article is witty and scathing at the same time. It needs to be read in its entirety. However, I offer two quotes from it. These sum up the views expressed widely about many in the lobbying fraternity:
Was ever a man a finer advert for the services he offers than Tim Bell, the lobbying activities of whose firm, Bell Pottinger, this newspaper revealed yesterday? Any despot wavering over whether to join brethren from Belarus and Sri Lanka in hiring Lord Bell's image-laundering skills will have their doubts quashed by a visit to his own Wikipedia entry. All the dirty linen has been magically vanished.

The second quotation is:
A story does exist, of course, and it's a depressingly familiar one for both our democracy and the victims of distant dictatorships. It is a story as old as civilisation, in fact. So long as there has been a body politic to host them, parasites have feasted on its blood.
http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/commentators/matthew-norman/article6273126.ece

Back in No 10, amidst the furor surrounding 'Boy David' Cameron's visit to the 'Lions Den' that is Brussels, there were second thoughts about the Independent's stories. Melanie Newman and Oliver Wright had another article tellingly entitled: No. 10 changes its tone over lobbyists . They wrote:
When The Independent contacted No 10 on Monday night, a spokeswoman for the Prime Minister insisted that "it is simply not true that Bell Pottinger or indeed any other lobbying company has any influence on government policy" - leading to questions as to why large firms would spend hundreds of millions of pounds on lobbyists if they had no effect.

Well - the spokeswoman would say that, wouldn't she?

However - hold your hats on! There's been a change of what shall we say:
Mood?
PR?
Morality?
Call it what you will. The article quotes a Prime Minister's spokesman as saying:
Of course, occasionally lobbyists talk to Government, the CBI often talks to the Department for Business or the Treasury and individual companies with interests talk to Government and raise concerns with us.

We listen to their concerns and where we think they have legitimate concerns and we can help we try to do so.

That's what you would expect us to do. Most people would think if the Prime Minister is raising these issues with foreign governments with the intention of improving our trade relationships, that would be a good thing to do.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/politics/article6273279.ece

Meanwhile - back in the lobbyists' nest - what does Lord Bell think about all of this? Do you remember Lord Bell, Head of Bell Pottinger's holding company Chime Communications. He was erstwhile favourite of Lady Thatcher, when she was PM. As you can imagine, a Magician hates the secrets of his tricks being revealed. After all, if they are revealed - then anyone can do them! Magicians are secretive guardians of their dark arts. Lord Bell is no exception. He is enraged. In an interview with Stephen Robinson of the Evening Standard, Lord Bell appears under the headline:
'Of course I regret it, I need it like a hole in the head, all this s**t'

Robinson writes of Bell:
He likes to work behind the scenes shielded from view as his companies burnish various brands with what might be termed "reputational issues" - General Pinochet, Sri Lanka, Bahrain, Belarus and many, many others. Only occasionally does he intrude visibly into the political world, as when he sealed the demise of his old friend Liam Fox by helping one of his clients pass bank account details to the Times revealing a conflict of interest in the way Dr Fox's "adviser" Adam Werritty was funded. Yesterday, he declined to comment about Fox.

Oh Dear! Dirty! Dirty! Arturo would love this!

Robinson continues:
Even as we are talking, the Independent is emailing him selected extracts of further allegations to be published in today's edition, including the recorded assertion by an official at Bell Pottinger that the company took money from the government of Belarus via an unnamed agent, in possible breach of accounting rules. Bell denies this happened.

Bell has launched an internal investigation after which the full board will decide if disciplinary action should be taken against his staff for their efforts to secure the business of Uzbekistan.

Robinson lists the accusations made against Bell Pottinger:
Its staff explained how a despotic regime could improve its international standing while keeping child labour for up to two decades.

They admitted using Wikipedia accounts to change entries about its clients.

They suggested they could manipulate Google results to drown out negative coverage of human rights violations.

Boasted about access to No 10, claiming they persuaded David Cameron to speak to the Chinese government on a client's behalf within 24 hours.

Claimed to have access to other senior figures including Foreign Secretary William Hague and No 10 adviser Steve Hilton.

Claimed the firm had close relations with foreign office minister Alistair Burt.

Claimed they could arrange meetings with the special adviser to Business Secretary Vince Cable.

Claimed they may be able to organise a royal tour and boasted of links to the royal family.

Claimed to be able to use politicians to attack Channel 4's investigative TV programme Dispatches.

Helped pick the police station former News International chief executive Rebekah Brooks would be taken to for questioning; prepared her to give evidence to Parliament.
http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/lifestyle/article-24019238-of-course-i-regret-it-i-need-it-like-a-hole-in-the-head-all-this-st.do

Oh Dear! And Oh Dear, again! It sounds more like the machinations of a Ruritanian Republic then the business dealings of a company that boasts strong links with top UK politicians. How are the mighty fallen? Or maybe, they were never UP there in the first place!

