We should not forget who started it

I am at work and so not able to listen to this discussion on 5 Live, but I would be interested to know the reasons why Independent columnist Owen Jones thinks private sector pensions are currently lower than public sector ones.

The reverse was the case in the 1990s - British private sector pensions had a good reputation around the world and the United Kingdom was cited as one of the few western nations to get their long-term pension provision on a sound footing.

This changed with the Gordon Brown on-going tax raids on private pensions.  He seems to have made a cynical decision that there were relatively few votes for New Labour among people relying on private pension funds.  And so people with private pensions became a target and the sector was decimated.

Now the Coalition seems to have decided that there are few votes for them among public sector workers and so they can safely target them for cuts without any electoral repercussions.

Both strategies are reprehensible, but we should not forget who started it.

For the Labour party to complain about Coalition attacks on the public sector is a bit like the city of Leipzig complaining about Bomber Harris.

David Cameron’s legacy

Interesting discussion on the Today programme this morning between James Naughtie, Lord Falconer and Lord Fowler discussing the Leveson enquiry.


Recent Prime Minister’s have become obsessed with their “legacy” as if they can decide in advance what posterity will decide about them.

In reality there can be no guarantee of a good reputation in history. Tony Blair’s legacy is already decided as British involvement in the Iraq war. John Major and Gordon Brown both have legacies of catastrophic economic failure and incompetence.

David Cameron’s legacy may well be the ending of the 30-year Murdoch hegemony over the British political process.

Perhaps he intended this, perhaps he didn’t. But he was the leader who ordered the Leveson inquiry into existence, bringing about the public “humbling” and legal taming of the Murdochs and their satraps. No other senior politician had the inclination or the courage to do this (apart from Vince Cable, and he lacked the self-control and effectiveness).

For this one act David Cameron deserves the gratitude of all of us.

Tra-la-la quips

Marina Hyde (who is perhaps the thinking person's Carole Malone) insinuated that the Rothschilds were giant lizards in an article in yesterday's Guardian.  In conspiracy theories (taken seriously by a surprisingly large number of people throughout history, including the German government 1933-45) "the Rothschilds" is code for Jewish world finance, "giant lizards" is a euphemism for Jewish world conspiracy.  It was all dressed up with her usual tra-la-la quips to imply she is actually trying to be ironic and satirising the conspiracy theorists.

Interestingly the giant lizards sentence has been deleted from the version of the article on the Guardian's website - an Orwellian example of "unspeak"?

Or an indication that the Guardian is beginning to realise this stuff is not funny?

http://www.guardian.co.uk/sport/2012/may/29/marina-hyde-olympics-kim-jong-un

I will dig out yesterday's newspaper from the wheelibin and photograph the article as it appeared in the newspaper complete with ironic anti-semiticism (assuming the paper is not smeared with food debris and other rubbish).

Update - 31st May

Have just pulled the newspaper out of the dustbin and reread it and there is no mention of giant lizards.   So I was wrong.  How stupid of me. 

Thank goodness no-one reads this blog.

Urtica dioica

In the enervating heat of the early evening urtica dioica or the common stinging nettle.

An untouchable plant.

Bluebells in the back ground.

Hereditary privilege

In a piece critical of the Diamond Jubilee on the Independent's website Rob Williams makes a repetitive call for the ending of hereditary privilege http://blogs.independent.co.uk/2012/05/29/a-jubilee-letter-from-a-republican-to-royalists/

Perhaps he would be more effective addressing the hereditary privilege in the Labour party?

As well as the Benn family (Tony Benn followed by son Hilary Benn), Stockton MP Dari Taylor’s father Daniel Jones was MP for Burnley from 1959 to 1983. Former chief whip Hilary Armstrong succeeded her father Ernest as MP for North West Durham. Ex-education secretary Estelle Morris is the daughter of former Manchester Openshaw MP Charles Morris and niece of former Manchester Wythenshawe MP Alf Morris. Greville Janner, MP for Leicester West from 1970 to 1997 is the son of Sir Barnett Janner, who was a Leicester MP from 1945 to 1970. Chorley MP Lindsay Hoyle is son of Doug, the former Warrington MP (these examples from http://labourlist.org/2009/08/its-time-to-end-labours-dynasties/ ).  This article was written before the last election but I am sure the current position is much the same.

Added 30th May:

We ought to add to this list Peter Mandelson whose grandfather was a Cabinet minister.

More generally, it is ironic that the small minority currently sounding off about a hereditary monarchy are perfectly happy to accept an increasingly hereditary Labour party.

Tony Blair appeared at the Leveson inquiry yesterday, provoking caustic comments in today's newspapers (and bilious invective on yesterday's social media).

The Labour Party in general and "the left" in particular seem keen to distance themselves from Tony Blair, forgetting that he was their creation and they must take ownership for everything he did.

How can the current Labour party disown Tony Blair and pretend he was nothing to do with them?

You often find Labour party members now referring to Tony Blair as a "tory".

This is itself a Tony Blair trick - he used to call the hard-line communists in Yeltsin's Russia "conservatives".

I hardly need to point out that Russian communists are not "conservatives" in the normal way we understand the word, nor can Tony Blair possibly be called a "tory" - except in an attempt by the left to deliberately obscure things and evade responsibility.

And when Tony Blair was in power the very people at the time urging us to vote Labour are the ones who are now pretending they were never really Blairites.

Lies upon lies upon lies.

Marmite

When I opened up one of my e-mail accounts this morning I saw this ad for Marmite.

On a golden throne the Marmite product displays the Union Jack while the national anthem "plays" in the background.

Yasmin Alibhai-Brown might dismiss this as mere sycophancy, but brands do not change themselves in this way (even the product name has been changed!) unless there are sound commercial reasons to do so.  This creative would have been tested and retested against a range of alternatives - including, possibly, some "stuff the Jubilee" versions.  The number of people involved, on both the client side and the agency side, in a campaign of this kind is huge.

18 million pots of Marmite are sold each year.

Marmite tends to be purchased by C2 families with children.

Yasmin Alibhai-Brown writes an anti-Royal piece in today's Independent

Spluttering with indignation, Yasmin Alibhai-Brown writes an anti-Royal piece in today's Independent.

She refers to democracy, but does not acknowledge the overwhelming democratic wish of the people to keep the present system intact.

Possibly she is out of touch on this subject, has not researched it properly, and is just voicing her prejudices.

The comments section below her article shows worrying examples of chav-hate ("Only the ignorant and under-educated part of the masses like royalty. But only because they're on TV and in the papers all the time. Just look at Peter Andre, an uneducated twit with an IQ that struggles to get into double figures. Very similar attributes as the royal family. That's why they like them.")

http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/commentators/yasmin-alibhai-brown/yasmin-alibhaibrown-the-case-for-a-republic-is-as-strong-now-as-it-has-always-been-7792583.html?origin=internalSearch

Have just watched Press Preview on Sky News.

