by Martin Odoni

This morning, the BBC covered a celebration of the Scouts Movement being held in Chingford. While the interviewer was talking to some of the people attending, the crowd broke out into a, shall we say, somewhat familiar chant.

Watch this; –

I am fairly sure that the presenter got the willies when he recognised the chant, because he quickly abandoned the interviews. This was probably more due to political neutrality rules than actual censorship, but even so, his reaction will not have been greatly different to the reaction of others within the corporation. There was an outrageous hatchet job attempted on the Labour Party this week by Panorama. Therefore it is easy to imagine many-a-BBC-face going pale white as they behold opinion polls with a clear Labour lead, and ongoing boisterous support for the leader they keep imagining they have discredited.

Survation Poll - 10th-11th July 2019

When will the smear merchants get it? The more mud they sling, the more Labour’s polling position improves.

Ever get that ole’ sinkin’ feelin’, BBC? Well yes you have. Today.

The Scouts sing Oh Jeremy Corbyn.png

You can almost picture the Director General staring at the screen and muttering in a growling croak, “I’LL GET YOU NEXT TIME, GADGET! NEXT TIIIIIIIME….”

Advertisements

by Martin Odoni

Just offering my ha’penny’s-worth on the BBC Panorama on-screen sewerage-fest from Wednesday. I am not going to offer a comprehensive breakdown of what was wrong with the ‘documentary’, as there were only two things wrong with it; everything that was said, and everything that was done. These pictures will offer a few hints about some of the problems though; –

Asa Winstanley

Asa Winstanley about BBC Panorama

Alex Richardson, regular messenger between LFI and the Israeli Embassy

Alex Richardson of Labour Friends of Israel (afiliation unmentioned in the programme.)

Ella Rose

Ella Rose of the Israeli Embassy (afiliation unmentioned in programme.)

If you want a comprehensive breakdown, please see here, herehere and here.

For me, my main focus is a small point about the Deputy leader of the Labour Party, and most powerful weapon the Conservative Party has left in its arsenal, Tom Watson.

Tom Watson revealed

Ah, this explains so much….

Sorry, wrong picture there. Lex Luthor cannot be Tom Watson. Luthor is someone who is somewhat intelligent after all. Let me find the right picture, give me a moment. Ah yes, here we go; –

Slimy backstabbing weasel

Oh hi, Tom.

Unmistakable.

The angle I wanted to highlight is Watson’s treatment of the party’s General Secretary, Jennie Formby. There has been a major backlash against Watson today for essentially using the Panorama fantasy as a pretext to join the ‘dogpile’ it has encouraged on Labour’s higher-ups, especially Formby herself. Formby, as she announced a few months ago, is currently fighting breast cancer, and so she is not really in the right shape for defending herself against political attacks.

Now, in itself, I do not believe there is anything inherently wrong in criticising Formby while she is carrying out her role as General Secretary. So long as Formby continues her duties, she has to be accountable, and while her illness should be taken into account when asesssing her conduct, if she cannot cope with oversight, she should really step aside – at least temporarily.

However, this does not really apply here, for while Formby has made clear that her illness is making matters difficult, she has not said that she cannot cope. Moreover, Watson’s behaviour is completely grotesque either way. Partly because he already knows full well that almost every detail in the ‘documentary’ was heavily-distorted or worse – probably knew full well days before he even saw it – and yet he still used it as a pretext to persecute Formby. The fact he would do that on false pretences while she is so ill is utterly inhuman, regardless of whether she can deal with it. Indeed, it is tempting to suspect that Watson hopes Formby’s illness will make his attacks more effective, which would show his amorality is at Boris Johnson standards.

JMac responds to Watson pretending not to know what he does

There is no doubt that Tom Watson is pretending not to know things that he very much does know, and that he is asking for information in public that can easily be obtained privately.

But still more than this, what slimy hypocrites Watson and his allies have shown themselves to be. Think back to the winter, when Luciana Berger was still a Labour Party MP. Berger was relentlessly rebelling against the party, especially is policy on Brexit. She kept publicly condemning fellow party members, and the leadership.

