Mary Queen of Scots had her head chopped off....

I'm intrigued by Christine Grahame's call for the remains of Mary, Queen of Scots to be repatriated to Scotland from their current resting place of Westminster Abbey.

I can understand this opinion - after all Mary was Queen of Scots, she was murdered in England and it seems tactless to keep her remains in England. However Mary requested in her will that she be buried in France and her son asked for her to be buried at Westminster Abbey. So who gets to decide her fate now?

I would always say that a person's last wishes should be respected so really if she is to be moved it should be to France, however family wishes are also important. So if we take her son's wishes into account then she should stay where she is.

I can see the flip side though - after all these years and with a figure of national and religious importance there are more important considerations than personal wishes.

I'm not convinced. Someone's resting place is quite a sacred consideration - I'm not sure that it should be changed for political purposes. But I am open to be persuaded otherwise.

Why does Brown's disability matter?

I'm not a fan of Gordon Brown. While I think he is generally a good man with good intentions I don't think he has the ability to run the country well. Having said that there's few if any on the Labour benches who do have that ability. There are also rumours about his mental suitability for the job and if the rumours are based on fact rather than vitriol then that would be of real concern.

I found this article in today's Telegraph distasteful in the extreme - snarkily pointing out that his physical disability is getting worse and that assistance such as large fonts in printed and email texts is now needed. The implication - though never said - is that if he is becoming increasingly blind he can't do the job. Nonsense. He can't do the job because he's a leftie who doesn't have the right policies. Frankly whether he receives emails in size 12 or size 36 font is completely irrelevant to his ability to do the job.

If he is becoming more blind as the years go on then it's only right that changes are made to assist him with his work - I would expect it in mine. A blind Prime Minister doesn't bother me in the slightest. A media which heaps scorn on someone because of their disability does.

Stop pandering to the lowest common denominator

The news today that nine universities in England are looking at offering interviews to "disadvantaged" youngsters even if their grades don't merit it annoys me immensely. Why should people who don't achieve the necessary results be offered interviews? It patronises them and it insults the students who have achieved the grades needed.

It also, much more damagingly, helps to perpetuate the system we have at the moment where failing schools (and for that read bad teachers) are allowed to thrive happy in the knowledge that somewhere further up the system someone will bail them out. I went to school in a deprived area and as far as I know only two students in my year went to university. That's not to say that everyone at my school was stupid but we had no encouragement and no support from 90% of the teaching staff. It was a fairly common thing to be told "No-one from this area will amount to anything" or "You'll never achieve anything". When we had our discussion - with the school librarian - about university she gave the same answer to everyone. Do an English degree. So when I asked about medicine her answer was "Do an English degree."

Pupils from disadvantaged areas don't need patronising, they don't need false methods of entry into university. They need good schools and strong teachers. They need teachers who tell them they won't amount to anything to be sacked. They need the first step to be the right one, not the final step to be a muddle.

Musings from the journey from hell

Have just endured a rubbish hour on a South West Trains journey from Waterloo home and as I was standing and couldn't nod off so I had to think.   Always a dangerous thing to do.

Why does a fatality at Surbiton so badly affect trains which go nowhere near Surbiton?

Why, on a busy train, is it always the men sitting and the women standing?  I don't expect men to give up their seats for me, but nor do I expect to be sent spinning as men rush past me for the free seats.  

Do people understand the concept of the Olympics? A couple were speaking about the opening ceremony (which I've still to see) and complained that each Olympic host city was trying to outdo the previous city?  Apparently the Olympics isn't about competition.

In the event of everything going so wrong on the trains (ie train leaving an hour late with 100 people standing per carriage) does the guard really have to keep to his idiotic script?  "On behalf of South West Trains I would like to wish you a pleasant journey".  Oh piss off.

Rant over - I feel much better now.  But if anyone has the answers to the above questions please let me know.

Foolish and Inappropriate? Only the Decision!

So Councillor Jahangir Hanif has been suspended from the SNP for firing a gun two and half years ago in Pakistan. According to some nameless, presumably unelected, spokesman his behaviour was "foolish and inappropriate".

Oh do bugger off with your puritanical, holier than thou stupidity. As far as you know the man broke no laws, has been charged with no offence, presents no danger to the public and has never fired a gun in Scotland. So why has he been suspended? Because you're spineless cowards afraid of the bad publicity of an ethnic minority councillor being seen with a gun. Grow up.

