Another sorry-not-sorry turn from Johnson… and the cruelties of the Rwanda plan…

The Daily Mail has sneaked into my consciousness again. I only ever see the front page, but maybe that’s enough to leave a stain.

Today’s edition has a blurb asking where readers stand on the great debate dividing Britain.

This is not the morally knotty one about whether the prime minister is a flagrant liar and a scoundrel who broke his own Covid rules, got fined by the Met over partygate, and had yesterday to drag his sorry arse to the Commons to say sorry-not-sorry yet again.

No, this is the ‘shoes off indoors’ debate, one that seems to have passed me by.

Johnson is nowhere to be seen on the Mail’s front page, although his muddy footprints are all over the other papers. The Mail’s loyalty to Johnson knows no bounds. A bit like those ministers who are sent to clean up after their boss while carrying a big shovel and telling lies to cover up his lies, while heading ever deeper into a fabricator’s maze with nothing at its centre.

Johnson says sorry all the time these days without ever appearing to be sorry at all. What’s telling is what came next.

Once he was out of the Commons, Johnson met his MPs, and immediately went into typically combative mode, laying into the BBC and two archbishops for ‘misconstruing’ his plans to send some asylum seekers to Rwanda.

The Archbishop of Canterbury, Justin Welby, preached at the weekend that the policy was “the opposite of the nature of God”. His counterpart in York, the Most Rev Stephen Cottrell, said he was “appalled” by the plan, adding: “I think we can do better than this.”

I am not sure what the BBC did wrong, other than reporting what the archbishops had said.

A man without religion approaches archbishops with caution, and sometimes a sharp stick. But the churchmen are right on this terrible, inhumane, duplicitous plan.

Nothing was being misconstrued here.

What the government wants to do, in a shoddy deal stitched up by home secretary Priti Patel against the advice of her most senior civil servant, is to fly some asylum seekers to Rwanda. From where, reportedly, they will not be allowed to return.

The argument for this bizarre idea is that it will cut dangerous Channel crossings, although how that might work is anybody’s guess.

Incidentally, to tap into the warped logic used to excuse this policy, the home secretary insists that if you can afford to pay for a crossing, then you have money and don’t need to come to Britain.

What a disgrace. One of the richest countries in the world is passing the buck to one of the poorest, sending desperate people to Rwanda on a one-way ticket.

Would such an idea even work? Here is the view of that noted complaining lefty, Theresa May ­– “I do not support the removal to Rwanda policy on the grounds of legality, practicality and efficacy.”

And that from the architect of the hostile environment policy that spawned the Windrush scandal.

Of course, the Rwanda plan may never happen, and it may be just the latest diversionary tactic in the endless culture wars, another nasty squabble in the basement. It’s quite possible that what Johnson wants is for this scheme to be dragged through the courts, allowing him to rant and puff about “lefty lawyers” and “the people’s priorities”.

Ah, the people.

Many people volunteered to take in Ukrainian refugees, only to find that the system was bogged down with cruel bureaucracy. The enthusiasm to help suggests a country that is more open to migrants and asylum seekers than our own government likes to believe. As that man of York said, we are better than this.

Boris Johnson wants to appeal to our lesser nature, and the way to stop that is to be better than him. Not that it’s much of a moral yardstick.

As for those shoes, downstairs wear is allowed as we have hard floors, but shoes are removed before ascending the stairs.

j j j

The prime minister wriggles but his repentance doesn’t go deep… and the greedy joys of Stanley (Tucci, not Johnson)

I see the Daily Mail has got on its old rocking horse to defend Boris Johnson after he was fined for attending a lockdown birthday party in Downing Street. They may have to clamber up there again as 12 such parties are being investigated by the Met, quite a few said to have been attended by their disreputable hero.

“Don’t they know there’s a war on?” grumbles the Mail’s headline, like something found in a dusty drawer last opened in 1940.

The subheading above contains the words as “the Left howls for resignations…”

Oh, get off that rocking horse you picked up at the culture wars jumble sale. This has nothing to do with left and right, and everything to do with a prime minister and his cabinet making very strict rules for everyone else during a pandemic, then being caught out having parties while ignoring the strictures everyone else stuck to, sometimes at great personal anguish, with people left unable to visiting dying loved ones.