Agnes Poirier, in her usual self-important way, tells us she is a republican (as if anyone is interested).

If she is so in favour of a republic why has she moved to the United Kingdom?

Working class Co-Op customers plan to celebrate the Royal event

Over the summer I thought I would keep a digital scrapbook of the way the Diamond Jubilee and the Olympics are being used in the media.

I will label these "Jubilympics" (from one of the funniest episodes of the comedy Twenty-Twelve).

Above:  today I am going to look at the latest Co-Op magazine which features bunting on the cover, a promise of recipes for the "Jubilee party feast" and, in the lower left-hand corner, an illustration of "fun Union Jack cupcakes".

Note the subtle red white and blue colours of the cover - very subliminal.

The Co-Op is, as the name implies, a working-class co-operative.  More than just a retail organisation it is a social force with fair-trade policies, cradle to grave services (including farms, banks and undertakers), significant donations to charities.  It is also a political movement, sponsoring 29 Members of Parliament (they sit on the Labour benches although they are not obliged to).

So you would think that the Co-Op would join the republican miserablists in boycotting the Diamond Jubilee (Miranda Sawyer sneered at bunting in today's Observer; there are plans for a "significant" anti-monarchy demonstration on the side of the Thames next Sunday as the Queen sails past; teachers are reported to be disapproving about children bringing flags to school etc).

Like any major retail organisation the Co-Op must have tested its customers on attitudes to the Diamond Jubilee.  And presumably they have received back data that shows the working class Co-Op customers plan to celebrate the Royal event.  Hence this celebratory issue of the Co-Op magazine.

Above:  double-page spread in the magazine.  Look carefully at the right-hand page (you may need to click on the image to enlarge it).  It makes a number of assumptions about Co-Op customers.  In a fortnight when former Sunday Mirror columnist Carole Malone said that benefits claimants deserve to be burned alive, and Kerry McCarthy MP joked that chav-people should be exterminated, the Co-Op is showing us that working-class families will have access to embroidered table-cloths, cake stands and souvenir Coronation mugs (these mugs are often sneered at by the middle classes).  Photoshoots like this are not just thrown together, they are carefully researched and the details matched to the lifestyles of the target audience.  Co-Op stores are often located near council estates or in deprived areas - but even the most deprived families will often have items "kept for best" such as a hand-embroidered tablecloth or a Coronation mug kept since 1953.

Above:  I have to admit to being rather mystified by the KitKat (or "BritKat" advertisement).  The ad tells us it is exclusive to the Co-Op.  You would think that if they wanted an exclusive tie-in they would go with one of the big four supermarket chains which would offer them much more sales (does their research tell them they will sell more "royal" chocolate through the C2 and D Co-Op than through the C1 and B Tescos?).  Also I was not aware that Nestle used Fairtrade chocolate.  Nor was I aware that KitKat held a Royal Warrant, which presumably means the Queen likes them.  I would love to see the brief for this ad.

Above:  page 20 of the Co-Op magazine caused me a little shock of recognition.  Alongside a recipe for Jubilee jam tarts was an illustration of the tarts in a 1953 Coronation biscuit tin.  The sight made me go upstairs to a cupboard and bring down our own identical 1953 Coronation tin.

And although my present income takes me way outside the C2 category, not for the first time I thought about the Co-Op:  these people are my people.

Sixty years the tin has been in my family, representing sixty years of working-class royalism.

Socialists assume that the working classes are foolish dupes to celebrate the "class and privilege" of the Royal Family.  What they overlook is that families living in poverty are often starving.  Perhaps not literally starving (although in the early 1950s food was still rationed).  But starved of romance, starved of colour, starved of kindly words and gestures and fellow feelings that come from frivolous communal events.  Starved of belonging to a wider community.  And perhaps overwhelmed that anyone in the elite should promise to devote their whole life to the service of the ordinary people.

A near-perfect essay

The newspaper article I most enjoyed this weekend was Sarah Churchwell's piece on Scott Fitzgerald in yesterday's Guardian.

In a near-perfect essay the only flaw I could find was the use of the word "probably" in parenthesis in a paragraph discussing a Vanity Fair article.

But that is a tiny detail in an important article that I intend to keep (I file articles like this in the books they are relevant to, so I will fold this page up and tuck it into my copy of The Great Gatzby).

How mundane the work really is - the past week at work

Monday

First thing in my mind when I arrived at the office was the delay in delivery of the publication.  I was very cool to Larry F, MD of the printing company, when he arrived to apologise in person.  Reading between the lines I gathered that the first printing had gone horribly wrong and had to be junked.

Otherwise the day was quiet.

In the afternoon an internal discussion about the future of the Post Office.

News that Alec Nussbaum at Head Office had "resigned" on a matter of principle but had been persuaded to withdraw his resignation.  This was dispiriting for the Institute's Director Vijay Singh as it means that our "sister organisation" regards Alec Nussbaum as indispensable.  As Alec Nussbaum intends to add the Institute to his empire this is an indication that he may well win the battle.

Tuesday

Rather fruitless morning spent searching for information on Google.

Then organising name badges for an exhibition, a tedious task that involved many e-mails and telephone calls.  The Institute is often accused of masterminding nefarious campaigns.  If only our critics could see how mundane the work really is!

One cannot help but notice (however much one is determined not to notice) the office romance that has developed between IT & Accounts clerk John Johnson and temp Kayla.  They spend the whole day talking to each other, John J leaning up against the Reception desk where Kayla sits.  The 'phone now rings for ages before Kayla answers it (at one point Vijay Singh came out of his office and looked pointedly at the Reception desk).

When I got back from lunch I found that the publication had been delivered.  However an insert that is to go with them was so poorly printed that it will have to be done again.  More delays.

Wednesday

To Head Office in London.  I was early and went to an Italian cafe for half an hour, tall dusky waiters in white aprons and white shirts milling around as I wrote up notes over a cup of coffee.  Lovely warm day.

At Head Office I represented the Institute as Kathy W from the Head Office PR department presented the overall PR plan for the combined organisation.  Other departments sat in on the presentation and a number of vicious remarks were made about Kathy W's pedestrian reliance on case studies and lack of imagination.  When called upon to speak I made a point of saying that the plan was thorough and professional.

Afterwards I went along with most of the others to lunch at a local pub.  Dull conversation and indigestible sandwiches.  I left as soon as I could.

Thursday

Horrible intractable day spent sorting out problems with the publication.  Sections that Lois Cooper had written were inaccurate, but as Lois Cooper is ill with cancer it seems unacceptable to publicly blame her.  Other inaccuracies are in sections written by Vijay Singh, but it is impossible to publicly blame our Director, although privately I made sure he knew what he had done. 

Therefore there was no option but to allow people to think I was responsible.