Berger’s behaviour essentially demanded cross-examination and criticism, and at length, her local constitutency party in Wavertree, fed up with literally years of her undermining her own party, tabled a Motion Of No Confidence in her. However, she was heavily-pregnant at the time, and the motion was met with nationwide cries of condemnation of the CLP’s supposed ‘bullying’. Most of the cries, on analysis, came from the Blairite Labour right. And guess who was one of the loudest to object?

“A pregnant young MP bullied out of her own party by racist thugs,”

Watson wailed when Berger resigned the whip (mysteriously avoiding all mention of the fact that the Chairman of Wavertree CLP is himself Jewish).

And Watson was moaning again just over a week ago when Ellie Reeves was allegedly targeted by one member of her CLP in Lewisham for deselection.

So, being heavily-pregnant absolves a female politician from any and all accountability, even accountability for activity they are carrying out while heavily-pregnant?

But fighting cancer does not?

There is no getting away from it. Tom Watson is just utter filth. He is a slimy, insinuating, double-faced back-stabber, and he has no place in any public office, let alone a place as deputy leader of the largest political party in Western Europe. Sir Humphrey Appleby once described MPs as having a skill called ‘moral manoeuvrability’. Which really means that they have no ethical consistency at all. He might as well have been talking about Watson.

(Note that the same condemnations above apply to Harriet Harman, who has also shriekingly leapt to the defence of Berger and Reeves, but has remained deafeningly silent over the bullying of Formby. Who does Harman think she is kidding?)

Still, all of these blatantly corrupt theatrics are rather deodorised by the latest opinion poll released by Survation. Note that the days the polling work was done were Wednesday and Thursday, so yes, the data includes the effect of the Panorama smear. What do we find? Labour are six points ahead.

Survation Poll - 10th-11th July 2019

When will the smear merchants get it? The more mud they sling, the more Labour’s polling position improves.

I think Watson and his allies need to get it into their heads; their blatantly-orchestrated smears are simply not working. If they were ever going to, Jeremy Corbyn would have surrendered the leadership long ago.

by Martin Odoni

It is a small detail, but Wednesday night’s Democratic debate in Miami proved that one very important change-for-the-better has happened in the USA in recent years, in amongst all the crudeness, chaos and cruelty of a Donald Trump presidency. That little beacon of positivity is that Senator Bernie Sanders’ campaigns over the last four or five years definitely do count, have made an enormous psychological difference, and have been completely worth every ounce of energy invested in them.

The issues Sanders spoke of during the 2016 Democratic Primaries were largely sneered at and dismissed by most in the US media, and by the Democratic National Committee – similar to how Jeremy Corbyn has been treated by media and Labour Right over here in the UK. But Sanders (and his excellent support base, some of whom are friends of mine) have shown fantastic perseverance, both during that campaign and subsequently. By dogged refusal to be side-tracked, Sanders and his supporters have kept discussions of Climate Change, healthcare that is free-at-the-point-of-delivery, workers’ rights, corporate abuse-of-power, wealth-inequality, public education, women’s rights – especially reproductive rights – and anti-warfare (among others) firmly in the public domain ever since. The genie is out of the bottle, and not only are these topics no longer sneered at, other Democratic candidates are now stepping up to the plate to speak about them, and even daring to propose the odd (relatively) radical solution, from time to time, as demonstrated during the debate by Elizabeth Warren.

Thus, Wednesday demonstrated that the window on real left-of-centre politics, which had been closed in the USA for about 35 years by the time Sanders emerged to challenge Hillary ‘Dollary’ Clinton for the 2016 Democratic Party nomination, is wide open again. With a prolonged and tireless four-year heave, Sanders forced it open, and he has made sure that the media and the corporate elites will not be free just to force it shut once more. These topics simply have to be tackled, regularly and with the fullest of candour, and without any more cheap attempts to distract from them. Way too many lives depend on finding real and lasting solutions to these crises, especially Climate Change, healthcare, and wealth inequality. Instead of looking for ways to get everyone to ‘ignore the problems away’, as has been the habit of the last four decades, there is now a real pressure for them to be properly addressed.