As for the war in Ukraine, that represents an appalling afront to life and liberty, but a smaller affront is to be found in the way Johnson has grasped this conflict as a something to hide behind, another distraction in a political career littered with convenient diversions and colleagues too willing to provide alibies.

The only reason we don’t talk about the disastrous Brexit he lumbered us with is that the pandemic came along and got in the way. The only reason we don’t talk about the pandemic mistakes he made is that people grew tired, and then the war came along.

Some praised Johnson for visiting Kyiv last weekend to meet Ukrainian PM Volodymyr Zelensky. And it was good to see him there, but you can’t escape the suspicion that however grave the occasion, Johnson will be making personal calculations.

And lo and behold, as the news emerges that he and the Chancellor, Fishy Sunak, had been fined for attending Downing Street parties, members of the cabinet tweet with one voice, praising Johnson’s stance on the war and the pandemic efforts he and Sunak made.

Just like one of those Russian bots, only with a human face. Sorry, strike that – human might be pushing it a bit. But there they all were, arse-licking posts at the ready, with culture wars secretary Nadine Dorries first in line.

It’s always like this in Johnson-land, make a noise, confuse people, bluster and blow, and hope no-one remembers, hope they overlook the unnecessary deaths and the Covid-19 deals done with friends of the Tories; hope they overlook, too, that Sunak wrote off £4.3 billion in furlough fraud – just as he was cutting social benefits and staying shtum about his wife’s tax arrangements.

As Johnson becomes the first UK prime minister to be convicted of breaking the law, do we accept his apology or dismiss this latest bit of sorry-not-sorry as just another dollop of fake contrition.

Perhaps enough people will believe that there are more important matters to worry about right now. And perhaps there are, but none of this should be allowed to go away. Just imagine if a Labour government was in this mess. The hostility from the newspapers would be relentless.

I’d love to see Johnson go as his continued presence is a stain on our national life, but if people are credulous enough to swallow his endless lies and evasions, we are stuck with the dreadful man until his own MPs turn against him.

The US actor Stanley Tucci is the world’s least likely glutton, staying as slim as a whisper while he eats everything in sight, declaring somewhat theatrically “Oh my god!” as he takes another mouthful of Italian grub.

Stanley Tucci: Searching For Italy is on the BBC iPlayer and I am doubtless late to the party, but it’s a great programme, a foodie travelogue like those Rick Stein Cornwall programmes or the Hairy Bikers chomping their way through the north.

The scenery is lovely, the food looks amazing, and Tucci charms everyone he meets while tucking into everything in sight. My wife is a big fan. She likes Stanley as he reminds her a little of the man she is married to, being small, bald, and devilishly attractive (well, two out of three isn’t bad).

 

j j j

Without knowing a thing, no-nothing Nadine sets about selling off Channel 4…

YOU won’t find much praise round here for Margaret Thatcher, but one exception is the way she shaped Channel 4.

In 1982, Thatcher’s Conservative government, never my favourite, did one good thing in establishing Channel 4 to create an independent television production sector in the UK. Now her descendants want to rip up what their heroine once helped to create.

As former channel boss Dorothy Byrne reminds us…

“Unlike the BBC or ITV, it was not to make any of its own programmes, not even its flagship Channel 4 News. All over the UK, independent companies sprang up to make its content. In the 40 years since, they have made billions of pounds – not just for themselves but also for Britain, selling their wares around the world. And, unlike the BBC, they have spoken with many voices, bringing diverse and radical ideas to the fore which had barely been heard before in mainstream broadcasting…” (The Guardian, April 5, 2022).

Having floated the idea of this sell-off, the government sought wider opinion and 90% of those who responded were against the idea. But Boris Johnson’s know-nothing government still wants to go ahead with this destructive act, more red meat for the baying right-wingers in his party.

The latest announcement fell to the never knowingly over-prepared culture secretary Nadine Dorries.

You may recall that Dorries polished her know-nothing credentials last November when she appeared before a select committee of MPs and claimed that Channel 4 is “in receipt of public money”.

No, No Nadine. Channel 4 is funded from advertising, taking no money from the public coffers, and ploughing all its income into making more programmes. A sound and sensible arrangement.

You might have thought the culture secretary should know that, but Dorries blundered across the rutted acres of her own ignorance with barely a blush.