Friday

I sent an e-mail to the Head of Media Relations at Head Office praising Kathy W's presentation on Wednesday (she might be a useful ally in the future). 

The rest of the morning spent raising purchase orders.

The admin team put up bunting in the office, £3 for five metres from the Co-Op.

Starbucks has been heavily criticised

Advertisement for Starbucks in the Great Workplaces supplement given away free in yesterday's Guardian (but not a Guardian publication - it is published by an organisation with the unsettling name Redactive Publishing).

The advertisement celebrates the Starbucks "blend" of employees.  A range of Starbucks paper cups is displayed, most of them with a name written on the side - the implication is that these are the names of Starbucks employees.  The names are:  Bob, Gemma, Liz, Daniel, Laura, Dave, Ben, Katie, Hayley, Amy, Sophia, Jonathan, Matt, Rich, Mark, Sarah, Tom.

These are all English names.  There are no names such as Lukas, or Jolanta, or Svetlana, or Aminah, or Sharik, or Ohin, or Zahire, or Cheng, or Suhrita.  The implication of this advertisement is that Starbucks in the United Kingdom only employs English people.

Unfortunately this is a lie.  Starbucks has been heavily criticised for employing a migrants - to the point where it is very unusual to find a non-migrant Starbucks employee.  The correct PR response to this criticism is to apologise publicly and say what steps are being taken to put things right.

The absolutely wrong thing to do is to issue an advertisement telling lies.

The Advertising Standards Authority requires all advertisements to be legal, honest, truthful and decent.

Complaints about untruthful advertisements can be made to the ASA on-line here:  http://www.asa.org.uk/Complaints/How-to-complain/Online-Form/Step1.aspx

The Starbucks marketing director is listed as Brian Waring.

Not sure who did this ad.  Their agency is listed as Kitcatt Nohr Digitas but I am not sure they were responsible.  The ad is so amateur they could have done it in-house.

Edward Hopper

Recently read this book on the paintings of Edward Hopper.

I've had the book for ages - no idea why I bought it (probably it was discounted).

Edward Hopper had an ability to capture one of the essential truths about life - ultimately we are all on our own.

Hopper said:  "The self-conscious internationalists, no less than the self-conscious nationalists, generally achieve nothing but sterility".

A bleak but beautiful vision of the world.

It appears that Kerry McCarthy MP is advocating euthanasia and eugenics for the politically-incorrect "chav" class

Although Kerry McCarthy MP subsequently said her Twitter comments were just a flippant reaction to a T-shirt slogan, the reaction of the Labour MP for Bristol East (Tony Benn's old seat?) perhaps illustrates how far the party has moved from its traditional supporters.

And personally I think Kerry McCarthy is being disingenuous in her defence of the two Twitter comments.

As I read the two Tweets, it appears that Kerry McCarthy MP is advocating euthanasia and eugenics for the politically-incorrect "chav" class - albeit expressing this in a light-hearted and flippant way.

In case there is any doubt about the "context" of the remarks the person is described by Kerry McCarthy as being an oaf, a lager-drinker, an anti-social person and someone who boasts about being sexually incontinent.

Freud told us that if you let people talk for long enough eventually they tell you the truth about their core beliefs.

Twitter certainly allows public figures to talk extensively in public.

Update 21.40 Saturday evening.

Since making these "kill the chavs" Tweets yesterday afternoon Kerry McCarthy's Twitter site has fallen silent ( https://twitter.com/#!/kerrymp ).   This is unusual as she is the Labour party's "Twitter Tsar" and generally issues many hundreds of Tweets on a daily basis.  Has she been silenced, and if so by whom?

What this statistic tells us about the economy

On last night's This Week Alan Johnson chose as his "political moment of the week" the publication of the immigration figures which show net immigration into the United Kingdom of 251,000 in 2011.

A discussion followed on whether the government would achieve its immigration targets with this level of immigration.

No-one was interested in what this statistic tells us about the economy.

If massive immigration into the United Kingdom is occurring, it must mean that our economy is doing reasonably well.  Failed economies such as Greece, southern Ireland and Portugal are experiencing massive emigration and "lost generations" without a future.  The fact that many of these "lost generations" are voting with their feet and moving to the United Kingdom must mean that they are optimistic about the economic future of this country and are willing to relocate here to share that future.

Socialism

Earlier this week Coalition Minister Vince Cable was called a socialist.

As socialism is the nationalisation of the means of production, distribution and exchange he cannot by any stretch of the imagination be a socialist.

With the abandonment of Clause IV the Labour Party gave up the reason for their existence and they have yet to find a new role (currently their economic policy seems to be "we would be less Tory than the Tories").

I am not by any means a socialist, but I would like to see a socialist Labour Party - and as an example, arguing for nationalisation of the railways (not as an economic measure but as a way of providing full employment for the long-term unemployed).

Unfortunately once the Labour Party gets into power it does not concentrate on socialising the economy - instead it brings in a whole slew of spiteful bullying ideological garbage that makes them intolerable to most normal people (health & safety gone mad, political correctness gone mad, calling people "bigots" because they are worried about their grandchildren, putting spy-chips in dustbins, waging pointless foreign wars, "constitutional" reform of institutions that were not in need of reform etc).

It has just been confirmed that staff at the Institute where I work will get 4th and 5th June as paid leave to celebrate the Diamond Jubilee.

As the two days are "National Holidays" and not "Bank Holidays" the Institute was trying to argue that there was no contractual requirement to give staff the time off (our contracts say 21 days paid holiday plus bank holidays - no mention of national holidays).

How many other employers are trying to deny their staff the time off?

The Eurozone crisis from a PR perspective

I think it is a mistake to regard the Eurozone crisis as a purely economic issue that can be rationally analysed in economic terms.

As well as a political project and an economic project "Europe" is also a PR project.

Therefore it makes sense to look at the Eurozone crisis from a PR perspective.

The people driving the PR project are the Germans.  The primary force between the EU's ever-closer political and economic union is the unstated (but nevertheless frantic) desire by the Germans to create a benign identity for themselves.  "We are not the monsters who walked the earth 1933 to 1945" is the message they want to project, and they will pay any price to keep the PR campaign going.

Therefore it is reasonable for the members of the Eurozone to ask the German taxpayers to pay for their PR campaign and their transformation from "bad Germans" to "good Europeans".

One can sympathise with the German predicament, but in PR terms I think the Eurozone is a good deal for them.

WSPA

Very unsettling e-mail I received earlier today.

WSPA is one of the charities I support - I am appalled by the way animals are treated.

 

A society that is cruel to animals is a society that is invariably cruel to humans.

 

http://www.wspa.org.uk/

Twitter seems to be utilised by a great many people who like to have the last word.

 

As having the last word is extremely addictive Twitter probably has a therapeutic value for these people.

