Image via theguardian.com
During the evening of Saturday 30th November 2013, the War on Welfare petition reached its target of 100,000 signatures which means that the backbench Business Committee will consider if the systematic punishment of people in need of most support is worthy of a debate in the House of Commons. It is an indication of just how vile this coalition government is and how ineffectual the opposition has become, that it requires a petition to secure half a chance of a possibility that some sort of scrutiny of callous, vindictive and brutal oppression might or might not take place.
The WOW e-petition was created by comedian and disability rights activist Francesca Martinez and calls for a meaningful assessment of the effects that abandoning any pretence at humanity, or “Welfare Reform” as the vile coalition government prefer to style it, will have on sick and disabled people, their families and their carers. So rapid has the descent into venality been, that it is necessary for the petitioners to also request (more…)
Image via News of the World (So sue me)
When rummaging in the dustbins of hypocrisy, it is always worth remembering that there is a sliding scale of double-standards, double-talk, double-crossing, double-speak and double-trouble.
We should first discard criminal hypocrisy as that is a matter for the justice system and Her Majesties Prison Service. As every responsible blogger knows, any comment regarding current legal proceedings that could be prejudicial to a safe conviction or acquittal can attract a charge of contempt of court and is best left well alone. Easier pickings can be had by ridiculing ignorant hypocrisy; undoubtedly brought about by selective memory loss, an astonishing lack of self-awareness or, more usually, crass stupidity. There is no finer example of an abject lack of irony than (more…)
Screen grab via BBC parliament
Imagine the managers of Manchester United and Chelsea deciding before a vital cup tie to play ten against ten and not field any goalkeepers. The resulting goal fest might delight match sponsors and broadcast sports media but the fixture could not under the current FA rules, be described as a game of football. As ridiculous as this appears, it is a common procedure in what is laughingly known as parliamentary democracy.
On Tuesday, the parliamentary Labour Party called an Opposition Day debate on Housing Benefit in an attempt to kick into touch the utterly vile and pernicious Bedroom Tax; a sanction designed specifically to punish people for being poor, vulnerable and disabled. As commendable and well-intentioned this enterprise by Labour might be, it was not considered an important enough issue to impose a three line whip and so the pairing system of House of Commons voting allowed MPs to be absent as long as an opposing MP wanted a day off as well. Out of a total of 650 elected representatives, 478 turned up to vote leaving 172 otherwise engaged and able to claim that the “pairing system” ensured that their potential vote was meaningless. (more…)
Image via walsall-people.co.uk
It has been brought to my attention that an article recently published on this blog contains an inaccuracy that requires some sort of apology, apparently.
Due to an unfortunate oversight, a trivial snippet of information was allowed to be included in the piece which, on reflection, might suggest in some way given a certain interpretation taken completely out of context and manipulated beyond recognition viz-a-viz evidential credence and factual credibility by certain dark forces wishing to discredit me, might or might not without prejudice, actually be true or not as the case may be.
The minor discrepancy is so insignificant that it hardly warrants a second thought but my experienced and very expensive legal advisors inform me that under new legislation designed to curb free speech and silence the inalienable right to make stuff up about people, some form of correction is expected. Let me state categorically that I am not responsible for this minor lapse in the usually impeccable and irreproachable ethical standards of this publication. In fact, after learning of this inconsequential distraction upon my return from a holiday in Dubai, I replaced my entire team of researchers and reported my correspondents, political editors, sub-editors, editors and managing editors to the local constabulary. (more…)
Image via the Mainly Fail
With the utmost sincerity, I would like to publicly thank the Right Honourable Grant V Shapps MP, Conservative Party Chairman and the member for Welwyn Hatfield.
As a consummate politician, polymath and all-round Renaissance man, Mr Shapps might be a minister without portfolio but he does possess an impressive portfolio of business interests outside parliament and a cunning array of associated personas. It would be a display of breath taking hypocrisy for an anonymous blogger to criticise a senior public servant for concealing his or her identity for financial gain but there is a subtle difference between anonymity and impersonation which, in law, can be crucial. Pretending to be a polypropylene river horse does not exempt a blogger from legislation regarding defamation, slander, libel and incitement to violence or hatred. Pretending to be a “real” person can result in more complex litigation. (more…)