You know you're getting old...

When you're watching Father of the Bride on the Sky Plus box, and you're looking at the wedding from the father's point of view.

Might have had something to do with the gorgeous eight month old baby on my knee at the time.

You know you're settling into Brentwood....

It's been the end of an exhausting fortnight - I went over to Ireland for my brother's wedding, returned home last Monday only to have to go straight back to Ireland for my grandmother's funeral (I actually got the call as the boat was pulling out of Dublin Bay). Home again for a couple of days, before heading up to my grandmother's house for a night.

And the realisation I was finally, finally settling into the area as we pulled off the M25 onto the A12... I was thinking "finally, we're home".

Education....

I was a bit puzzled by the stupidity displayed by Caroline Flint in her Newsnight video:



But according to her Wikipedia page she has a "BA (Hons) in American Literature and History combined with Film Studies from the University of East Anglia."

I'm not puzzled any more.

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?