Wise sane words from Lord Glasman on Newsnight this evening.

All the hawthorn trees had simultaneously flowered

On the drive to work dull grey overcast skies.

In the office we felt the temperatures rising so that the windows had to be opened and the blinds drawn down and the fans switched on.

And on the drive home all the hawthorn trees had simultaneously flowered earlier in the afternoon so that the countryside was dazzlingly beautiful with white may blossom (referring to the May tree, not the month of May).

I stopped in a lane to look more closely at one of the hawthorn trees.  The white flowers glistened in the early evening sunlight.  Delicate honey smell of the blossom.

At my feet the flat green fields stretched to the horizon.

Andrew Pierce from the Daily Mail called British involvement in the Afghanistan war "Blair's folly"

On last night's Sky News Press Preview Andrew Pierce from the Daily Mail called British involvement in the Afghanistan war "Blair's folly", Kevin Maguire from the Daily Mirror not demurring from this view.

Surely it should be called John Reid's folly since he was the Defence Secretary who said in 2006 that British troops were going into Helmand province and would complete their mission "without a shot being fired".

Six years later and approximately four hundred British personnel have been killed in Helmand.

John Reid now sits in the House of Lords and displays an astonishing insouciance towards his responsibility for the war in Helmand.  He now claims he never said the "without a shot being fired" remark (but I saw him on television saying this, so I do not see how he can deny it).  The current Labour party pretend Helmand is nothing to do with them.

Ridiculously overwhelming representation of Oxbridge among current MPs

Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg is due to make a speech later today calling for more social mobility.

Secretary of State for Education Michael Gove has called the currently prevalence of privileged people in public institutions "morally indefensible".

Labour Leader Ed Miliband has said "Tackling social mobility is a huge mountain to climb".

The three main political parties are important institutions within the British establishment.  They each have the power to immediately open their candidates lists up to non-privileged people.  And this does not mean selecting one or two exotic tokens from minorities and saying "there, we've done our bit" (and when you look at those exotic tokens you usually find they come from a privileged background anyway).

I would like to see really radical measures such as a ten-year ban on selection of candidates with an Oxbridge background (given the ridiculously overwhelming representation of Oxbridge among current MPs).

But who am I to voice an opinion? 

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-18154730

The British Establishment

What do people mean when they refer to the British Establishment?

The phrase describes the formal and informal way in which power and influence is exercised in the United Kingdom.

You could divide it up into three general areas - the old establishment (long-established institutions); the new establishment (influential charities, think tanks, charismatic individuals); the anti-establishment (which ironically is continually being subsumed into the old establishment).

There is a crisis in the British establishment.

The abolition of the grammar schools in the early 1970s meant that few ordinary people were educated to the correct level and in the right format to be recruited into establishment institutions.  This effectively closed-off access to establishment posts for everyone except Privately-educated Oxbridge alumni (in the rare instances where individuals from "bog-standard comps" get to Oxbridge and into the establishment you usually find that one or more of their parents were teachers or academics, effectively meaning they were tutored at home - the Miliband brothers for instance).  After thirty years of this restricted recruitment the resulting gap between the elite and the ordinary people has become so blatant that it is, the words of Michael Gove Conservative Secretary of State for Education "morally indefensible".

Someone needs to write a book on the subject (but not me).

Greater Britain?

Further to yesterday's post, I glanced at the Matalan summer catalogue.  It's just out this week.  Matalan is a fashion retailer. 

I stopped to look at this double-page spread in the Men's section.

On the left you can see "Sam", "Liam" and "Max" in One Directionesque repose.  In this contrived shot the target demographic looks early 20s, probably C2 social group (Matalan is low cost fashion), too cool to be interested in issues of state governance.  On the opposite page is a selection of "Rule Britannia" summerwear aimed at this demographic.

Look carefully at the right-hand page.  You may need to click on the image to see it properly.  Among the Union Jack flip flops, flag tab polo shirts and flag print swim shorts is a t-shirt featuring a lion's head and the slogan Greater Britain.

Greater Britain?

It has been a long time since the concept of Greater Britain has been espoused.  Probably not since the 1951 groundnuts scheme in Tanganyika.  "Wider still and wider" as a conceptual idea has not been popular among young fashion-conscious men since the Delhi Durbar of 1911.

But these things do not happen by accident.  Attitudes to these designs would have been tested and re-tested among focus groups long before they made it into the Matalan summer catalogue.  Especially in these hard times valuable catalogue space will not be allocated unless the product managers are sure the items are going to sell on a large scale.

Which must indicate society is changing.

Not everyone is going to like this.  

On Sky News Press Preview this evening the word "1984ish" used to describe the Blair government's policy of continuous war for its own sake.

The vast majority of people want to live in a monarchy

Above:  the forthcoming Diamond Jubilee celebrations are scheduled for 4th and 5th of June (national holidays although other events are planned throughout the year).  On a local level there is little doubting the popularity of the monarchy.  On a national and international level possibly Elizabeth II is the most popular European head of state of all time - I hope I am not exaggerating here.

I do not mean to add to the general outburst of gush that accompanies events of this kind.

I want to try to understand what a popular monarchy might mean for politics, society, economics etc.

Above:  Tesco has produced a booklet that is packed with Jubilee-themed editorial and photographs.  Whatever one thinks of supermarket giants like Tesco, one cannot fault their attention to research.  If Tesco is investing in the event they must have good reason to anticipate consumer spending around the two national holidays.

Ten years ago the Golden Jubilee saw a million people in front of Buckingham Palace (taking the Blair government by surprise and prompting a "we'll have to think again" editorial in the republican Guardian newspaper the following day).

Is it possible that the euphoria generated by the Diamond Jubilee will make people feel secure (we are celebrating an institution that has lasted a thousand years) and optimistic about the future?  Will this translate into the famously timid "feel good factor" that politicians and economists prescribe as a preliminary for economic growth?  Difficult to predict as these things only become apparent months afterwards, but certainly we can say that the conditions are in place for an economic "turning point" and early June might possibly be it.

Above:  it is not just Tesco that is making a fuss.  All retail organisations seem to have put up bunting and flags and are running promotions.  Even the quasi-socialist Co-Op.

Above:  double-page spread in yesterday's Guardian magazine featuring a room entirely furnished in Union Jack items and royal memorabilia.  It is an incredible ensemble.  I have read the text carefully and there is no trace of irony. 

What is happening here?

Presumably there must be a calulation that anything in the media with the words "Diamond Jubilee" is going to increase sales.

But I think there is also an acceptance of the obvious.  The vast majority of people want to live in a monarchy.  It is such a profound part of British society that to complain about it is futile.

Above:  there are of course lone voices of protest.  In last week's Observer review section Will Self wrote screeds of curmudgeonly copy about a exhibition of Elizabeth II portraits.  In this week's Observer Nick Cohen wrote a rather splenetic attack on the Prince of Wales.