Much like that time she stumbled into a meeting with Microsoft and reportedly asked the company when it was going to “get rid of its algorithms”.

One theory behind the reason for this sale is that Johnson took against Channel 4 when he was replaced by a melting ice sculpture after he declined to attend an election debate about climate change.

Day after grubby day, that discredited man pulls us down.  Never overlook his pettiness; never forget the bite beneath the bluster.

As for Dorries, she believes that “government ownership is holding Channel 4 back from competing against streaming giants like Netflix and Amazon”.

Back again to Dorothy Byrne…

“Channel 4 is not there to compete with Netflix and Amazon. It is there to provide public service programming which promotes discussion and debate.”

Dorries also says that the profits from any sale could be ploughed back into “creative training” and into independent production companies. Er, the very companies who already make all the programmes for Channel 4 and whose existence is threatened by this utterly pointless sell-off.

Comparing Channel 4 to Netflix is meaningless – and conveniently overlooks that the streaming giant has a reported debt of £11.8bn, next to Channel 4’s debt of, ahem, nothing.

And you will be looking for a long time before you spot a Netflix reporter on the ground in Ukraine or anywhere else. Channel 4 News is often the strongest news service around, braver than the BBC and more willing to explore un-furrowed ground.

Smashing up the unique structure of Channel 4 so that it can be flogged off to a private company will threaten rather that secure its future. Just imagine if Murdoch got hold of it.

These are just the thoughts of one man sitting on a ledge. Here are the thoughts of others, including a Tory or two, as aired on Twitter…

 

 

 

 

And a final word from me. If it ain’t broke, don’t fuck it up.

 

j j j

Wokey-wokey with Dominic Raab… and weaponising fed-upness…

I see that Dominic Raab, the justice secretary and part-time deputy prime minister, is out to get ‘wokery’.

It’s all about free speech, he says. Which is funny as that man is never free to speak in my house. Soon as Raab is announced, the radio goes off quicker than Boris Johnson can find a sticky lie in his pocket or down a drink at a party that never happened.

It might help if anyone knew what wokery was. It’s all so handily vague in a sinister, lame conspiracy way, a making of something from nothing much. A good guess might be “liberal-minded stuff right-wing people sitting on barstools won’t let pass without a grumble”.

A while ago in this blog, I was trying to sort this out for my mother, who is 90 but still likes to know things.

“We have been wondering what woke means. Can you tell us!”

The answer I came up with was: “It started in the US as a way of describing liberal people who are sensitive about how others feel. Now it’s been turned around as an insult for liberals. It’s basically become a lazy shorthand used by right-wingers to be rude about anyone who disagrees with them.”

Raab wants to replace Labour’s Human Rights Act with a British bill of rights. He told the Daily Mail that free speech was being “whittled away” by “wokery and political correctness”.

Ah, it’s always a good rule of ink-stained thumb that whenever anyone uses the phrase “political correctness”, they have lost whatever argument they are trying to bundle out of their mouth.

It’s the old blues singers I feel sorry for. “I woke up this morning…” Raab will be on them in an intemperate flash, that vein in his forehead throbbing away – “You can’t say that – it’s political correctness gone mad.”

What Raab seemingly wants to do is encourage free speech by stopping people saying things he doesn’t like. It’s all very confusing. You might almost wonder if he doesn’t want free speech at all ­– just the freedom for people like him to say what they want, and for other people to just shut up.

On one level this is plain silly, yet on another it is sinister as it weaponises grumbling, turning a vague sense of dissatisfaction with life into a hard grudge.

This is what Donald Trump did with all that Make America Great Again nonsense, tapping into people’s fed-upness as a useful source of voting capital, without ever wishing to change anything.

Trump stirred the well of grumbling sourness, that sense that “something isn’t right” or that “they” (that usefully capacious general enemy) don’t want us to know or do certain things and stood back with a nasty smile on his face.

The tyrannical Vladimir Putin has weaponised wanting to Make Russia Great Again in a tragically literal way – by pursuing his needless colonial vendetta against Ukraine, while trying to hide the war he is waging from his own people.

And over here, Make Britain Great Again was the corrupt call behind Brexit, again tapping into dissatisfaction and making grand promises that could not and will not be fulfilled. All so that Boris Johnson could be prime minister.

