I'm a creep... I'm a Tory...

A gem of a find here passed to me on Twitter via @Jasonargonaut (well actually it was found by Bristol University's other firey female Labourite, Emma, but she's not on Twitter... yes, #fail )

Listen to this,

he's been called the YouTube Billy Bragg, possibly a step too far(as he can't really sing) ,but it made me smile on the 6:30 train to work this morning. And that's no mean feat.

Another treat for your ears, Kerry McCarthy, our new online leader, Twitter Tsar (which is unfortunately going to stick, Kerry) or officially - New Media Campaigns Spokesperson (woop woop!) is interviewed by the Guardian today on how, as Prezza put it beautifully, Cameron is "an email politician in a Twitter age".

...Oh and one last lazy link, Brian Barder who writes for LabourList today concludes with this poignant reminder and a link to a letter from someone who can say they warned you...(and it's not Kinnock)

"A recent letter in the Guardian carries a warning that should be printed out and pinned to every notice-board in the country. The most frightening danger facing the country is not the credit crunch, not the recession, and certainly not the national debt: it's the threat of a Conservative government, and what it will do. It's time to say so, loud and clear."

#welovetheNHS and this time it's political....

Gordon Brown writes:

Eleanor,

I want to say a huge thank you to all of you who have supported the #welovethenhs campaign.

I have been profoundly moved by the enormous groundswell of support for the NHS in the last few days. A genuinely National Health Service – introduced by a Labour government in the teeth of opposition from the Conservatives and the medical establishment – is one of our nation’s finest achievements.

So it is understandable that the Conservative leadership have tried to distance themselves from those in Tory ranks who criticise the NHS.

But the reason why their comments have generated so much anger is that they spoke to a larger truth.

That truth is that there are two Tory faces on the NHS. Behind all the recent talk of commitment, the party has not truly been reformed. Despite all their talk of reform, the Conservatives still put special interests before patients’ interests.

The Conservatives say they are committed to the NHS but they would scrap our guarantees for patients – including the guarantee to see a specialist within 2 weeks if your GP suspects you may have cancer.

The Conservatives say they are committed to the NHS but they would scrap our agreement with the GPs that means nearly three quarters of practices now offer extended opening hours.

The Conservatives say they are committed to the NHS but they would let hospitals mortgage their own assets – even though they admit this brings the risk of financial failure.

I will not stand by and see the NHS and its brilliant staff denigrated and undermined, whether that's by the right wing in the United States or by their friends in the British Conservative Party.

This is not just a debate for this week. It is central to everything we believe in and care about. And I am determined to take the fight to the Tories, not just today, but in the weeks and months ahead.

Thank you for backing our NHS.

Gordon Brown

I read that at the bus stop on my phone today. And if I'm honest I was very moved, I'll explain why in a moment (incidentally someone on Twitter, who shall remain nameless thought the email he/she received was specifically for them! bless). The #welovetheNHS campaign has been spectacular. It's incredible to sign on to Twitter and see hundreds of new messages every couple of minutes in support of our health system. Most along the lines of without the NHS 'I wouldn't be here'.

I don't have to convince anyone who reads this blog, that I love the NHS too. It's the reason I joined the Labour party. It's the reason I most probably could never leave the party. And, to jump on another bandwagon, I wouldn't be here without it too. But the creator of the #welovetheNHS campaign or twampaign (I am so bad at those it's ridiculous) says he's annoyed the Labour party are hijacking the campaign for party political purposes. I could not disagree more.

The NHS is a party political issue. When both main parties are fighting an election to run the system. Party politics could mean the difference between life or death , a cancer wait for two weeks or eighteen. And if that is not a 'conversation' that the Labour party can enter into, fighting,I don't know what is. It would be remiss not to. If I thought we, as a party, were not battling for the patients (past, present and future) and staff in the service, I would think we should give up and go home now.

There is not a doubt in my mind that the Labour Party are the Party of the NHS. The Tories are the party of low taxes, yes. Individualism, yes. But the NHS, never. Churchill and his party opposed it from the beginning, calling Mr Bevan 'the minister of disease' and rallying alongside the BMA to stop the State dictating whether you live or die, removing the medical authority from the surgery to Whitehall, rendering doctors civil servants. Sounds familiar doesn't it?