Now, some Democrats are daring to show ambition and no little backbone to speak openly about and pursue what they really believe in. That is Bernie Sanders’ legacy to the USA, and even if it is not as glamorous as, say, Barack Obama’s accession as the first Black President, it is at least as important. Sanders widened the Overton Window to allow in progressive ideas that have been kept silent for a long time, and which the aforementioned Obama would have been reluctant to consider. While Sanders claims to be a democratic socialist, he is in truth merely a social democrat. But as he forces old-style social democracy back into the world of the ‘thinkable’, he has opened the way for other, more radical forms of progressivism to take the American stage.

Even if Sanders never makes it to the White House, and my suspicion is that the DNC, by hook or by crook, will stop him again, his work over the last five years has still been worth every minute. This is because he accomplished something that had frequently looked impossible since Ronald Reagan’s time; Sanders managed to broaden the terms of public debate in a leftwards direction, instead of, as had happened persistently since the early-1980s, towards the ever-more-extreme right. Successfully pushing back against that tide is a supreme accomplishment in itself in an era that has become so right wing that even a television network like CNN is somehow viewed as a ‘progressive’ media outlet.

The accomplishment is more psychological than physical, perhaps, and it remains entirely possible that it will not lead to more progressive policies actually being implemented in the long run. It also may not hold the glory or pageantry of a Presidential Inauguration ceremony for Bernie Sanders. But the political conversation in the USA, normally marked by childish hysteria among Republicans, and cowardly blandness among Democrats, has been much-enrichened by Sanders’ rise to prominence. He has given a voice to those who most need one and who usually lack one, and has given the unreality of US politics a long-overdue anchoring in ordinary wisdom.

Four years of that are as great a gift as any number of years in residence at the White House, and are a tribute worthy of the best of politicians.

And it is quite a reassurance to be reminded that the best of politicians do occasionally exist.

by Martin Odoni

Crown Prince Mohammed bin-Salman, of the House of al-Saud, is a politician. That may sound like a grossly obvious description, but it is meant as a condemnation. He is a politician in the sense that so many professional politicians are capable of the most grotesque hypocrisy, moral inconsistency, and deliberate twisted logic.

bin Salman hypocrite

The Crown Prince of Saudi Arabia exploits a terrorist attack to condemn Iran, while insisting that no one should condemn him for a murder he definitely ordered.

I am sure everyone is aware by now of the attacks on two tankers – one Japanese and one Norwegian – in the Gulf of Oman on Thursday. There has been a highly prejudicial and, obviously politically-motivated, attempt to blame the blasts that rocked the tankers on the regime governing the Shi’a Republic of Iran. Now, the evidence for this, presented in an undignified rush by Mike Pompeo, the US Secretary of State, has been criticised as unreliable. It also runs contrary to eye-witness accounts provided by the crew of the Japanese tanker, who state that the ship was struck by an airborne object, whereas Pompeo’s presentation indicated that it was damaged by a limpet-mine that had been attached to its hull.

Now, there are all manner of reasons, beyond the differing testimonies of the people who were actually there, to treat Pompeo’s story with skepticism. The video provided – purportedly of Iranian Revolutionary Guardsmen removing evidence from the hull of the Japanese tanker – is suspicious at best, given it seems unlikely that US surveillance would have been monitoring the tankers so closely at the moment the pictures were supposedly captured, unless they already knew the mines had been fastened to the ships. If that was the case, why did they not send a warning to the tanker captains?

It is still possible that Iran was behind the attacks, but that is not a conclusion that can be drawn with honest confidence on present information.

With this in mind, Jeremy Corbyn, always maligned as a ‘fool’ and yet in practice always on the side of sensible and rational caution, has warned against blindly following the American lead. The response to this has been a predictable tidal wave of social media attacks on Corbyn, especially from Tory MPs, implying his insistence on critical thinking and evidence-based assessment demonstrates some kind of moral failing. Even to the extent of contradicting themselves.

Hunt showing usual Tory moral consistency

Jeremy Hunt showing his usual moral and intellectual solidity.

In all of this nausea-inducing hypocrisy, it should be impossible to judge whose knee-jerk deceitfulness is the worst. But the House of al-Saud specialises in being abhorrent in ways few other parts of the world can rival, and sure enough, bin-Salman has found a way.

