Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú

...Policy Exchange - a Conservative-leaning think tank ...

Doesn't sound like there has been anything at all?

maybe the tories will yet snatch defeat from the jaws of victory.

If the crowing of over confident right wingers can re establish the image in the public's mind of what the lording it up tories are really like they may still lose?

2 years is a long time for ubermensch to unnaturally restrain themselves? To just sit quiet without figitting ?

NGOs THE NEW ECONOMY?

a registered charity, has been described as Mr Cameron's favourite think tank."

we've heard from them before haven't we Newsnight viewers? Remember Dean Godson's appearance on the evil Muslim mosque literature and Policy Exchange's 'research'? That it's a 'charity' (NGO) these days means precious little after the 2006 Act, other than that it isn't peer reviewed or otherwise regulated for truth and accuracy. Has Policy Exchange had a make-over? Has it learned how to do research yet?

The Charity Commission is going to be snowed under as more and more of these self-appointed 'researchers' register themselves as charities and start advising all and sundry. 'Unaccountable pressure group' might be a better name for Policy Exchange and their ilk, this one is, surprise surprise, a Neo-conservative 'think-tank' to boot (right wing, left wing, who cares which way now it's all the 'Third Way'?

Merseyside and Tyneside did grow because of specific functions, all of which have long gone, and since the vast majority of our economy is now Service Sector (with an ever growing contributions from the Third Sector like Policy Exchange which offer self-published words of advice resting on verbal cognitive ability (a national resource which appears to be slipping according to all our measures), instead of describing the claim that urban regeneration is not a runner as 'insane', perhaps Mr Cameron could spell out exactly what he envisages the replacement economy for these areas will comprise (nothing but offender management comes to mind immediately) and in explicit, accountable enough detail so that the Newsnight team can press him (or more likely his hapless minions) to answer the question without resorting to subterfuge?

#2 JadedJean

I have no time at all for either Brown's NuLab Tories or Cameron's BluLab Tories, but why on earth should Cameron provide even more ideas for "Duff" Gordon to cherry-pick and then claim as his own nearly 2 years before Brown has to call an election or more if he can persuade QEI/II not to dissolve the Westmidden Parliament on the grounds of a national emergency.

As leader of the opposition, he is paid a state salary to oppose the lunacies of the government.

You seem to have the same odd idea as "Duff" Gordon at PMQs, when he wants to ask the questions and read lists of dead soldiers instead of answering the questions addressed to him.

The LSE guy behind the Policy Exchange report has just been on C4 News trying
to argue that 'London is closer to Europe than Hull'. But Hull is a major ferry port?!

PS to my #3

I do think it appropriate for the PM to read out the lists of dead soldiers the government has put in harm's way, but it should be in government time and not at the expense of the very limited time available to MPs to hold the government to account.

I hope Newsnight is going to say something about the forthcoming by-election in Fife too.

HUMANITARIANS AND NEW YORKERS ABROAD

"He [Bush] is sending Condoleezza Rice to Paris and on to Tbilisi, and he announced a humanitarian aid mission headed by the United States military."

And it looks like "a column of 70 Russian military vehicles, including military trucks with anti-aircraft guns and artillery, as well as armoured personnel carriers, pursued by a large contingent of the world's media, left Gori on the road to Tbilisi and turned left a few kilometres outside of the frontline Georgian town. Russian troops claimed they were on a too.

Can we take it that and friends down the road in Tsibili don't want just any old 'humanitarian aid' (note the discredited profile in the second piece)? Was Mr Sarkozy in Tsibili to tell him off about misuse of the flag or is that Mrs Merkel's job next week?

What a shower of winbags.

Brownedov (#3) "why on earth should Cameron provide even more ideas for "Duff" Gordon to cherry-pick and then claim as his own nearly 2 years before Brown has to call an election"

You're right on this (and I knew it when I wrote my largely rhetorical #2) but like many, I'm tired of hearing vacuous rhetoric from the opposition whilst the country continues to be fragmented and go down-hill just as I am from New Labour. If Newsnight is going to put such issues up for discussion I'd like to hear the team press Cameron to substantiate his remarks or why bother? On second thoughts, maybe it would just be better to ask the Russians how their 'humanitarian aid' to Georgia is going and whether they or the Chinese would like to help out over here too?

#7 JadedJean

You talk of an EU flag being used illegally, but this is untrue. Please check your facts.

First, there is no such thing as an EU flag. What you'll see in the picture you reference is the European flag. This has been an official symbol of the Council of Europe since 1955.

Please look at the CoE's where you can read: "The European flag and the European anthem were chosen and adopted by the Council of Europe before also becoming symbols of the European Union."

Both the Russian Federation (CoE members since 1996-02-28) and Georgia (CoE members since 1999-04-27) have the right to fly the European flag. I spend nearly half my time in Switzerland (CoE members since 1963-05-06) who are not members of the EU but where the European flag is a common sight.

