UKIP and 42 days

The recent UKIP policy document on Criminal Justice Policy says

We regard detention without trial as in improper state of affair

That would explain Bob Spink, UKIP's only MP support for the government in last night's vote to extend the period for locking up terrorist suspects for 42 days without trial.

Watching Prime Minister's questions last night - I couldn't believe that Gordon Brown had the cheek to lecture the Conservatives on the risks of terrorism. It was clear which side won the argument - sadly, they lost the vote because the Prime Minister saw fit to maintain the old Irish tradition of bribing MPs (or TDs) to vote with the government in exchange for supplying their constituencies with cash.

Irony....

So, I'm spending a few minutes glancing through Hansard from the early days of the online archives, and I found this gem from Defence questions:

Mr. Darling : To ask the Secretary of State for Defence if he has any plans to strengthen the security of sensitive defence computer systems.

Mr. Archie Hamilton : Yes. For security reasons I am not prepared to disclose details.

Mr. Darling : Can the Minister tell us whether British defence computer systems have been interfered with? Can Britain's defence computer system be infiltrated as happened in the United States when computer hackers spread a virus in the system and so compromised defence? The Minister sounds a little complacent, as if he is seeking to hide behind a shroud of secrecy. Will he answer my question and give the House the assurances it needs?

Isn't it somehow ironic that years later, Mr Darling was the Chancellor when HMRC managed to lose the details of 26 million people?

But who chose them in the first place.....

Tim Worstall points out (rightly) that the MEP Tom Wise, who was the subject of a rather damning report in the News of the World about MEPs "riding the gravy train" hasn't been a member of UKIP for some time. Ashley Mote, the MEP who was sentenced to nine months in jail for benefits fraud and attempted to avoid prosecution by claiming immunity as an MEP, had the whip removed by UKIP within weeks of his election. As for Robert Kilroy Silk, I'm sure that UKIP would feel the less said, the better. In 2004, UKIP had 12 MEPs elected. In other words, they've lost 25% of their elected representatives, mostly under a cloud (and Godfrey Bloom isn't exactly a walking advertisment for a modern political party either).

This does rather beg the question though - what does it say about the party that thought the three of them were fit to nominated in the first place?

It's called democracy, dammit.

Two recent political stories make me wonder about how democracy in this country is going to shake out over the next few years.

While the likes of Iain Dale are correct in pointing out that whatever else it is, Boris Johnson's election is not a bad day for democracy, there are a couple of other stories that indicate other things might be.

Take for instance the news that Stuart Wheeler has successfully obtained a judicial review of the government's decision not to hold a referendum on the European Constitutional/Review Treaty. While it would be rather entertaining seeing Gordon Brown getting slapped down by the courts - and why not, everyone else is giving him a good kicking at the moment so it's only fair the judges should have a turn - I'm very uncomfortable with the idea that a court can presume it might even have the power to strike down parliamentary legislation on the basis of an election promise. (Side note to the likes of the Devil's Kitchen complaining about Boris banning booze on the Tube - it was in his manifesto. You don't get to cheer when Gordon gets a shoeing over failure to keep his election promises, and simultaneously complain when Boris keeps his - at least be consistent).

The other issue that concerns me even more is the report in last night's the London Paper about the anti BNP protest at City Hall yesterday - with the paper reporting one protestor as saying their aim was to "force" Richard Barnbrook "out of office". I loathe the BNP - and I have little time for any party that would refuse to have my son or daughter as a member simply because of the colour of their skin. However, I am equally uncomfortable with the idea that in a democracy we should seek to "force" someone who was democratically elected out of their office simply because we find their politics odious. Apart from the fact it will simply harden the hearts of those who voted for the BNP as a protest vote (the whole "anti political establishment" mentality can only be reinforced by this kind of thing), the democratic solution is to wait four years and then campaign hard to get rid of him (either that or change the system so that minority parties find it harder to gain Assembly seats - just like Westminster! I some how think the Greens might not like that though!) I also suspect that the people protesting this would be the same people who defended Ken's association with Sheikh Qaradawi on the grounds he was a moderate next to those who were so disenfranchised they took to blowing up the Tube. Hows that for double standards - why is associating with those who would behead homosexuals better than associating with unpleasant racists who advocate the voluntary "repatriation" of any one with dark skin?

10% tax rates

Haven't been blogging for a while due to the recent birth of my daughter.

I meant to blog last week about the evilness of the CBeebies controller in taking "In the Night Garden" out of the bedtime (and in the week when the clocks went forward as well - moron!)

However, the bigger bunch of morons are the Labour backbenchers. Have cheered and cheered when Gordon Brown announced the rate cut from 22% to 20% - they are now, a year later complaining about the fact he's partly funding it by abolishing the 10% band. So it was okay when it got good headlines last year, but now it's actually going to hurt people, they are complaining. Typical!

The West Wing and Obama

A lot of bloggers have been pointing out that the similarities between Barack Obama and Matthew Santos, and how the story looks so familiar (brokered convention, Republican candidate mistrusted by his own base, up against a party insider in the primaries etc). A number of reports even comment on how the "Obama candidate" won.

Just a piece of advice to whoever Obama might chose as his potential running mate - make sure you're in good health. Sadly, John Spencer, who played Leo McGarry who Matt Santos chose as his running mater, died while filming the final season of the West Wing - just before he would have been due to start filming the climax of the election campaign. West Wing executive producer Lawrence O'Donnell has suggested the original plan was for the Republican to win it, but the death of John Spencer forced a rewrite.

Though am I being too nasty in suggesting that maybe that could be the best reason for picking Hillary?

Beer and water

They are at it again. This morning I caught an interview with some idiot on the Today programme on the subject of binge drinking and young people - I think said idiot was Kevin Barron MP, but I'm not 100% sure. Said idiot was however advocating increasing the taxes on booze and complaining that water in the supermarkets is more expensive than lager.

I call the guy an idiot for a number of reasons:

1. It is simply idiotic to suggest that the reason kids are getting drunk is because water is more expensive, which is what is being implied by this comparison.
2. It is also untrue. The last time I bought Sainsbury's basic water, both still and sparkling 1.5 litre bottles cost 18p. The Sainsbury's basic lager was 22p for what (I think) was a 0.5 litre can. So in fact it would appear that you can by buy three times as much water for 4p less.
3. Why should I pay more taxes on something because the government is incapable of enforcing its own legislation.

I am getting fed up of the lie - for that's what it is, a lie - that supermarkets are charging more for water than for beer, and that being used as a justification for increasing taxes. Politicans should maybe go and do some research before repeating it (after all, it should take a reasonably bright young researcher on 22k a year about five minutes in Sainsburys to realise it's not true).

Of course expensive waters like Perrier cost more than cheap lager, but expensive beer may cost more than cheap wine.