It’s probably woke to point out that Johnson hiding behind someone else’s war as a way of deflecting his own inadequacies is hardly a fine look. His supporters say he has been leading the western world over Ukraine, which seems to be a stretch. Also, any notion that he is having a “good war” is just too morally shoddy for words.

Johnson wants us all to forget about ‘partygate’, to let slip from our minds the Covid-19 rules broken by those who set them. So, what did he do yesterday as police issued the first fines over partygate? He threw a big party in a hotel for Tory MPs, that’s what.

Oh, and that Human Rights Act Dominic Raab wants to remove. No need to worry about that. It’s only full of woke notions such as the right to life; freedom from torture and inhuman or degrading treatment; freedom from slavery and forced labour; the right to a fair trial; the freedom of thought, belief and religion, and of expression, too.

All that and lots more wokery. Look it up. It’s quite a list.

Wokey-wokey footnote: Interviewed on Sky News by Kay Burley, Raab said the Prime Minister had told the truth “to the best of his ability”. Is it just me or does that sound like a perfect euphemism for lying? Or was Raab admitting that Johnson just isn’t very good at telling the truth?

j j j
· 2 Comments

The unfolding tragedy in Ukraine… Boris Johnson mouths off… listening to Rachmaninov…

WHENEVER Boris Johnson says something regrettable, another minister is sent out to clear up the mess, like a zookeeper trailing after an incontinent baby elephant.

This morning it was Sajid Javid’s turn to carry the slopping bucket.

The health secretary was valiant in his insistence that Johnson had not just made a direct comparison between the fight for freedom in Ukraine and the vote for Brexit.

To which the impatient bystander can only squeal: wash your ears out, mate – that is precisely what he did say at the Conservative spring conference in Blackpool.

Should you have been fortunate enough to have missed the words that tumbled from Johnson’s careless gob, let me spoil your day…

“I know that it’s the instinct of the people of this country, like the people of Ukraine, to choose freedom, every time…When the British people voted for Brexit in such large, large numbers, I don’t believe it was because they were remotely hostile to foreigners. It’s because they wanted to be free to do things differently and for this country to be able to run itself…”

As President Putin attempts to bomb and starve the people of Mariupol into submission and surrender; as millions of Ukrainians flee their beloved country, our prime minister feels happy to make a cheap political point comparing their brutal plight to the Brexit referendum.

It seems to have slipped his mind that Ukraine wants to join the EU, applying last month after the Russian invasion began. Only three weeks ago, President Volodymyr Zelenskyy said: “Our goal is to be with all Europeans and, most importantly, to be equal.”

Whereas Putin’s goal is to bomb Ukraine to shit, to murder innocent citizens, and to reduce once-proud cities to rubble.

There seems to be no logical reason for this war, other than Putin’s acrid resentment at the collapse of the Soviet Union, and his refusal to accept that post-Soviet Ukraine has a right to exist on its own terms.

There are people who will tell you differently, who will say that this is the fault of NATO or the US or that we are no better. This may be true, but it is beside the point when Putin needs to be defeated. Will he be defeated – is there any way for him to be defeated without a wider war? I am only a man sitting on a ledge, so don’t ask me.

As for Johnson’s insistence that the Brexit vote was nothing to do with being “hostile to foreigners”, that was the undercurrent throughout, from endless tabloid newspaper headlines to Nigel Farage standing in front of his anti-migrant ‘Breaking Point’ billboard showing a queue of mostly non-white migrants.

Johnson and his Brexit-besotted cohorts cashed in on such hostile sentiment while pretending that it didn’t exist.

Rachmaninov

Sergei Rachmaninov

ANYWAY, time for a bit of Rachmaninov.

Much social media hostility recently greeted the decision of the Cardiff Philharmonic Orchestra to pull music by Tchaikovsky from a concert at St David’s Hall.

The 1812 Overture famously celebrates Russia’s defence against the invasion of Napoleon and features a volley of cannon fire. Some members of the leading non-professional orchestra were unhappy about this after the invasion of Ukraine and opted for a different programme.

Assorted commentators ridiculed their decision, with the right-wing comedian Geoff Norcott tweeting: “Cancelling a Tchaikovsky concert is so daft ordinary Russians will write it off as mad Vlad over-doing the propaganda.”