You can verify this on the EU website entry for

#8 JadedJean

I'm honestly not unsympathetic to your view and do wish Cameron could be pressed harder on his views.

I think the real problem is the change of NuLab leader. Bliar is a natural Tory who realised he could go further in a NuLab moulded to his image than in the official Tory party where he would have to had to compete with both the "toffs" and the "bite-yer-legs" Tebbit faction. He had no need to invent Tory policies - they came naturally to him.

Brown on the other hand started out as an idealistic socialist and has turned into a Stalinist. Centralisation and control are all that come naturally to him, but he has just enough working brain cells left to realise that Tory policies are his only electoral hope, particularly after seeing the reaction of his "core vote" to his doubling the starting rate of tax.

I can see why Cameron is unwilling to act as Brown's feed.

NEW/LAWYER SPEAK FOR DEMOCRACY

As pointed out elsewhere, NYC is Hispanic, Black, Jewish. E. Asian and other white in that order, so by my calculations, the minority groups are surely the latter two, namely non-jewish whites and East Asians, so what is Mr Saakashvili's ex law firm really saying/doing when it states "The goal of furthering diversity requires hiring law students from different backgrounds"? his human rights law, and was allegedly recruited for his current role.

In recruitment, what choice does Patterson, Belknap, Webb and Tyler have? Are they hypersensitive about the ethnicity of the majority of NYC lawyers? Incidentally, the US Attorney General was a partner at the firm before and after his accession to the bench.

Brownedov (#9) Fair enough, I didn't appreciate that. I'd taken my cue from the Italian MEP over the weekend who said it was illegal on Russia Today (but he's ex Communist Youth and there's been lots of propaganda from both sides).

Legal or not, it still looks like to me and if I were Sarkozy or Merkel I'd have had a quiet word about being provocative if nothing else under the circumstances. Russia has given stern warnings before about human rights interference by foreign NGOs, which, all else aside, is effectively what we're seeing in Georgia via proxy.

#12 JadedJean

I do agree 100% that it was not the height of tact!

Brownedov (#10) It used to be a myth that politicians ran this country, the Civil Service ran the country. But that all started to change in the 80s, and dramatically so. Since then its been anarchism all the way: decentralisation, privatisation or Third Sectorisation. Look at what happened to the Home Office/Probation, few in the know were surprised. It began in the late 80s and has just progressed. The objective was and still is fragmentation of the Public Sector and regionalisation of the UK as NUTS. Brown may think he's a Stalinist, but look who funds him and Blair. Stalinist days went with the demise of the Civil Service as GOSPLAN. Trotskyism is now the New Left 'frass-roots' democracy of today, and it started with Thatcher/Joseph. It's good for the markets, i.e. it's good for the backers of whatever colour party one wants to vote for. In the end we'll just get more of the same - deregulation, fragmentation and PFIs.

Blog No. 6 another Labour pasting with another SNP victory. So Why waste time debating this. It's a foregone conclusion.

More important issues such as Georgia, where the West still continues to appease the Russians and sit on the side lines.

Kennedy would have had his troops in at the Georgia border. Until we see somebackbone by the west why should Russia stop what it is doing now, invading parts of Georgia. Who is to stop them?

#14 JadedJean

To some extent I agree. The model of both NuLab and the Civil Service is big government with any decentralisation being more apparent than real. PFIs are certainly not the answer.

As an old Liberal (not LibDem), I believe in small government to be there mainly for an effective, progressive taxation & benefits system and effective regulation of the private sector especially in ant-trust areas. For example, I would want to see a true National Insurance system and the entire existing NHS in the private sector regulated by both a standards agency and the monopolies commission.

Unless we move to that sort of approach the quangos will just continue to grow like Topsy.

It's getting late, do I'll probably not look back here until tomorrow.

I cannot believe the Hunter interview on Newsnight. Not once did he suggest that an artillery bombardment of a civilian area by the Georgians killing 2000 or so people was perhaps not in the best democratic traditions.

If you start threatening G8 membership shortly after a massacre (and I do believe there has been uncontrolled retaliation by the Russians) of Russian ethic civilians what happens next?

I never did have a high opinion of Bush but this could get very bad indeed.
----------------------------------------------
Brownedov its a free world n'all but be aware that some posters are holocaust deniers. Its jackboots on cobblestones stuff. Zimbabweans have too low an IQ for democracy so perhaps Maoism would be better. Personally I think people prepared to use the democratic process under the threat of extreme violence qualify 100% in my world.

What was going on during the Wednesday edition? Kirsty Wark showed all her shortcommings as a presenter allowing John Prescott to turn what was supposed to be an interview a party political broadcast on behalf of the Labour Party. Regeneration? She should have taken him to task about the sink estates that still exist in places like Liverpool and Glasgow.
I am no conservative, but all of the deprived areas in this country have had Labour MP's.