The current Crown Prince is often lauded by Western Governments and media as a ‘liberal reformer’ leader, and less of a brutal autocrat than his predecessors. This is technically true, but all that really demonstrates is what horrific dinosaurs the previous generations of Emirs and Crown Princes were. By any standards, bin Salman is bloodthirsty, aggressive, and reckless, and his ‘modern outlook’ has little to do with a respect for human rights and individual liberty. Instead, he is just open-minded enough to recognise that Saudi Arabia has a lot of catching-up to do in the world of science and technology, especially if it is to survive in a relatively near-future in which Anthropogenic Climate Change is likely to force an end to the Oil Age. Hence his reforms; he wants efficiency, not justice.

Sure enough, bin-Salman’s reaction to the tanker attacks has been absolutely textbook opportunist-politics. While offering no more evidence than the US has provided, he has publicly accused Iran of being behind the attacks.

We do not want a war in the region… But we won’t hesitate to deal with any threat to our people, our sovereignty, our territorial integrity and our vital interests… The Iranian regime did not respect the presence of the Japanese prime minister as a guest in Tehran and responded to his [diplomatic] efforts by attacking two tankers

Now, it is quite vomit-inducing enough that Saudi Arabia is trying to claim some kind of moral superiority in any situation. Sure, Iran is a very repressive country, and its regime clearly has links to a number of Shi’a terrorist groups in the Middle East. But Saudi Arabia is also a very repressive country, and has at least as many links to Wahhabist-Sunni terrorist groups across the region, and probably all around the world. Quite what bin-Salman thinks the attacks even have to do with Saudi Arabia is very unclear too.

But worse than this, less than twenty-four hours after exploiting the tanker attacks to score points against the Ayatollahs, bin-Salman has issued a statement obliquely criticising officials in the Turkish Government. The reason? Bin-Salman seems convinced that the Turks are “exploiting” the horrifically bloody murder of journalist Jamal Khashoggi in the Autumn last year (yet another Saudi atrocity that receives the sort of muted response from British politicians that a similar Iranian deed would never get).

That murder in itself is enough to sever any contact the Crown Prince has with the moral high ground for the rest of his life. But for him to criticise political exploitation of an atrocity less than a day after he was committing the same crime gives off an unholy stink of hypocrisy that spreads around the world. I mean, at least we have ample reason to be confident that Saudi Arabia was behind the Khashoggi murder. At present, there is no confidence that Iran is behind the tanker attacks.

The Iranian Government is a hideous regime, no one is disputing that. But the circle the West cannot square is its hostility to Iran going hand-in-hand with its closeness to the House of al-Saud.

All the evidence of the two years since bin-Salman became Crown Prince shows that he is not the man to ‘launder’ that relationship.

by Martin Odoni

If evidence were needed that Theresa May is an arrogant, out-of-touch Prime Minister, we have it in the shape of her determination to welcome and do deals with the US President, Donald “Darth Satsuma” Trump. While Trump repeatedly insists that “the Brits love him”, there is far more visible animosity towards him than affection on this side of the Atlantic. His narcissism, his xenophobia, his climate change denialism, his misogyny, his deceitfulness, and his racism hardly need pointing out. But his incredible stupidity outstrips (“trumps”, dare I say?) all of these, and it makes a mockery of the US Government that he could be its Head.

There were small local demonstrations around the UK against Trump’s presence in the country on Monday, before a massive national demonstration in London on Tuesday.  I was at the local demo in Manchester on Monday, and the national demo on Tuesday. Here are some pictures I took.

IMG_20190603_182356

Due to a camera problem, this was initially the only photo from the Manchester demo I was able to keep. But I have recovered the other photos from Manchester and they are now available below.

And now, from the next day’s gathering at Trafalgar Square; –

Me on Trafalgar Square

End Austerity… now.

IMG_20190604_112739

Subtle reminder for Trump of his old nemesis, the late John McCain.

IMG_20190604_112742

IMG_20190604_112745

The problem is that whenever Morgan goes over there, he keeps coming back again.

IMG_20190604_112749

IMG_20190604_112755

IMG_20190604_112816

IMG_20190604_112850

IMG_20190604_113145

Sadly, politicians often make pretty lousy politicians too.

IMG_20190604_113214_1

I think Trump is already helping with that…

IMG_20190604_113522

Not Britain’s friend. In fact, he sounds like a British aristocrat.