I just hope it isn't an omen for 'Boy David's little trip to talk to Merkozy!

Never mind - we'll know the best/worst by the weekend, won't we? If not, Arturo and I will keep out of the way of Cameron himself and his acolytes. Don't they say that when you're angry 'Go and kick the cat!'

'Bye'


Friday 2 December 2011

Let them eat cake @ No 10

Arturo had a fit of 'tutting' this morning. When he had finished he said:
"Do you remember that Daily Mail headline in June, 'David Cameron warns feckless parents who expect to raise children on benefits'? The one written by James Groves?"

I said I did not. Arturo tutted some more: "It quoted your 'Boy David' Cameron going on about some TV interview he had given. He said:
‘The biggest change I want to make as Prime Minister is to change the values where if people do the right thing, work hard and try to support their families we reward them and if people do the wrong thing they get punished.’
Remember it now, do you?"

After Arturo's promptings, I did remember it. To read the Daily Mail article go to:
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2002195/David-Cameron-Families-children-afford-it.html#ixzz1fOqF6f6b

Arturo's reminder was very timely. The whole business of 'fecklessness' has reared its ugly head again, this week. Who raised it? None other than the 'Silent Man' Iain Duncan Smith. The pity is the man does not live up to his moniker. He just cannot keep his mouth shut!

The Guardian had an article written by Robert Winnett entitled:
Feckless parents would only spend extra benefits on themselves, says Iain Duncan Smith : Giving more money to poor families will not help the issue of child poverty because feckless parents will spend it on themselves, Iain Duncan Smith warned on Thursday night.

Really! Just how does he know that? Has a scientific study shown that 'feckless' parents rush straightaway to the bookies or the pub as soon as they have got their grubby hands on some dosh? Or is this a 'gut feeling', the same 'gut feeling' that 'Boy David' Cameron had in June? Maybe, 'Silent Man' Duncan Smith and Cameron just think through their guts - leaving their heads and brains for other things such as insulting the poor!

In his article, Winnett wrote:
The Work and Pensions Secretary said that increasing “benefit income” simply pushes the “family further into dependency” and makes it less likely that their children will ever escape from poverty.

He warned that extra money provided to dysfunctional families may simply be spent on drugs or gambling, rather than on helping children.

Mr Duncan Smith decided to intervene in the debate about child poverty amid growing controversy after decisions taken by George Osborne, the Chancellor, in the Autumn Statement were estimated to push 100,000 extra children into poverty.

It seems that the government is thinking about a change to the definition of 'poverty'. All I would ask is 'why would they want to do that?'. The answer can only be that they want to fiddle the figures so that children on the borderline of poverty are deemed as not being in need of extra help. Talk about 'Victorian Values'! No doubt, we'll soon have 'Workhouse Values' with the 'deserving poor' and the 'undeserving poor'. Oh, I forgot - can't have workhouses - we're cutting down on welfare! Duncan Smith and Cameron better just say: 'Let them eat cake' instead!

Winnett's article quoted from Duncan Smith's speech at the London School of Economics, in which he said:
I believe that increased income and increased well-being do not always follow the same track. Take a family headed by a drug addict or someone with a gambling addiction – increase the parent’s income and the chances are they will spend the money on furthering their habit, not on their children.

Winnett commented:
He (Duncan Smith) indicated that rather than ploughing more funds into benefits and other handouts, government money might be better spent on providing nursery school places and health visitors for disadvantaged households.

Similarly, providing relationship support or help for parents to return to work was likely to pay long-term dividends for their children.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/8929809/Feckless-parents-would-only-spend-extra-benefits-on-themselves-says-Iain-Duncan-Smith.html

So there we have it - don't give the money to the families - provide nursery school places, health visitors and relationship support. What guarantee is there that in the interim between setting up the nurseries, health visitors and relationship support - young children won't starve? Also, has 'Silent Man' Duncan Smith not heard that his Lord and Master Cameron is hell bent on cutting public services? So, Clever Clogs Duncan Smith who will provide the support?

Arturo and I have mulled all this over. I suppose we could be considered 'feckless felines'. After all, we haven't caught a Downing Street rat for days; we've lived off sardines and turkey twizzlers discarded by the Interns. But, 'Silent Man' Duncan Smith! There's always tomorrow. When we see a rat approaching your trouser bottoms - we'll be there. So who'll be feckless then? Remember - given the opportunity and understanding even the so-called feckless do the right thing.

'Bye'