PROPAGANDA

At the end of the programme tonight, we heard the Russian Deputy Representative to NATO assert that the convoy of troops reported to be headed towards the Georgian capital today was NOT Russian, that this was false propaganda, and that the Western agencies should be more careful about what they disseminate. So what is the truth of the matter? Were they Georgian troops? If so, were we not told by the Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú tonight that the Georgian military had effectively disbanded and was the programme not pitched in such a way that it appeared like Bush's firm words and US 'humanitarian aid' + US military was in response? Or was this just 'the fog of war'?

On this evening's newsnight I believe the Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú had its image blemished by what could only be perceived as unbalanced and shallow reporting o the subject of Georgia. First, a significant amount of time was given to a former NATO head who used the opportunity to repeatedly criticize Russia with inane arguments, while a Russian spokesman was cut off after only a minute or so. Moreover in the general discussion of the issue we were not given any substantial background to the conflict in terms of how it began or indeed what some of the root causes may be. And both Sarah Rainsfourd's report and Andrew North's were short on substance. The evidence of people fleeing or houses burning is not enough to make us understand what is going on there. Is the Â鶹¹ÙÍøÊ×Ò³Èë¿Ú becoming like CNN? God forbid.

I think News Night could have covered the EU' s foreign ministers meeting today , as isn't energy security in their hands now ?

You could have said how they agreed to send more peace monitors to the area (not that they would deploy currently), the opt out certain countries insisted they had if the EU decided to send in peace keepers ,unless Russia gave them the all clear to do so.

Solidarity in a crisis huh ?

Gawd help us !

THE (BAKU-TBILISI-CEYAN) NABACCO 'SPECIAL PROJECT'?

"Sergei Lavrov, the Russian Foreign Minister, earlier over the crisis, describing the government of President Mikheil Saakashvili as a of the Bush administration rather than a proper state."

GORI



The Georgia-Azerbaijan corridor isn't just a convenient route for oil/gas given Iran to the South.

"Young men are shunning work and turning to a life of crime as Britain develops a "get rich or die trying" culture, the country's most senior black MP warns today. David Lammy, the skills minister, says young men are encouraged by a "bling culture" to pursue crime as a short cut to wealth in the face of a rapidly changing economy which no longer places a premium on manual jobs."

Yes Mr Lammy. They've been watching 'The Apprentice' and observing how New Labour gets it's funding - i.e. they've been learning all about bling culture (a product of the same get-rich-quick types by seling toot) and how to 'get on' in our free (de-regulated/lawless) market - catching the ball on the second bounce so to speak. They do indeed lack decent role models!

This is your party's (and Thatcher's/Cameron's anarchistic) doing. But don't say anything that might upset the sorcerers.

"He [Bush] is sending Condoleezza Rice to Paris and on to Tbilisi, and he announced a humanitarian aid mission headed by the United States military."

_______

If it’s Tuesday, it must be Tibilisi.

Off Condi goes on her Magical Mystery Tour.
Are they on LSD at the White House? Sounds like it.

Georgia was mad to take on Russia.
Their PM must have had some very bad advisers in the room.
What was the Grand Plan? Would he have then pushed onto to invade Beijing?

No one in the EEC thought that was a good idea.

Bush seems to have forgotten what has happened to them in Baghdad. The man is a joke.

I suppose journalists like it. They can all roll out their old comments about the Soviet Union.


Ron Taylor

thegangofone (#17) Here's the basic problem with your prima facie nobel humanitarian equalitarianism: people are not equal in cogntive ability, it's normally distributed with different means for different groups and it appears to be largely genetic. This shows up in all the tests which predict SATs and in GCSEs, and this is the case wherever these test are created and used, throughout the world. All countries are not equal in mean IQ either. If countries (like many in Africa) have mean IQs of 70, this means that the majority of the population will have literacy and numeracy problems to such an extent that they will not be able to understand what they are voting for, or, to put it another way, they will be very easily misled and exploited by unscrupulous people purporting to give them what they want in return for their votes for power. Under such circumstances, the people think much like children and like children everywhere need to be led and managed. This is why one finds authoritarian, paternalistic forms of government in such, poorly industrialised, countries. This is why Stalinism or Maoism with population (family) planning) is probably the best form of government for the people of such countries. They are not ready for liberal-democracy, and need to be protected from those who cynically assert otherwise and preach equalitarianism and democracy.

Other, currently more fortunate countries in the world, increasingly subject to dysgenic fertility, will ultimately revert to such forms of government unless they correct their current dysgenesis through eugenic policies (the latter probably accounted for their ascendency in the first place). Crime and civil-disorder will force this upon them in time.

Before you reject the above, instead of looking for allies, make sure that you understand that it's based on empirical facts, ask who has the most to gain by denying or censoring those facts, and at whose expense they do so.

John Prescott came across as a massive hypocrite when he said that "moving everything down south is treating people like economic units".

Treating people like economic units is exactly what this governments immigration policy has been about for the last 11 years. Shame the interviewer didn't pick him up on this.