IMG_20190604_113531

IMG_20190604_113534

IMG_20190604_113704

A truly hideous bromance.

IMG_20190604_114049

Really ancient sci-fi pun though it is, I must confess this one made me snigger.

IMG_20190604_114225

I’m not sure which of these two politicians I detest more, if I’m honest.

Then, everyone marched down Whitehall, where there were speeches by Jeremy Corbyn, Diane Abbott, Caroline Lucas, Richard Burgon, and others. (Sadly, I was unable to get into a position where I could get a view of the stage); –

IMG_20190604_121041

Never mind Downing Street or the House of Commons. THIS is the real centre of British Government.

IMG_20190604_121051

IMG_20190605_133349_463

IMG_20190604_121517

IMG_20190604_121738

Outside the Whitehall Museum was where I came to a halt in the crowds to hear the speeches.

 

IMG_20190604_121947

The statue is of the eighth “Duke of Devonshire”. And as we all know, there is no such county as ‘Devonshire’. It’s called ‘Devon’ and it’s also an Earldom, not a Dukedom or Duchy. Take that from someone who was born there.

IMG_20190604_125611

My vantage point was quite useless for getting a view of the stage.

IMG_20190604_125746

George Washington could not tell a lie. Tricky Dicky could not tell the truth. Dimwitted Donald cannot tell the difference.

IMG_20190604_131825

IMG_20190604_131915

IMG-20190604-01456

IMG-20190604-01457

My original placard sadly disintegrated in the rain, but I soon obtained another one.

Then we marched down Horseguards Avenue, past the Ministry of Defence, along the riverfront of the Thames past Scotland Yard, and onto Parliament Square.

IMG-20190604-01458

IMG-20190604-01460

IMG-20190604-01461

IMG-20190604-01462

IMG-20190604-01463

IMG-20190604-01464

IMG-20190604-01465

IMG-20190604-01466

IMG-20190604-01467

IMG-20190604-01468

IMG-20190604-01469

IMG-20190604-01470

You let Penny Mordaunt in THERE?! Britain! What are you thinking?!

IMG-20190604-01471

IMG-20190604-01472

IMG-20190604-01473

IMG-20190604-01474

IMG-20190604-01475

IMG-20190604-01476

IMG-20190604-01477

IMG-20190604-01478

IMG-20190604-01479

IMG-20190604-01480

IMG-20190604-01481

IMG-20190604-01482

IMG-20190604-01483

IMG-20190604-01484

IMG-20190604-01486

IMG-20190604-01487

Truth to tell, science has found little evidence of chlorination being all that dangerous, but we still don’t really want it here.

IMG-20190604-01488

The presence of the police did not deter anybody.

IMG-20190604-01489

The climate, more than the weather.

IMG-20190604-01491

IMG-20190604-01492

No doubt about it, the Queen Elizabeth Tower does look a little pathetic when ‘undressed’.

IMG-20190604-01493

The lady in the middle is Róisín McDermott of Unite the Union. And no, I have no idea how any of them got in there.

IMG-20190604-01494

IMG-20190604-01495

And finally, some other interesting pics I got while on Parliament Square; –

IMG-20190604-01498

IMG-20190604-01500

We’ll forgive you eventually.

IMG-20190604-01501

IMG-20190604-01502

Not witty, but certainly gets the irrefutable point across.

IMG-20190604-01505

Ronald McDonald has written to protest in the strongest possible terms that he finds comparisons with Donald Trump excessive and derogatory.

IMG-20190604-01506

IMG-20190604-01507

NO! THAT’S VILE! I don’t want to risk getting Donald Trump all over my poo!

IMG-20190604-01508

IMG-20190604-01509

IMG-20190604-01510

Trump’s hands are portrayed as much too large in this picture.

IMG-20190604-01511

IMG-20190604-01513

IMG-20190604-01514

IMG-20190604-01516

Tommy Robinson is reported to have wet himself when he saw this placard.

IMG-20190604-01517

There does seem to be a loud note of American embarrassment coming across at this demo.

IMG-20190604-01518

Again, there’s some real American embarrassment coming across at this demo.

IMG-20190604-01519

Sadly, some Brexiteers were there, having got it into their fallacy-addled heads that being pro-Leave is compatible with being anti-Trump, despite Trump repeatedly speaking out in favour of Brexit.