It is not enough to simply attack an institution.  The republicans must say what they would put in its place.  And in any election for a head of state the political parties would put forward their own candidates.

President Peter Mandelson?  President Michael Howard?  You can see why no-one is keen to go down the republic road.

However to return to Nick Cohen's piece he should pay more attention to detail.  I have been in the Fens  after a thunderstorm many hundreds of times and have not heard the croaking toads he refers to.  Is it possible he just made that up (in which case one has to ask what other "facts" he has made up)?

"It's where I have to keep repeating myself to get things done" - the past week at work

Monday

Most of this morning I drafted the copy for the two new leaflets.  This included the weary job of liaising with Alec Nussbaum at our sister organisation (or "Head Office" as he likes to refer to it).  It has become open knowledge that Alec Nussbaum wants to be director of the Institute, and he is constantly digging for information about current director Vijay Singh.

Is the Institute the most political organisation I have worked for - everyone seems to be manoeuvring and campaigning to advance themselves.

In the afternoon I finally got the copy agreed and e-mailed it to graphic designer Joey to lay out.  Then I researched a possible database for distribution.  The print run is to be twenty thousand, and the change in outlook and opinion will be assessed by a telephone campaign three weeks after the mailing.

Tuesday

The leaflet designs were ready by the time I got to work this morning.  Alec Nussbaum hyper-critical and complaining down the 'phone about the front page.  I got Joey to ring him up directly rather than get involved in all the interminable alterations.

I think I still feel exhausted after all the exertions of last week.  The publication seems to have absorbed all my enthusiasm and left me numb.  Or perhaps I am just being lazy?

In the afternoon a meeting to discuss distribution of the publication.  It will be an immense undertaking.  Vijay Singh talked about introducing some kind of "recognition mark" for individuals who signed up to the programme.

News that Alec Nussbaum had intervened right at the last minute and removed my name and Vijay Singh's name from the publication (we had been listed as joint editors).

Wednesday

Just mundane tasks today.

I rang up Alec Nussbaum to discuss various projects.

"You sound hoarse" I said to him.

"It's where I have to keep repeating myself to get things done" he said testily.

Thursday

Meeting with telephone surveys manger Abi Reed to talk about a questionnaire for social services departments.

Friday

News that the printing of the publication had been delayed.  Vijay Singh did not take this at all well.  I was instructed to send an official complaint to the printers.

After work there was a "team bonding" event of pitch and putt but I managed to excuse myself.

Carole Malone and her (I hope unintentional) oblique suggestion

In all the justified furore over the nastiness of Carole Malone and her (I hope unintentional) oblique suggestion that welfare claimants should be burnt alive it should not be forgotten that she worked for ten years for the left-wing newspaper The Daily Mirror before she had so honed her skills in nastiness that she was able to graduate to the opportunistic News of the World (which as part of News International supported the New Labour government for fourteen years).

By all means let us condemn Carole Malone.

But it would be misleading to link her nastiness to the policies of the Coalition government.

The nastiness of Carole Malone is directly attributable to the culture of vilification towards the "under class" created by the Labour Party post-1993.  This was a cynical move based on the understanding that benefit-dependent social groups had nowhere else to go in voting terms (although some of them subsequently voted for extremists).  If we allow this fact to be forgotten we risk the chav-hate of 1997-2008 happening again if the Labour Party ever gets back into power.

Of course, all political parties rely on scapegoats to some extent.  It is a theme you can see in ALL administrations (and so far does not seem to have been analysed - perhaps I should write the book myself).  However although it might be acceptable to attack strong groups (bankers, lawyers, perhaps even miners since the NUM in their heyday were capable of defending themselves) it is despicable for a government to wage internal war against people who are weak and defenceless (as the Blair administration did against the "chavs" 1997 to 2008).

Question Time

From a press release:

“Brian May comes to Wales this week for Question Time

But apparently not.

So I have switched back to Newsnight.

A position of great responsibility

Writing in today's Guardian Patrick Wintour reported the appointment of Jon Cruddas as the co-ordinator of the Labour Party's policy review.

This is a position of great responsibility, assuming the review is not a cynical exercise and the manifesto junked immediately after they get into office (if they get into office - this is very far from certain).

Jon Cruddas's most notable quote is probably:  "Immigration has been used as a 21st century incomes policy".

Grossly offensive bald-headed Polish person filmed on Newsnight tonight saying "English people is lazy".

And in the studio discussion an overweight Polish woman called Magda Harvey made a series of sneering unpleasant remarks about English people.

Surely these people should be arrested for inciting hatred of people on the basis of national origin?

Or does the Equality Act 2010 not protect English people?

Stuck with a reputation

Above:  in yesterday's Guardian Hugh Muir apologised for inadvertently making an anti-semitic remark.  He used the phrase "Jewish political establishment" without realising that the proponents of the Jewish World Conspiracy argue that the political establishment is controlled by Jews.  It was gaffe, he told us, and should not be taken seriously.

Above:  in the same newspaper "comedic" Charlie Brooker continued his "joke" that David Cameron is a shape-shifting giant lizard.  Presumably he would tells us he is unaware that the wacky theory "the world is controlled by  shape shifting giant lizards" is a euphemism for "Jewish world conspiracy".  In any case, he would no doubt inform us, it is his job to "push the envelope" and say outrageous things and challenge orthodoxies etc.

Above:  and it was not long ago that Mehdi Hassan wrote in the Guardian that David Cameron's great-great-grandfather was a Jewish financier.  What possible relevance does someones great-great-grandfather have?  I know I have written about this comment before, but it still sticks in my mind.

I am not Jewish.

My great-great-grandfather was not Jewish.

However I do work loosely in "PR" (with all that the inverted commas imply) and I know that this is not good in PR terms.

I do not know who advises the Guardian on PR (or perhaps they are one of those foolish companies who think they are above PR).

But let me give the Guardian some free PR advice:  many more of these comments and you are going to get stuck with a reputation.    

Currently watching Newsnight.

The report on Greece said that wealthy Greeks are moving their money to safe havens such as Knightsbridge or Surrey - do they mean property?

Jacob Rees-Mogg on Sky News talking about education

Have just seen Jacob Rees-Mogg on Sky News talking about education.

On the whole I agree with him that you do not make the state schools better by abolishing the private schools (although the existence of the private schools must be very galling for the lobby that pretends the comprehensive system is the best of all possible worlds).

The reason the pro-comprehensive lobby wants the private schools abolished is because they cannot tolerate the comparisons that are being made.

I went to a comprehensive school and left at 16 with very inadequate qualifications.  Was this because I was stupid?  Or was it because ALMOST EVERY TEACHER IN THAT SCHOOL was lazy or incompetent or lazy and incompetent.