The American political advisor Matt Duss got in on the act too, tweeting: “Doubly absurd because Tchaikovsky spent a lot of time in Ukraine, and incorporated a lot of Ukrainian folk music and stories into his work.”

You know, I think the cannons had something to do with it.

Anyway, Rachmaninov.

Wishing to be reminded of the glories of Russian culture, rather than the barbarity of its present leader, I dug out my CD of Rachmaninov Vespers 1-15 (All-Night Vigil), composed in two weeks in 1914.

This beautiful choral music reminds you of a different Russia, as indeed does the music of Tchaikovsky normally: as do the plays of Chekhov or the novels of Dostoyevsky or Tolstoy.

Incidentally, Rachmaninov and his family left Russia two years later, in 1916, just before the Russian Revolution, moving to New York, and the composer never again set foot in his homeland.

Whether those Ukrainians fleeing their country will ever return to their homeland is anybody’s sad guess.

j j j

I have taken this ledge on tour but the widescreen view remains the same…

I HAVE taken this ledge to my mother’s house for a few days for reasons explained below. The view remains much the same, as in gloomy, but this visit reminds me that news comes widescreen and in a narrow personal squint.

The world cinemascope is still screening the same news, the unreeling horror of what is happening in Ukraine, the lethal sweep of Vladimir Putin’s cruel ambition. And the U-bending insanity of his logic in telling Ukrainians that if they continue to resist his troops they risk the future of their country – “And if that happens, they will have to be blamed for that.”

That’s quite the twisted leap: I am invading your country and obliterating your citizens, but if you resist, everything that happens is your fault.

Narrowing the focus, we see that Boris Johnson has a six-point plan to solve the Ukraine crisis – an improvement, I guess, on a three-word slogan, although none of it seems particular to Johnson. It’s almost as if he said that just so the newspaper headlines would say that he had a six-point plan (which they dutifully did).

The seventh point, unmentioned, is the hope that his past sins and poor behaviour will somehow be forgotten, erased by events. For now, perhaps. But any notion that Johnson has suddenly become a world-class leader will eventually wither under the glare from that big screen.

Besides, the idea that any of our politicians is having a “good war” is deeply distasteful. I tell you who is having a bad war: everyone and anyone in Ukraine or being forced to flee their homeland. Trying to earn political capital from that unspooling misery is far from a good look.

A headline in the Spectator literally said this: “Liz Truss is having a good war.” That is, of course, true if you consider a good war to be a chance for many pointless photo-ops and empty-vessel interviews, in which the Foreign Secretary’s robotic mutterings convey little besides her own perceived importance.

But now we must return to the widescreen cinema club. We interrupt this news to bring you unlikely statements from Home Secretary Priti Patel and Culture Secretary Nadine Dories.

Patel would like to say that she popped over to Poland (poor Poland) and noticed that Ukrainian refugees were fleeing true terrors. All those other refugees and migrants she has demonised and told to go away presumably just fancied a cheeky day out and a boat trip.

As for Dorries, she turned tearful while praising the BBC for the standard of its reporting on Ukraine, after previously berating everything about the BBC and wanting to yank it up by the roots.

All of this and more is to be found filling the big screen. On the smaller screen off to the side is the roll of personal news, the lives we keep on living while worrying about the distant lives of others.

This morning I drove my mother to hospital. She turned 90 two months ago, remains bright as a button, but today she faces an operation, her first medical problem. The news on that front will be clearer by this day’s end.

For now, I wait and worry, eyes flicking between the widescreen of world news and the small screen of personal news.

j j j
· 3 Comments

Just when you thought we’d seen the back of all that, along comes Putin…

SOMETIMES it seems you have lived beyond history, seen the back of all that, only for events to upend the foolhardy assumption.

Those of us now in our 60s were born not that long after the end of the Second World War (11 years, in my case). That fact still surprises: surely not, you think, that was all so long ago.

The Russian invasion of Ukraine unleashed by the thuggish despot Vladimir Putin drags us back into history’s bomb shelter.

What to think, what to hope and what to dread; here are a few thoughts…

Those on the left and right have been caught out in their admiration for Putin.