And as for foolish and inappropriate? Getting drunk and being thrown into a police cell to cool off for a few hours is a pretty bloody stupid thing to do. But was Kenny MacAskill suspended from the SNP? Hell no - he's now telling us how much we're allowed to drink, when we're allowed to drink it and how much we have to pay for our booze.

This whole incident is nothing more than a gutless show of spin being more important than any sort of reasoned consideration.

Hooray for the Olympics

I love the Olympics. I'm not a huge sports fan - I like to watch Wimbledon, but don't watch other tennis tournaments very often. I like cricket but again don't watch it too often. I love Celtic and want them to win every match they play but don't care if I never see them. I really love the Olympics. I watch the Olympics religiously, sports I would normally mock I get caught up in drama of - synchronised swimming, speed walking, beach volleyball, you name it I love watching them.

I also love the idea of the Olympics. The training for so long to have the honour of competing for your nation, the glory of standing on the top step and being awarded the gold medal. As for "athletes of the world unite" - I cry. I believe in the Olympic ideal, I believe that if you strip away the craziness and the drugs cheats and the over-commercialisation there is still a very pure message about hard work, dedication and honest competition. Maybe I'm just a schmuck but for me the next few weeks will be pure bliss and probably lots of tears too.

There is a lot to say about the wisdom of awarding the Olympics to a nation with such a poor human rights record as China, one which is complicit in an on-going genocide and which doesn't allow its own citizens freedom of religion, thought or speech. I'm not sure this is the weekend to do it.

Good luck to all the competitors, especially Team GB (and for their cracking stand on Darfur Team USA). I'll be watching and loving every minute of it.

Go Team USA

While I will of course be supporting Team GB in the Olympics my respect for Team USA has just gone up 100-fold. Despite athletes being begged not to make political statements, Team USA have made a powerful, meaningful and best of all peaceful statement about China's support for the Sudanese government by appointing a former Darfuri refugee, Lopez Lomong as their flag-bearer tomorrow.

Well done Team USA for highlighting China's appalling position on the genocide in Darfur. I hope that if Britain doesn't come top of the medal table you do.

Why No Front Page For Michael Causer?

It seems like every day there's another murdered teenager on the front page of the newspapers. Young boys stabbed to death by other young boys have dominated the news for weeks now. We're told that "something must be done!" about it.

On Saturday an 18 year old boy, Michael Causer, died in hospital a week after receiving serious head injuries in what police are describing as a homophobic attack, yet a glance through the newspapers this morning has no sign of it. Is it because he wasn't stabbed to death, therefore it isn't a fashionable crime or is it because Michael came from Liverpool and well, we expect that kind of behaviour up there?

Or maybe it's because Michael was a young gay man and homophobic crimes are really quite acceptable. If a young black man had been beaten to death it would have been front page news, and rightly so. But not for Michael. All crime is an act of hatred but we also have crimes motivated by nothing but hatred of the victim because of their race, religion, sexuality or disability. It isn't enough just to fight crime, we have to recognise where hate crime is taking place and face it head on. Admit that it is going on and work on ways to educate people about our differences and challenge them to accept the differences as a good thing rather than as an excuse to attack others.

Please don't let Michael Causer's death go unreported and unknown. He and every other victim of homophobic hate crime (and every other victim of hate crime) deserve better than to be ignored in favour of more "newsworthy" crimes.

Tory MPs Reading List

I'm slightly bemused by the story in today's Sunday Telegraph about Tory MPs being given a reading list designed to make them better MPs.  A more pretentious bunch of claptrap I've never come across.  First of all, who has the right to tell their sub-ordinates what they have to do on holiday?  If my boss gave me a list of 38 work-related books to read on my fortnight on the beach I think I'd tell her to get stuffed.  

And the books on the list aren't exactly fun frolics.  Muqtada al-Sadr and the fall of Iraq, or 1948: The First Arab Israeli War don't quite lend themselves to a poolside and a pina colada.  Why do we insist that MPs must always be serious?  Why can't they get away from work for a couple of weeks when they are on holiday?  Would my MP be less good at his job if he read the latest John Grisham or Jilly Cooper or Alexander McCall Smith on holiday rather than the historical reading list they've been given?  Of course not.  Nor will he become a better constituency MP by reading about Lloyd George's women.  Of course, if these are the books that individuals want to read then by all means of course they should.

And we're always told that the long recesses aren't all holiday, that MPs work just as hard in their constituencies during recess as they do in Parliament during session.  So are they expected to read these 38 books in their two/three week holiday?  I'm a pretty voracious reader but even on the laziest of holidays I only average one book a day.  So what will they be losing to read this list?  Precious and deserved time with their families or time with their constituents?  I'd rather they had both.