As The Mirror (who have responded to the campaign brilliantly) wrote today
"No Labour MEP would ever go on US TV to run down the health service. No Labour cabinet minister would forge links with US politicians at the forefront of attacks on the British health system. But Tories are guilty of both these traitorous acts...Only Labour can be trusted to protect the health service"

They're right aren't they? Can you imagine Alan Johnson or Andy Burnham venturing across the pond and doing the same. Or indeed Claude Moraes MEP or Mary Honeyball MEP. They wouldn't, because if they thought like Mr Hannan, they wouldn't be in the party. Labour see the NHS as our greatest achievement, a source of pride. It's emotional to us, a symbol of functional socialism that we fought to achieve in the darkest post-war years. Our economy was not thriving, but Nye and Attlee saw our nation's health as far too important to neglect. Whereas the Tories, past and present, see it as a financial burden, they are electorally obliged to maintain.

I honestly do not think #welovetheNHS would have trended in 1996. A crumbling, crippled service brought to it's knees by the LAST Conservative government. No Ancient History textbooks needed folks, their last stab at power. Labour have revitalised it, into a NHS we can all be ridiculously proud of.

So forgive us, if we want it to stay that way.

I was booorrrn by the river...

Sorry, a random title I know but this post concerns Obama and whenever his name is mentioned I tend to hum a little Sam Cooke, so while I'm trying to reach the "it's been tooooo hard living..." line, you have a butchers at this pure piece of solid loveliness in full in the NS courtesy of the leader of the free world. And if you can't trust him, who can you, eh?

There is increasing anxiety within the Obama administration over the foreign policy of Cameron, a man the US President dismissed as all "sizzle" and no substance.

From across the Atlantic comes more detail about Barack Obama's opinion of David Cameron. Last year, I reported that the then presidential candidate had emerged from a meeting with the Tory leader describing him as a "lightweight". Now it is claimed that Obama also said that Cameron is all "sizzle" and no substance. The colourful verdict was apparently the result of meetings with Tony Blair, Gordon Brown and Cameron on 26 July last year, at the end of a Continental tour. I have been contacted by a senior figure at a respected national newspaper who gave me an account of the meetings from an Obama aide. After taking breakfast with Blair, visiting Brown in Downing Street and meeting Cameron in parliament, Obama is said to have given the following verdict: Blair was "sizzle and substance"; Brown was "substance"; Cameron was merely "sizzle".

Two days earlier, Obama had delivered a pro-European speech in front of 200,000 people in Berlin, dismissing "voices that deride and deny the importance of Europe's role in . . . our future". The president has also said he regards the EU - as opposed to the UK - as his country's key ally. The Tory leader, who has isolated his party in Europe, appears to be at odds with Obama in this and other areas.

Indeed, while Obama opposed the Iraq invasion from the beginning, Cameron (it is often forgotten) supported the war. Cameron told Obama during the recorded section of their chat last July that "judgement" is key to success as a leader. Yet his attempts to compare himself to Obama as a "change" candidate are not borne out by substance. The neoconservatism and free-marketeerism of his top team are opposed to the values of Obama's administrationSo there you have it. Mr President has spoken. Cameron is all mouth and no trousers. Which, of course we knew, but it's kinda nice to have the most powerful person in the world confirm our suspicions isn't it?
For quite a few years we've held a smug authority over the US, thanks to Bush. Do we really want this sizzling sausage representing us, standing next to one of the most inspiring political orators and figures of modern times?
A change aint gonna come with the substance-less sizzle. Labour have got the substance, we can work on the sizzle.

(any contributors to a caption competition for the above pic?)

update: Kerry has just tweeted "am I the only the only person who think Cameron doesn't actually have much 'sizzle' either?"
God, what was I thinking... of course he doesn't, perhaps more of a stew?

The curious case of Harriet Harman

As I, perhaps rather optimistically, think visitors to this blog may not visit (or indeed God forbid buy the paper) the Daily Mail website, I thought I'd give you a taster of their new lows. New lows that today were smeared all over their front page.I've had to read this twice and glance at the date of the paper, but no, contrary to the weather it aint April and apparently this Mr Slack is a journalist (probably from the Carol Malone school of writing). Anyway have a gander and a warning, I'm commenting afterwards, so if you agree with it, I'd click away- trust me, you'll hate what I've got to say. And me. And Harriet. So maybe actually you should go now- go on, off you pop.

So, for the rest of us... try and stay with it without reaching for the scissors:


LESSONS ABOUT WIFE BEATING AT FIVE: IN THE WEEK HARRIET HARMAN TAKES CHARGE, YET ANOTHER FEMINIST INITIATIVE
(wtf??? sorry, I'll keep quiet)

James Slack

Pupils as young as five will be taught about the evils of 'wife beating'(1) and the need to form healthy relationships.