From the sentimental socialists there is too often a reluctance to allow criticism of Russia, and a willingness to blame Nato/the US for all wrongs (Jeremy Corbyn is a cheerleader for this gang). Yes, the West may have overlooked a chance to build bridges with Russia after the fall of the Berlin Wall, but this bloodshed is all on Putin and his vengeful ego.

From the rancid right, you will find Putin fanboys such as Donald Trump, who when president basically fawned over the Russian leader, and our own Nigel Farage (“Vladimir Putin is the world leader I most admire,” The Independent, March 2014).

Also on the right is our prime minister, who seemed happy until recently to paddle in Russian money, some landing in his party’s coffers. In truth, successive prime ministers have indulged Russian wealth, earning our capital city the nickname Londongrad, thanks to the ease with which dirty Russian money can be laundered.

Putin has played both sides for fools, lying shamelessly about how he is not going to invade Ukraine, then marching straight in.

Of course, Putin has not physically gone anywhere, being safely at home as his young troops are sent to invade a country for reasons they may not understand, a country similar in many ways to their own. Instead, he stays at the end of that very long table, while his generals gather in a craven huddle in the far distance. A perfect symbol of a man divorced from reality, detached from humanity.

On any given day you will find criticism of the ‘mainstream media’. Trump loved that tacky phrase, and those on the left mutter it as they gather in disgruntled cabals online to complain that we are not being told the full story.

Maybe we never are told the full story about anything; but we are told a story. Our television news and our newspapers show what is happening, or their version of that. In Russia, the state media hides those Kremlin missiles firing at Kyiv, denies the existence of the war against Ukraine.

You do not have to like everything the BBC, ITN Channel 4 or Sky News broadcast, but the story is being covered by reporters who are on the ground and at risk, the likes of Clive Myrie and Lyse Doucet. That BBC pair have been calm and authoritative under pressure, with Mryie even allowing for humour:

 

But the reporting honours for yesterday went to the Ukrainian reporter Daria Kaleniuk, who ambushed our photo-op prime minister Boris Johnson in Poland with an abruptness he was not used to. Speaking directly and passionately, she said: “NATO is afraid of World War III. But it has already started. And it’s Ukrainian children taking the hit.”

Johnson looked uncomfortable, as well he might, especially when Kaleniuk told him that three-word slogans were not enough. His latest is “Putin must fail”, seriously meant, perhaps, but ‘just too glib’ (we can all play slogan Scrabble).

As for refugees from Ukraine coming to Britain, the message from the government seems cruelly convoluted. The kneejerk attitude was that refugees should stay in the first country they enter – a shameless Brit response, made in the knowledge that we will never be that first country.

One charming Tory MP, Kevin Foster, even said that Ukrainian refugees could apply for fruit-picking visas. The best response to that comes in the Times cartoon below by Morten Morland…

Our government’s approach to accepting refugees is to brag about how generous we are, only for greater exposure to daylight to reveal this to be untrue, before they hastily step back, while still leaving the picture deliberately hazy. And leaving refugees in need without an honest answer.

The EU, funnily enough, acted more quickly and with greater generosity, but we have our sovereignty (whatever that is), so that’s all right.

j j j

Ah, I see. That’s what they mean by levelling up. Improving opportunities for super-rich Tory donors…

Sometimes stories bump into each other like badly driven cars, leaving scratches and a dent, even though there are no witnesses, and no one can say who was to blame.

Each story is left with paint belonging to the other. Here are two such near-misses…

Alan Rusbridger is the former Guardian editor who now edits Prospect magazine. He tweeted the other day that he had been refused a freedom of information request to see the minutes of a mysterious body convened by the Government to consider the future of the BBC.

His request was turned down because this panel needs “a safe space to debate live policy ideas away from external interference and distraction”.

Coming in the other direction was a much-shared story from the Sunday Times. This revealed that a monied cohort of the most generous Conservative Party donors has been granted access to senior ministers and advisers during the pandemic.

The BBC website’s paper review said: “As Boris Johnson was taking controversial and difficult decisions, some of Britain’s wealthiest people were given unique opportunities to question his team and offer their views on the government’s direction”.

Ah, I see. That’s what they mean by levelling up. Improving opportunities for super-rich Tory donors, who are given a back-door key to slip into Downing Street.