IMG-20190604-01520

That’s a bit insulting to gorillas, isn’t it?

IMG-20190604-01521

The slight ‘dominatrix’ overtones of the girl’s leather-heavy costume here might be meant to imply something iffy about Trump’s sexual tastes. And is therefore probably true.

IMG-20190604-01525

IMG-20190604-01522

IMG-20190604-01527

Ivanka apparently uses vape.

IMG-20190604-01530

IMG-20190604-01531

IMG-20190604-01532

The idea that climatology is a conspiracy, and that contrary information from the oil industry is not, is so idiotic that it’s hardly worth the bother of explaining why.

IMG-20190604-01533

IMG-20190604-01534

IMG-20190604-01535

IMG-20190604-01536

The little-known title of the Star Wars film that was ultimately never made, because George Lucas suddenly realised that a rancor would be scarier than a domestic tabby.

IMG-20190604-01537

The UK has a relationship with the USA of close, personal subservience.

IMG-20190604-01538

IMG-20190604-01539

The first word is ‘hell’.

IMG-20190604-01541

This is a very poor impression of Trump, because all of the words are spelt correctly.

Yes, Donald. The Brits love you. We can really see that.

by Martin Odoni

Stupidity is quite the most abundant commodity in modern Britain. Alastair Campbell, former spin doctor of disgraced ex-Prime Minister Tony Blair, was absolutely correctly expelled from the Labour Party yesterday, after openly boasting that he had voted for the Liberal Democrats in the recent European Union Election.

Before I get to my central point here, let me make clear; Campbell had to be expelled, as it was an open-and-shut case. The Labour Party rules expressly forbid voting for, supporting, campaigning for, or promoting other British political parties. Any Labour member who is found to have done so during their Labour membership cannot remain in the party. Membership Rule Clause I 4B in the official rulebook is absolutely emphatic about that.

Labour Party Rule 2B

Excerpt from the Labour Party Rulebook explicitly banning support for other political parties.

A member of the Party who joins and/ or supports a political organisation other than an official Labour group or other unit of the Party, or supports any candidate who stands against an official Labour candidate… shall automatically be ineligible to be or remain a Party member

By putting a cross next to the name of a Liberal Democrat candidate, Campbell supported a candidate standing against an official Labour candidate. It is a textbook example of the rule being violated.

I have no doubt that some members of the National Executive Committee are quietly very happy to get rid of Campbell, given his endless undermining of the current leadership. But even if that were true for none of them, they still plainly had no choice. That Campbell is guilty of violating Clause I 4B is manifestly self-evident, because he himself revealed that he had done it. When the guilty openly declare their crimes, even when no one else is aware a crime has been committed, proving the guilt is very easy, and justice can be swift and summary. One can therefore feel as unsympathetic about Campbell’s brazen stupidity in announcing his transgression, as one can for him over the transgression itself.

Inevitably though, many in the media and the wider public have leapt to Campbell’s defence, trying to claim he is being made a ‘scapegoat’ for Labour’s poor showing in the Election, or even that he is being ‘made an example of’ for being on the right of the party. The former accusation is clearly nonsense, because no one is suggesting he was involved in any way with Labour’s campaign. The latter is downright laughable, simply because Campbell announced his expulsion himself, rather than the NEC ‘perching his head on Traitor’s Gate’ or something.

Those who side with Campbell are generally doing so for reasons quite other than an objective assessment of his conduct. Some defend him just because, like him, they are centrists who want the left removed from the Labour Party. Others because they have a pro-Remain position on Brexit, and know that Campbell does too. Unfortunately for all these people, whether we feel their stances are right on these subjects or otherwise, it makes no difference whatever to Campbell’s transgression, which is still undeniable and inexcusable.

Perhaps most absurd though – and this is my central point – many on social media are pointing to a Tweet that Jeremy Corbyn published in 2012, as they attempt to argue that Labour is exercising double-standards. The Tweet in question, congratulating George Galloway on winning a by-Election in Bradford as a Respect Party candidate, is being interpreted as the current Labour leader somehow ‘supporting’ a rival party in 2012.