There was no attempt to teach to exams (and when I sat the exams the questions had no relation to coursework I had done).  Often in "Social Economics" (a non-subject if ever there was one) we just had to copy sections of textbooks while the teacher got on with some work of his own.  In History, a subject I love, the teaching was mind-numbingly awful and the teacher just droned on about the "turnpike age" - and when asked if we could study something more interesting told us he had been teaching that course for twenty years without complaint.

I came from a family that didn't understand how the education system worked.  No-one at that pathetically awful school explained how the education system worked.  When I was at school I had no idea that it would be possible to go on to university.

Leaving school at 16 I went into a dull clerical-administration job and studied in the evenings to improve my qualifications.  It was an auditor at work who explained that if I got three A-levels I could apply to university.  I was 21 before I managed this, and eventually got into London University.

Looking back it is ridiculous how ignorant and naive I was about how the system worked and how nearly I fell into a limbo of mediocre lifetime achievement (and I need to put on record that many of the people I was at school with absolutely fell into an abyss).

It was not the private sector that was responsible for this.

The politicians who trashed the state education system were to blame; plus the local education authority who failed to supervise schools properly; but above all it was the lazy and incompetent teachers that must bear the burden of responsibility.

That is why I would be in favour of an education voucher system where parents can spend their share of the education budget at the school of their choice.  If the "bog-standard comps" are so good they have nothing to fear from the exercise of free choice.  In reality I think we all know there would be a stampede away from the comprehensives.

On the front page of today's Observer there is a big article by Daniel Boffey (with a special report on pages 8 and 9, and an editorial on page 38) saying that 230,000 teachers are considering leaving the state education sector because of the "stress" of being professionally appraised.  My reaction was to laugh out loud (as the Prime Minister might say).  Who on earth would employ these rubbishy useless people, and even if by some fluke a few did manage to get into the private sector how long do they expect to last in the real world with their offering of supercilious incompetence?

I could get on with the rest of my life - the past week at work

Monday

Bank holiday.

In the afternoon I went to a country fair held in the grounds of a hall.

Parking in a field we walked across a stone bridge and up a slope lined with various stalls (stopping in one of the tents to have a cup of tea).  The Hall itself consisted of long low plain grey stone facades, mullioned windows, battlements.  Magnificent magnolia grandiflora (not in flower).  Display of classic cars.  Children on the main lawn performing folk dances.  The local Hunt appeared, astonishingly smart, the hounds eager and friendly.

All the afternoon the rain held off.

Tuesday

Final proofs of the publication were on my desk when I arrived in the office this morning.  All I had to do was check that the amendments had been made correctly.  The 12 noon final deadline had to be extended to 2pm because of delays caused by Development Manager Tim Watts.

News that Deputy Director Lois Cooper has cancer and is now on sick leave.

Then when the publication had finally been finished, it seemed slightly bewildering how relaxed the day had become.

There was a general sense of congratulation throughout the building that the publication had been finished.

Graphic designer Joey R rang up, and talked about the publication - "It's such a great weight lifted, feels like I'm now on holiday, all I have to do now is repair my marriage..."

Wednesday

Why do I feel so tired?  I think it is because of the stress of producing the publication over the past few weeks.  A lot of my credibility at work is invested in the publication and I am glad it has been produced to a high standard in such a short space of time.

A meeting with Director Vijay Singh over the marketing budget for the rest of the financial year.

Thursday

The publication having been finished I felt that I could get on with the rest of my life.

Alec Nussbaum (from our sister organisation) rang to talk about two joint leaflets he wants to produce.  After the publication these should have been simple and straightforward, but actually they proved to be quite intractable (given the hostility between Vijay Singh and Alec Nussbaum).  Also the deadlines are impossible.

Most of the upstairs staff gathered to talk about Lois Cooper who is very seriously ill - praise for her positive outlook, her interests, her helpfulness, her humanity, her sense of the absurd, her awareness of mortality.

Friday

For some reason I found it difficult to sleep which meant that I started the day feeling extremely tired.  I had reserved the morning for copywriting the Alec Nussbaum leaflets but there were so many interruptions I made little progress.  I became resigned to taking the work home to finish over the weekend, a practice I usually avoid.

In the absence of Lois Cooper her work is being done by Accounts Superviser Marcia Walsh (aged 45, short, grossly overweight, sharp voice that at times almost shrieks, false teeth that slip when she is talking, frequent references to her disabled husband who is a wheelchair-user).  Marcia Walsh is very ambitious, and it is difficult to avoid the suspicion that she is using this opportunity to bolster her own position and extend her control over other departments.  Unfortunately she is the kind of person who advances herself by denigrating everyone around her, so we may be about to enter a period of aggressive office politics.

I had the afternoon off and drove about twenty miles to a commuter village just north of the M25.  Rambling 17th century yeoman farmhouse painted bright pink and turned into a frou frou restaurant (pink satin curtains, pink Louis VI sofas, pink menus etc).  In the bar I met my financial services client and we had lunch.

This freelance work is very useful - I am paid more for about ten hours a month than I am paid for my regular job. 

Vicheyssoise followed by poached salmon followed by lemon brulee; wine by the glass (we were both driving).

Our conversation was somewhat one-sided.  After the usual preliminaries my client (who has also become a sort of friend over the years) launched into an monologue that became an impassioned confessional of his recent business dealings.  He admitted he was bursting to tell someone of his coup - how by astute dealings he had outwitted a major chain of estate agents and had bought for a knock-down price assets that would deliver a massive increase in his income.

His mood veered during this conversation from bellicose pride in his negotiating power to an almost superstitious fear that he may have over-reached himself.  He was wearing a grey-checked shirt (Gucci label on the pocket) that was tight over his belly so that the buttons were straining and I visualised him physically as well as verbally bursting with the effect of his business triumph.  At the end of the meal he lowered his voice and said "Under no circumstances must you reveal this to anyone, but..."

He was so proud of his new acquisitions that he insisted on taking me on a tour, and we drove to a nearby town in his new blue Mercedes convertible (he owns three Mercedes).  A great show was made of taking the car roof down and despite my protests we charged along the duel carriageways at 105mph, the force of the wind almost unbearable.  Only when I threatened to throw his papers out of the car did he begin to slow down.

We arrived in the town and went to the newly acquired estate agents which was in an impressive red-brick Victorian building (I will have to see if it is mentioned in Pevsner).  Inside were a variety of staff who all seemed wary of their new boss (he was darting about asking questions).  At the back, lounging in an expensive-looking leather office chair, was his business partner Raymond M - smug, oily and odious, the sort of person I most dislike.

Ignoring my presence Raymond M took my client on one side and began making complaints about the branch manager Robert T, who he referred to as Rob.  I jokingly said that "Rob" was an appropriate name for an estate agent.  They both looked at me with blank, poker-faced stares that made me feel momentarily uncomfortable.