I also want a governing party that respects the rights of individuals to choose their own leisure activities and how to lead their own lives.  If David Cameron makes it clear he can't trust his own MPs then what hope have the rest of us got?

So - What Next?

As the dust begins to settle (and it is settling already) the parties all have to look at their next moves. Immediate concerns for the SNP will be getting John Mason working hard as an MP - difficult to do when the House has shut down for the summer. It will take at least until after recess before he has any help whatsoever in terms of money (after all he's not technically a Member of Parliament until he has been sworn in, so no allowances) but not hitting the ground running is not an option.

And there's the Baillieston by-election to think about too with John Mason having resigned already. Is there a candidate in place? Is there a suitable candidate in place? The SNP will need to select someone who can fill John's shoes as a first-rate councillor. And then get campaigning immediately. No rest for the winners here.

As I said in my post yesterday they also need to get a good answer to the question of what the policy is in the event of a failed referendum campaign.

As for Labour - well, they've got to select their Parliamentary candidate pretty sharpish. Theoretically they should take this seat back, even if they lose the General Election but they won't win it by just assuming it will come back to them. If the rumours about their lack of canvass data is true - and the fact they couldn't get their vote out would imply they were - they need to be spending the next couple of years knocking on every door in the constituency. Twice. And I'm sure MPs in other "safe seats" will be wanting to know if they need to do the same, the answer's yes.

They also need to treat the council by-election with a lot of respect. They could win it, although I'm not convinced. This is one election where I think that candidate selection will matter a lot. As will an early start.

As for the others, well the Lib Dems need to sort themselves out a leader and rethink their by-election strategy. This was a pretty shocking performance from them. The Tories - more of the same from them would be good. They were gutsy, spirited and put up a good show in the face of public antipathy and a major squeeze operation. Solidarity and the SSP need to ask if they still have a place in Scottish politics. Between them they were less popular than the Conservative candidate. In the East End of Glasgow. The writing's on the wall.

So an interesting night, but the story didn't end at 2am. There's still a lot more fights to be had in the East End over the next few weeks. Stay tuned.

Predictions, predictions, predictions

Well apart from the turnout, winning party and majority my predictions were totally spot on. I'm giving up the prediction lark.

Until the next time that is.....

Election Day Campaign Review

So it's finally election day and early accounts indicate that its a slow one. Time for a totally unscientific campaign review and a bold, but probably flawed prediction. Living in Surrey I've not been on the ground in the campaign so am relying on blogs, news coverage, snatched bits of gossip and my own opinions to make these judgments.

SNP

Started brilliantly and captured the Big Mo early on. Picked a good, local, popular candidate - then did their level-best to stop him speaking in case he was a bit off-message. It was easy for Labour to attack the campaign as another Salmond ego-trip as he spoke more than the candidate. Ultimately though that won't make a huge difference as people like to hear from the party leaders and many people in the area know John Mason anyway.

The Party needs to get a better answer to the question about what they'll do if the referendum on independence goes against them.

A good, solid campaign. 8/10

Labour

Dear God - how bad was the start of this campaign? They failed to abide by the first rule of elections - if you don't have a candidate don't call an election. The crucial first weekend was a disaster which has tainted the rest of the campaign by allowing the SNP to grab the momentum then run with it. When they selected their fourth/fifth/nineteenth choice candidate it was a good one and that helped to steady the ship. There have been a few gaffes and bad news stories since but nothing that will matter to people outside politics.

Before Mags Curran 0/10
After Mags Curran 6.5/10

Lib Dems

Have been anonymous, bland and focussed only on the fire station, admittedly a damn good local issue. Don't rate their campaign or their chances of keeping third spot.

Dull dull dull 4/10

Conservatives

A good show in a seat they will never even have a sniff of winning. A good candidate and a well liked Scottish leader have given the Tories more airtime and control of the agenda than is really their right. Will still get a kicking, but a respectable one and could possibly overtake the Lib Dems into third.

Punching above their East End weight 7/10

The others

Well, not being in the constituency there's not much to see or say. Looks like the SSP and Solidarity may finally wipe each other out of any sort of relevance. Expect the Greens to come fifth.

Prediction

Low poll of about 31% with Labour just holding on by about 1000. Conservatives to come third and everyone below them to lose their deposit. I expect everyone to be back in Baillieston in about 8 months time as Margaret steps down and Steven Purcell goes for his place in Holyrood, lining up a leadership bid as the next hapless Labour leader falls by the wayside.