Here is Boris Johnson’s real world, not that one when he dresses up in working people’s outfits, strains the fasteners on Hi-Vis jackets, bothers hospital staff on a busy day, or has an RAF P-8A Poseidon plane flown more than 330 miles from Scotland (and back again!) for the world’s stupidest Top Gun-style photo opportunity. It’s so much easier to be surrounded by real money rather than pretending to care about real people.

And should you be worrying that inviting a group of multimillionaire Tory donors into the heart of government sounds perilously close to corruption, you’ll get no argument from me.

Those were the two story-cars that passed on Twitter.

The paintwork left on one from the other is that the government could be asking, for instance, enemies of the BBC such as Rupert Murdoch to share their ideas for what should happen to the corporation.

That’s a guess, but should such a scenario occur, it’s likely his contribution will be a gruff “scrap it now”.

That’s why we should know who the government has invited to exchange ideas or swap grubby favours.

In a later tweet, Rusbridger said: “Update: the mysterious panel last met in November and no longer exists. Baffling that they still ‘need a safe space to debate live policy issues’. The DCMS is supposed to nurture a free press, not block it. Appeal has been filed…”

We need to know these things, to be told who’s doing favours for whom. For instance, Culture Secretary Nadine Dorries has removed legal restrictions preventing Murdoch from interfering in the editorial independence of the Times and the Sunday Times. These were put in place by Margaret Thatcher when he was allowed to buy the papers in 1981.

Why was this favour granted by the BBC-bashing Dorries? Oh, probably because Rupert gets what Rupert wants. And one of his embittered desires has long been to see the BBC obliterated.

Over in the Observer, my usual Sunday read, a report revealed that six Tory donors have been “given top culture posts since Johnson became PM”. This is all part of the Tories pretending that the world is against them, and they need to put ‘their people’ in all the top jobs – or, as an invite to such donors put it in 2019, “It is important Conservatives rebalance the representation at the head of these important public bodies”.

And if you think such jobs should simply go to the best people, irrespective of party politics, you’re clearly not paranoid enough to get the job.

j j j

A Minister for Brexit Opportunities and other impossible ambitions…

Lies were told to bamboozle the country over Brexit. Many such glutenous whoppers were served up by the liar of the land, the man who pretends to be called Boris. He even had one slapped on the side of a bus.

All this truth-twisting has turned out marvellously, so long as the outcome you were hoping for was the biggest peacetime annual fall in British exports – down £20 billion to the EU.

There is more, a list longer than that line of lorries trying to leave the country in the Brexit bureaucracy queue. Or longer than the queue of farmers despairing at the duplicity of those promises.

In case you have forgotten, the advantages of Brexit were first touted by Ukip, as in this leaflet shared on Twitter the other day by Dave Lee of Hull.

Ah, yes, lower food prices, lower energy prices, more money for the NHS, better support for our farmers, revival of our fishing industry. It’s uncanny how accurate those predications have turned out to be.

The man who ate all the lies has just appointed Jacob Rees-Mogg as the Minister for Brexit Opportunities.

Boris Johnson likes to give ministers these titles. Michael Gove is the Minister for Levelling Up and Other Impossible Things. Culture Secretary Nadine Dorries is the Minister for Doing Unfortunate Interviews.

Oliver Dowden, who was elbowed out of culture to make way for Dorries, was made chairman of the Conservative Party instead. In that capacity, he has just given a speech of dull ludicrousness to an American right-wing think tank, blaming woke lefties for encouraging the enemies of the west. There is more but the urge to sleep while reading was just too strong.

Oh, and not forgetting Liz Truss, the Minister for Selfies. Dear me, that woman seems to travel the world just so that she can be photographed everywhere she goes. Do you think we should tell her she has a stalker?

Truss also does a shameless side-line in Thatcher montages, adopting poses once struck by the original. Now I hated that first edition with a bottomless passion, but she was a class act compared to this dopey doppelganger.

Anyway, back to the liar of the land’s new job for Rees-Mogg. According to the front page of the Sunday Express, we should be excited by this – “Coming soon! Brexit’s ‘Big Wins’ For Britain.”

Doesn’t that sound like a supermarket offer – “Coming soon! Two bags of lies for the price of one!”

Rees-Mogg is keen on touting the benefits of something that has so far proved to have none. He is even happy to turn potty-philosopher with remarks such as this: “The wisdom of crowds will ensure the benefits of Brexit.”