Very interesting Dateline London earlier today, focussed on Africa. 

I was not aware that the Americans may intervene in southern Sudan. 

It would make sense for the United Kingdom to build trading links with African countries rather than continue to lock our economy in with the rest of Europe.  The forty-year obsession with Europe has been a political project, and makes little economic sense.  The EU countries are all mature economies and are not going to provide the sort of growth oppotunities we need for the future.

Trust on the economy will be given to the party with a simple and convincing argument

On Question Time last night the economy was discussed.  A member of the audience likened the government's management of the economy with the management of a household budget (the "live within your means" policy of Margaret Thatcher).  This idea was endorsed by government minister Caroline Spelman on the panel and was applauded by a large section of the audience.

On one level it is not possible to compare a western industrialised economy with a Micowber-run household budget.  A national economy is too complex to be run on simplified lines.  There are too many paradoxes and subtleties.

However the "live within your means" argument is one of the great political communications of the modern era.  From a PR point of view it reduces economic policy to a concept that can be understood by ordinary people (and it has the added bonus of being not entirely untrue).  Such is the power of this message that it cannot be refuted, it can only be replaced by a more effective message.

Labour countered the household budget argument with simplifications of their own.  They were spectacularly successful with "No more boom and bust".  This delivered the trust of the people for the eleven years of the boom, and the argument only really came to grief when the bust arrived in 2008.

So I think we must conclude that the next election will be won by the party most trusted on the economy, and trust on the economy will be given to the party with a simple and convincing argument that is familiar and logical (being logical does not mean it has to be right).

To attempt to argue the merits of the Keynesian theory or the Austrian school will simply bamboozle most of the electorate.  What is really being said with complex arguments is "trust me I am an expert" or "trust me I am a politician" or worst of all "trust me I am an expert politician".  A party going into the 2015 election talking about endogenous growth theory is asking to be punished.

The Coalition is winning the argument on the economy because they have the best interpretations of the economic situation ("Labour maxed out the national credit card" or "We are clearing up the mess Labour left" or "There is no money left - they told us this in a letter from Liam Byrne").

On that basis I think the "live within your means" argument of running the national economy has a lot of life left in it.  "If you are in debt you need to stop spending" is deceptively alluring.  I don't see Labour coming up with anything (so far) that is even close to challenging it. 

I think it is a mistake to look at the elections in France and Greece and conclude that there is a pan-European rejection of "austerity".

The United Kingdom is not France or Greece.  What happened there is not likely to happen here.  For instance, during the 1920s and 1930s fascism was seen throughout Europe as a solution to the economic depression, but fascism did not happen here and could not happen here (the political "constitution" precludes it).

Not for the first time "keep calm and carry on" is the most likely course for the United Kingdom.

Universal care for the elderly free at the point of delivery

I listened to reports of the Queen's Speech on PM (Radio 4) then watched analysis on Channel 4 News, and will watch more analysis on Newsnight.

I do not understand why the Coalition government does not bring forward a Social Care bill - universal care for the elderly free at the point of delivery.

It would be a policy the Coalition could unite around, would outmanoeuvre the Opposition (since they can hardly oppose it) and would be an absolutely certain vote winner in 2015.

It would also re-establish the Conservative Party's "caring" credentials - an area where they are currently losing ground.

There is the small matter of how it is to be paid for, but given the way in which the issue affects almost every family in the country I think a rise in taxation would be accepted - an hypothecated tax would be best as mistrust of general taxation is so widespread.

Lack of affordable homes in rural areas

Article by John Bingham on the Daily Telegraph website about the lack of affordable homes in rural areas:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/countryside/9246005/Britains-prettiest-villages-becoming-rich-peoples-ghettoes.html

I think the answer is to allow the planning laws to be set aside for all dwellings that are:  single story; constructed of completely recyclable or removable elements; only leased for a maximum of twenty years; only leased to people with a strong local connection (perhaps born within five miles); leases sold for only cost price of agricultural land and cost of construction plus ten per cent; landscaped with native trees and upon expiry of the lease the land to be transferred to a body such as the Woodland Trust to extend the amount of woodland in the United Kingdom.

And the design of the dwellings to be in the local tradition.

Article in today's Guardian by Gary Younge

Big article in today's Guardian by Gary Younge.  Probably he wrote it in a rush as it is full of inaccuracies and half-truths and misleading statements.  The Guardian needs to pay more attention to editing articles like this if they wish to keep their reputation (if I wanted my intelligence insulted I would have bought the Daily Mirror).

For instance, he mentions the accusations against Rebekah Brooks of phone hacking and corruption, but brackets them with David Cameron.  The alledged criminal behaviour of course occured during the administrations of Tony Blair and Gordon Brown.  Perhaps Gary Younge thinks Guardian readers are so stupid that they will not notice this?

Central to Gary Younge's argument is the idea that a small group of people is running the United Kingdom.  This is undoubtedly true but he does not understand how that group sustains itself in power and co-opts new recruits.  To say that this group is just Old Etonians is stupid beyond belief (and you can see he accuses George Osborne of being an Etonian when in fact he went to St Pauls).

He says that almost 40% of current MPs went to a private school.  Is this because the networking of private schools is so good?  Or is it because the state schools are so bad? (I write as someone educated in the state system).

I could go on, but there is little point in giving a paragraph by paragraph critique of such lazy journalism.

What is depressing is that the Leveson Inquiry is a chance to get things right for the future - and idiots like Gary Younge are risking it all by trying to play party politics.

The Crown was an authentic pub

Friday evening I had dinner with friends at a pub deep in the countryside (only ten miles from the A1, but we could have been in another world).

Thatched cottages, blackthorn blossom in the hedgerows, cowslips on the grass verges.

I was early so I wandered about the village, taking the above photo of the pub from the church opposite (Norman tower, Perpendicular nave, Victorian arts and crafts chancel).  The air was cool and the light had a translucent quality.  The seemingly continual rain had stopped for an hour or so, and everywhere was fresh and wet.

The Crown was an authentic pub with a big open fire, hefty long tables, settle benches.

At the end of the long bar was a little restaurant with about six tables.

Off the restaurant was an "annex" conservatory just big enough for our table (we had asked for somewhere quiet).

Poached asparagus wrapped in bacon with soft eggs; sirloin steak with a big mushroom and kidney pudding covered in a red wine sauce (I also had some fat chips with this, but could not eat them all); rhubarb and ginger steamed pudding with rhubarb ice cream (possibly not sweet enough).

We talked about media, politics and economics.

We talked about money.

We talked, in an unflattering way, about various people we knew.

Francois Hollande has won the French presidential election.

If he reverses the French austerity programme and goes for growth, what impact will that have on the British economy?

Probably it will have a beneficial effect, as stimulating demand just across the Channel (only twenty two miles away) will create additional markets for British exports.