There has been no number-crunching, no inside information, nothing but gut feeling so expect this prediction to be utterly wrong. :-)

Nailing the Lie

How often have we heard the assertion "If you're innocent you've got nothing to fear"? Reassuring us that ID cards, biometric tracking, CCTV everywhere and 42 days dentention won't affect anyone who isn't guilty of some evil plot against the state. We're being lulled into a false sense of security, safe in the knowledge that its only other people who will lose their civil liberties and not us.


Hopefully this story will cause just a few more people to ask questions about the use of legislation in a frightening and dangerous manner. Because a woman had a mixed race child she was accused of trafficking him. Then because she stood up for herself she was detained under the Terrorism Act - you know the one that only the guilty will be affected by. The officer in question has been removed from the particular duty and Kent Police have paid compensation - both good - but the fact remains that this family were targeted because the legislation and the power to curb the rights of the British public exists for police officers and authority figures to use as they damn well like.

But don't worry folks - if you've got nothing to hide then you've got nothing to worry about.

Why Shouldn't MPs Holiday Abroad?

I've been meaning to blog about this for a few days but an entry on Tom Harris MP's fab blog and an article by Mayor Bo-Jo in the Telegraph brought it back to mind.

In all of the great witch-hunt of MPs over expenses one casualty seems to be their right to choose a family holiday abroad. The UK party leaders are falling over themselves to show their green/caring/committed to UK/thrifty credentials by holidaying in the UK and I'm sure the snippy comments will come in soon about fat cat Cabinet Ministers sunning themselves while catastrophe X happens.

But really, it's none of our business where anyone goes on holiday. I don't expect my boss to get snippy about my holiday destination or anyone who uses the services of my workplace to complain that I'm not holidaying in the UK, so why should we care where our MPs go with their families on holiday? Every family is entitled to go away and relax together and it is up to them where they go. Why should they have to justify it to their purient constituents - or worse a purient newspaper? The vast majority of MPs (from all parties) actually work very hard and face a lot of unneccessary criticism for the actions of some who are playing the system in an underhand manner. Let's not drive good people out of an important job just because they're not prepared to play our cynical games.

MPs have a tough job - let them enjoy their holidays.

Mamma Mia - The Review

Just come back from Mamma Mia - the movie not the stage show.  

It was stupid, camp, with ropey singing - really Pierce Brosnan can sing nane and Colin Firth isnae much better.  I loved it.  Loved it.  Loved it.  The campness was delicious, the action was fantastically fun, the scenery was gorgeous (I have to go to Greece!), the acting was much better than the singing and it was just fantastic.

The dodgy singing is totally forgivable as its all done with great humour.  You should go see it.  As soon as possible.

Do they never learn?

Following the failed £120 bribe at the time of the Crewe and Nantwich by-election, the government is at it again.

A postponement of the 2p fuel duty increase has been announced. Yet again in the middle of a tricky by-election. Do Gordon Bown and Alistair Darling think we are mugs? Taxes are surely set for a reason - the economic well being of the country. If it's ok to change them every time the government looks like losing a seat in the House of Commons it means it wasn't necessary. If the revenue was needed then how is going to be replaced?

The government should stop trying to bribe the electors and treating us like fools. Hopefully it will backfire in Glasgow East in an even more spectacular fashion than in Crewe and Nantwich.

Speak up - or shut up

I've been trying to steer clear (mostly) of the Glasgow East by-election. My dad is a councillor in the constituency and I regard Davena Rankin as an old mate so I don't want to say anything that would annoy either of them. But I'm intrigued by the news of Dorothy-Grace Elder having a pop at SNP candidate John Mason. Unfortunately I don't have a link to the article but Kezia Dugdale's blog has reproduced it. Naturally Kezia and labour people love it. Nats aren't so keen. Even Lib Dems have stepped in.

If (and I'm relying on Kezia reproducing the article faithfully) Dorothy-Grace did say "Facing a feisty woman will be the last thing this man wants. He has failed to accept a woman in politics in the past" this is an allegation which should be taken seriously. Sexism and bullying can't be tolerated in any sphere of public life and if she has evidence of this then she should bring it forward and let people judge it.

If, as I suspect, this is a case of two people not liking each other then she should admit it, accept that it happens and say that her comments are based on personal antipathy rather than any sort of concern about John Mason's ability to do the job properly.