The lessons are part of a controversial (2) drive, unveiled today, to reduce violence against women and young girls.

They will include teaching boys that they must not beat their partners or any other female.

Healthy relationships: Harriet Harman, pictured yesterday getting her nails painted at a youth club, wants women and girls to feel safer (3)

Last night, critics warned that ministers are cramming the already over-stuffed National Curriculum with lessons that should be taught in the home or in the community.

Others say the plan is part of the feminist agenda led by Harriet Harman in her role as Equalities Minister.

They pointed out the new classes will not cover violence against men (4), who are far more likely to be the victims of violent crime.

In the past few days alone, Miss Harman has blamed men for the banking crisis, and suggested the Labour Party should always have a female in one of its top two posts.

Miss Harman was due to be involved in its launch, before becoming embroiled in a Whitehall row over rape laws...

Feminist agenda: Under controversial plans, schoolboys will be taught not to beat their partners or any other female (5)

The most eye-catching proposal (6) in the document is the one to force schools to introduce statutory lessons in 'educating children and young people about healthy, nonviolent relationships'...

Margaret Morrissey, of family lobby group ParentsOutloud...added: 'I do not really want my youngster to be indoctrinated with these things.(7)...

In a document peppered with the language of Miss Harman's equalities-agenda, the Government says the first ever Violence Against Women and Girl s strategy is in production by departments across Whitehall, and will be published this autumn

It declares: 'Our vision is a society where women and girls feel safe and confident in their homes and communities so that they can develop fully, live freely, contribute to society, and prosper in their daily lives. We want to overcome women's and girls' fear of crime and the gender-based violence that they experience.'(8)

As well as the lessons, the already stretched Health Service (9) has been ordered to conduct studies into how it can improve treatment of women at risk of violence, and police must carry out a review of domestic violence incidents.

I've edited the 'best bits' so if you can manage it here's the full story.

I wanted to do a blog post 'in defence of Harriet Harman' or along those lines recently. When looking through her interviews, apart from perhaps one line she could have phrased slightly better, I couldn't honestly find the militant feminism and the seeds of pure hatred for half the population she was meant to have left in the dusty trail behind her this weekend.

Anyway, I'm a fan of Harriet. I said it on Twitter and I'll say it again here. I've met her quite a few times (some less embarassing than others - but that's for another day) and she's a charming, strong woman who I have bucketloads of respect for.
Similarly, it is no secret that someone with a blog such as this, and of the political persuasion that I am, is no fan of the Daily Mail. I'm not. But today's headline was one of the worst I've ever seen, not infuriating, not laughable, but downright frightening. The hatred of Ms Harman is unjustified and reeks of the sexism she rallies against.

But quickly, let's just have a little look some of those gems, shall we?

(1) I'm just wondering why the inverted commas? Is there something not evil about wife beating? Or are we just angry at the term? Does it reek of that disgusting Equalities department and their 'PC -gonefreakingmad' agenda?

(2) controversial drive to reduce violence against women and young girls - controversial pourquoi? This whole bloody article is madness. I'm sorry. Is there anyone, anyone who would suggest educating young children about healthy/stable/non-violent relationships wasn't a good use of school time?

(3) does she? The cow.

(4) Yes men are more likely to be victims of violent crime. Domestic violence is a different story, 1 in 4 women are said to be victims of DV, it's one in 6 men (there are problems with statistics on DV- these are for single incidents, it is thought women are much more likely to be victims of recurrent DV & are also far more likely to die as a result of it (2 women a week). However, this initiative is hardly going to preach that it's OK to hit men. It will teach that violence is unacceptable in relationships. And that will, obviously, affect both men and women.

(5) I think that one speaks for itself.

(6) That is definitely not the most eye catching proposal in the document, and if it is, then we've just proved this article is a load of fear-mongering, sexist, Harman-hating ,bandwaggon jumping, tripe.

(7) 'Indoctrinated' ????!!!!!! with respect for women? You are a very, very, silly person Madam, with very, very scary views.

(8) Does anyone else see a problem with that?

(9) I think when a health service like ours cannot afford to invest in keeping women safe, confident and alive, it will be the day our moral authority, that the NHS affords us, disappears.

So that's all I have to say on this crud. If you'd like to vote on whether this is a good initiative (The Mail would like you to say no, in case it wasn't obvious)


Oh and keep up the good work Harriet, with a policy-hungry opposition and some government departments a little too scared to implement some needed change at the moment for fear of the Dacre-diss, we need some courage. It's refreshing. And for anyone who thinks politicians were boring, I give you...Ms Harman. Thank you and good night.