Heavens, what does that even mean, matey? Ah, hang on I’ve just been told there’s a mistake there. What Jacob meant to say was the “wisdom of clowns”. Now it makes sense.

As it happens, the same shameless right-wingers who sold us Brexit are now, having achieved one shabby ambition, insisting that we should abandon the green agenda, abolish net zero, frack the hell out of the countryside, and drain every drop of North Sea oil.

Chief among the never satisfied right-wingers who want to trample the environment is Steve Baker MP, a keen campaigner against Britain’s plans to reduce annual emissions of greenhouse gases to net zero by 2050.

How great this all is. The same people who landed us with a no-benefit Brexit are now stirring up divisions over the environment. As we know from Brexit, they won’t stop until they’ve got what they want, and lumbered the rest of us while they are about it.

Let’s hope they don’t bend the all-too-pliable ear of the liar of the land. Johnson does like to spout green messages, possibly composed while taking one of those private flights up and down the country he so enjoys.

j j j
· 1 Comment

How the BBC and others were bamboozled by a levelling-up scam…

TWO things can be true in the same breath. In that spirit of parallel pondering, let’s agree that levelling up is both a good idea and an entirely cynical bit of political foot shuffling.

It’s a good idea as it could boost parts of the country long left behind. ‘Levelling up’ is what governments should do; it’s not political rocket science, just the basic duty of a responsible government (ah, yes, now you come to you mention it…).

It’s a good idea as areas blighted by austerity and serial neglect deserve something brighter around the corner. Sadly, all they will discover is Michael Gove spouting fine words and flourishing an empty wallet.

Like a man who generously promises to buy everyone a round of drinks but suddenly finds he has left his wallet at home (or had it emptied by that monetarist meanie Rishi Sunak).

What they will also discover, according to a report in the Independent, is a White Paper that appears to have been padded out by raiding Wikipedia.

As the online newspaper wrote: “The white paper includes large sections of padding, with three pages devoted to the history of Jericho, Rome, and renaissance Europe. But bits of this section appear to have been lifted directly from the popular internet encyclopaedia….”

How could such a thing have happened?

Boris Johnson: “Hey, Govey, when’s that White Paper of yours coming out about my fantastic plan to level up the country?”

Michael Gove: “It’s still a work in progress, Boris.”

BJ: “Well, get your arse in gear and progress it now, Govey. I’m in the ordure here up to my knees and I need a distraction so everyone will talk about levelling up instead of trying to do me down. I need the BBC news to be filled with a lot of waffle about my great plan instead of all those endless hours about parties I might have attended.”

MG: “Pretty sure you did attend some of them, Boris.”

BJ: “Don’t you start, Govey.”

MG: “OK, prime minister, but we need more information, something concrete to put in there, not just airy good intentions.”

BJ: “Oh, Govey, just do what we all did when we were journalists with columns to write. Go and grab something off the internet. No one will notice. Does anybody read White Papers anyway? Can’t say I have ever bothered.”

MG: “Righto, I’ll get someone on it now.”

And that’s how the media agenda ended up being hijacked, or hi-Goved, for a night by ‘levelling-up’. The BBC pliantly bent to this windy announcement, with even the local BBC Look North programme joining what turned out to be an empty party.

No so much bring-your-own booze, as that Downing Street shindig advised, but bring-your-own-news. There wasn’t much to find here.

Genuine levelling up is a serious business that costs serious money. What Johnson promises is mostly empty booster talk and no new money.

Or untold billions if you believe the press statements. Kudos to the poor, truth-mangling sods whose job it is to write those releases, as they produce more fiction than is to be found on the shelves at Waterstones.

This money-free levelling-up wheeze comes with an irony-free special offer: the Tories caused many of the problems they now boast they are going to solve, but if you don’t mention it, they certainly won’t.

The long years of austerity, the shoving of cuts on to local councils so they would get the blame, the under-investment in the NHS – all political choices made by the party that now pretends it can solve those very problems.

Oh, and should you be wondering where all the money went, don’t forget the squandering of billions on useless PPE deals, the billions in furlough fraud written off by the Treasury, and the billions blown by an ideological Brexit.

Still, at least there was money left the other day for a generous tax cut for bankers. Their coffers are going to be levelled up nicely.

j j j