Amendments and corrections - the past week at work

Monday

Still the rain continues.

The office was quiet today, many people having taken the week off.  I looked at my list of things to do wondering how many I can ignore.  Apart from the publication I am tending to put things on one side.

Graphic designer Joey rang, in a panic because there was too much copy for the design.  I deleted paragraphs from each chapter until the amount of text fitted.  It will be such a relief when the publication is finished.

Lois Cooper, Deputy Director of the Institute, failed to come in.  This meant that the afternoon meeting had to be cancelled.  No message from her, so that everyone wondered what might have happened.

Joey e-mailed over pdfs for the first few chapters of the publication and I began to proof-read them.  I e-mailed him the next tranche of copy.  He rang me up and complained at the speed we were working ("It doesn't leave much time to ponder the design").

I stayed in the office until 7pm.

Tuesday

Less than six hours sleep, and I was at my desk by 7.30am.  This publication has proved to be an enormous burden, but I am pleased that I have been equal to the challenge.  There have been no problems that I have not been able to solve.

Main task of the day was proof-reading and amending the publication.  This is really a pre-proof-read, getting it ready for others to proof-read.  I felt as if real progress was being made.

In the afternoon Graphic designer Joey arrived at the office in person, having driven up from South London (the publication project is worth a lot of money to him).  As usual he was dressed in black, wearing a Paul Smith shirt.  "You've worked a miracle" I told him (excessive praise is always wise when dealing with graphic designers).  We went over the major changes to the publication including the new chapter to go in, sections that have to come out, various bits that need to be moved around.  It was a cold day but he was perspiring excessively, rubbing and scratching himself.  We worked until 5pm, and when he left the girls in Admin wanted to know "Who was THAT!"

I stayed until 10.45 pm working on the publication.  I was the only person in the building, so it was alarming to hear the front door downstairs being opened and someone coming up the staircase.  I went over to the door to the stairs and threw it open as loudly as I could and stamped out onto the landing to try to demonstrate I was unafraid.

Campaign Manager Keith Chandler half-way up the stairs and so shocked by my appearance that he stumbled and fell forward (he had not expected anyone to be in the office).

The scene must have resembled the GW Joy painting General Gordon's Last Stand.

Wednesday

Only five hours sleep, but I was determined to get to work on time.  Despite my resolution I stopped on the way to work to buy a Mars Bar to have with my first cup of coffee.  At my desk I reviewed progress on the publication - I am in control but only after great personal effort.

During the morning Abi Reed, who had received an advance copy of the proofs, came up to me and asked to change the order of the chapters.  I suppressed the temptation to tell her no.  It took us over an hour to work it all out. 

In the afternoon I wrote the concluding chapter and rewrote Director Vijay Singh's Introduction.  I agreed with him that my name should go down as co-Editor.  Amendments and corrections are starting to come back to me.

Pat B (Admin) told me I was looking stressed.

I stayed until 6.30 pm, waiting for Joey to arrive with the latest sets of proofs including a bound mock-up.  These proofs were in book form, and give a better idea of the final look than pdfs.  Joey is self-absorbed and self-obsessed, but not in an egocentric way - more intense introspection and anxiety.

Thursday

Every day this week it has rained.

Today had been designated Big Proofing Day and everyone at the Institute asked to read through the publication.  I distributed the proofs to people, and began proof-reading a copy myself (although it is so familiar to me that I can hardly see it properly).  Even Gary in the Library asked for a set of proofs to read.

Alec Nussbaum (from our "sister organisation") had insisted on sending up someone from Head Office to proof read the publication formally and "sign off".  This person was Phillipa from the publications department.  I designated Phillipa's set of proofs the master copy and got her to include everyone else's amendments and corrections as they came back.

As a reward for Joey I had arranged for him to come into the office to meet Phillipa over a working lunch, as she would be an important new client for him.  He arrived in an expensive-looking Armani deep blue suit, light blue shirt and gold silk tie.  Phillipa (bespectacled, dressed in grey cotton trousers and Matalan striped top) seemed overwhelmed.

The three of us worked until 8.45 pm when the publication was finally finished.  Joey still perspiring - clammy handshake as he left.  I gave Phillipa a lift to the station and then went home.

Friday

I stayed up until 3am in the morning watching the election results (the Conservatives winning London, Labour winning Glasgow, both results satisfying).

Staying up so late didn't matter as I was ostensibly working at home on Friday and could get up at 10 am.  In reality I hardly worked at all, and just loafed around the house trying to rest.  I had intended to have one last thorough proof-read of the publication, but the sight of it on the dining room table so nauseated me that I could not go near it.

The end does not justify the means

I think Owen Jones, in his piece for the Independent today, is being unfair by accusing Louise Mensh MP of being a Murdoch apologist.  I saw the Newsnight interview he is referring to, and my impression was that Louise Mensh complained about Labour members of the committee misusing the committee report by including at the last moment a condemnation on the "fit and proper" status of Rupert Murdoch.  This does not mean that Louise Mensh is defending Rupert Murdoch, it means she is defending the integrity of the parliamentary committee process.

There is little point in seeking to remove Murdoch corruption of British politics by corrupting the process of a parliamentary committee.

The end does not justify the means.

http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/commentators/owen-jones-the-battle-that-men-who-arent-sexist-must-fight-7712188.html?origin=internalSearch

Vote 2012

I am currently watching Vote 2012 on BBC 1, analysing today's election results as they come in.

Emily Maitlis almost gushing with enthusiasm.

Nick Robinson in a very conventional tie (mauroon with white spots).

The charts and graphics rushed through so that it is difficult to see them properly (and a floor map that is incomprehensible because the camera keeps moving).

Not sure how late I will stay up.

On the whole I want the Conservatives to do well.

London Mayor election

Tomorrow is the election day for London Mayor.

If you have a vote in that election use it to elect Boris Johnson.

Genetically-modified wheat

Listening to the Today programme this morning am I the only person who is disgusted by the idea that genetically-modified wheat will contain cow genes?  Is the resulting wheat a plant or an animal?  And why is taxpayers' money being spent on this project when public opinion is so completely opposed to the idea of GM food?

Also I am not convinced by the assurances of safety by government experts.  These are the same experts who gave us absolute assurances that meat from animals infected with mad cow disease was completely safe.  Look how many people died from that frankenstein episode.

The faux-socialist dislocated holiday of May Day

The Occupy movement has never really caught on in Europe in the same way that it has in America.

Possibly because Europe suffered a real occupation within living memory, including the Channel Islands.  As a brand name (for that is what it is, whether acknowledged or not) "Occupy" raises images of the totalitarian imposition of a fanatical ideology.  L'occupation (of France, Belgium, Netherlands, Norway, Denmark, Poland etc) for most people in Europe means a dark period of horror.

Just my thoughts for the faux-socialist dislocated holiday of May Day.