Dorothy-Grace Elder shouldn't hide behind her newspaper column. If she has evidence she has to present it, otherwise she has to shut up and stop dealing in mean gossip and innuendo.

The Cold Wet Nose Show

Darren and I - along with some friends - will be attending the Cold Wet Nose Show tomorrow where thousands of people will be bringing their dogs. Darren will be taking action shots of the dogs and I'll be printing and selling them on site for the bargain price of £10 each - buy 2 get the 3rd free.

We'll also be offering gift items such as mugs, mousemats, t-shirts, key-rings and coasters.

The show promises to be a great day out - do pop along and see us if you're attending.

I WILL Stop Wasting Food - Maybe

I'm intrigued by Gordon Brown's latest proclamation that we should all stop wasting food. I agree with him - food wastage is a big problem and I'm as guilty as the next person. If not more so. It's not that I throw away perfectly good food. It's that I allow food to go off and then throw it out. I try to plan my menus and buy my food in advance. Store it properly. All that carry on. It all goes wrong when I get home from work at night. Sometimes, in fact a lot of the time, I get home and the last thing I can be bothered doing is peeling and chopping and making something sensible with the nice fresh food I've bought.

I don't think I'm alone in this one. I think in many households time in the evening is scarce and unless cooking is a particularly pleasurable activity it's something that doesn't become a priority. Relaxing, catching up with your partner's day, doing other housework all take precedence. And as a consequence we don't make that nice risotto we had bought fresh veggies for. We grab a snack or a takeaway.

The average British worker has a 45 minute commute and we work longer hours, have fewer holidays and a lower standard of living than our European neighbours. Is it any wonder we're knackered and can't be bothered cooking?

I get that it's wrong to waste food. I understand that we are putting pressure on our bank accounts and the environment by buying food we don't use, but frankly I don't want to be patronised by a man who has a stay-at-home wife, an army of staff, official dinners prepared for him and the ability to eat out every night at taxpayers' expenses without producing a receipt telling me where I'm going wrong in life. Yet another example of Government interference at its most insidious.

A Tricky By-Election

The news that there will soon be a by-election in Glasgow East has sent many of my political friends into a frenzy of excitement.

On the face of it this is a rock-solid Labour seat. The last majority was 13,507 and the SNP need a 22% swing to capture it. Normally a swing of that magnitude would be just that little bit impossible at a General Election - but by-elections are something different. The expectation, given Labour's woes, will surely be that the SNP will pull off a stunning victory.

But it won't be that easy - rumours are swirling that the candidate will be Elaine C. Smith. Where does that leave the already selected candidate Lachie MacNeill. And if Lachie MacNeill is the candidate - does he have the experience, knowledge and abilities for such a high-profile campaign? I don't know Lachie so wouldn't like to say but it tends to be that the best candidate to put up a good fight in an unwinnable seat is not always be the best person to take it on to win it in the spotlight of a media frenzy. Will Elaine C. Smith - a woman whose own "Chairities and Politics" page on her website doesn't mention independence go down well with the local members?

As for Labour - they really are in trouble. Anything except a win for them will be a disaster. Everyone knows that, but do they have the stomach for such a battle? Or will the campaign for a new Scottish leader overshadow everything else?

And the Conservatives? Well everyone knows they won't win Glasgow East. In 2005 their share of the vote was 6.9%. The campaign team from Crewe and Henley won't be troubling themselves on the doors of the East End. But the last story that David Cameron wants is the wheels coming off the election machine which is doing so well. A squeezed vote and lost deposit (likely outcome surely?) will mean that one story to come out of the by-election is that the Conservatives are still unwelcome in Scotland, that the Crewe vote wasn't a sign of making genuine and sustainable progress in Labour's heartlands - it was nothing more than a protest vote. If Labour lose they will want to deflect some of the pain, and this will be the easiest (and cheapest) way to do it. So the Conservatives will be looking to hold their share of the vote - or even increase it - and probably overtake the Lib Dems for third place. And the Lib Dems? Well they will want to stop the rot of Crewe and Henley so I imagine there will be an interesting - if irrelevant - scrap for third place.

If Labour win, even by the tiniest majority, it will be touted as a major success and defeat for the SNP. If the SNP win it will undoubtedly be a great victory but will it come at cost of upset members? The Conservatives could see a grinding halt to their relentless march to the next general election and the Lib Dems could just slide further into obscurity.

Its a tricky by-election for every party which of course should make for great viewing for those of us not involved.