The people leaping on this in triumph, thinking they have the ultimate Gotcha! moment, are of course making themselves look like complete cretins. Even LBC Radio, which mysteriously likes to think of itself – in spite of the overwhelming evidence to the contrary – as a ‘professional media outfit’, has leapt onto this bandwagon.

The lamest excuse for attacking Corbyn ever

Centrists and Remain campaigners demand action by the Labour Party against Jeremy Corbyn for a Tweet that is not, and should not be, against party rules

However, there is no comparison at all between voting for an opponent and simply congratulating an opponent after they have already won. This is because congratulating them after the event will have contributed nothing to their achieving the result in the first place, whereas voting for them will have.

Congratulating an opponent on winning a poll is absolutely one of the most standard behaviours there can be during an Election in fact, and is routinely done by beaten candidates when they deliver their speeches after results are announced. It is a simple display of magnanimity – ‘good sportsmanship,’ or ‘gentlemanly conduct,’ you might say. Like shaking hands with an opponent after the full-time whistle at the end of a football match, or after the last ball is bowled in a cricket match.

Harold Wilson and Edward Heath famously detested each other when they were fighting over the keys to 10 Downing Street in the 1960s and 1970s. But even then, the loser in Elections between them, however they might have felt privately, had the good grace to congratulate the other. After losing the 1970 General Election, Wilson, probably untruthfully, even claimed to have ‘always admired’ Heath as an opponent. Did that count as voting for, or campaigning for, or supporting, the Conservative Party?

When John Major became Tory leader in 1990, Neil Kinnock, the then-Labour leader, crossed the floor of the House of Commons to shake hands and congratulate him. Does that mean Kinnock should have been thrown out of the Labour Party?

This is not only stupidity on the part of centrists, who are leaping on it without even thinking, but it is also childish. Like impressionable teenagers, so many people are being drawn into agreeing with the accusation without pausing to think it through. They are too-easily-led into seeing resemblances that are not even there.

And centrists think that the left are too taken in by conspiracy theories and are ‘not living in the real world’?

by Martin Odoni

So, Theresa May, a war criminal, is stepping down as the Prime Minister of Her Majesty’s United Kingdom of Great Britain & Northern Ireland. Not because she is a war criminal, but because it is clearly the only way out of the Brexit gridlock she has done so much to create. She will depart 10 Downing Street on the 7th of June.

May was in tears when she made the announcement this morning. But as is so often the case with politicians – especially right wing politicians – the tears will not win any sympathy from my direction. She failed miserably as Prime Minister. She was unceasingly dishonest, evasive, cowardly, and mean-spirited, for reasons well-catalogued elsewhere in this blog. Her relentless boasting that only she could deliver Brexit, and her sneers that Jeremy Corbyn would lead a ‘coalition of chaos’ if he ever got into power, have both had a sorry outcome.

May fails and resigns

The Prime Minister resigns, having failed to see out three years in office, and having never truly established a firm mandate to govern.

But I have to comment on May’s speech announcing her departure, which was as littered with the same bare-faced deceit and hypocrisy that marked her entire stewardship. For her to resort to that even now, when she no longer has a job to cling to only serves to make clear that her dishonesty was no matter of desperation in difficult times. It was, and remains, simply a fundamental feature of her personality. She is leaving her post as Prime Minister anyway, there is no practical purpose left in her continuing to tell blatant untruths. But she did it anyway, because it comes as naturally to her as breathing.

May’s lecturing of others on the importance of ‘compromise’ was vomitous. She was the one who repeatedly refused to speak with Opposition parties throughout the Autumn, and when she finally opened talks with Labour this year, she persistently refused to give any ground at all, insisting that Jeremy Corbyn and Keir Starmer had to surrender to her every demand. Hence why, when May kept going back to Parliament to try and force through her Brexit deal that had already been rejected, it never contained any significant difference in its content. It had simply been reworded to mean the same thing each time. That stubborn refusal to give an inch is the very definition of failure to compromise, while her pretence that the Bill had really changed when it had not was the definition of dishonesty. For her now to lecture the rest of the House of Commons on the virtue of compromise means she deserves a milkshake over her head.

But even more deceitful still was May’s attempt to talk up her administration as a success. None of her claims, be they about job security, housing, environmental policies, mental health care, Grenfell Tower etc stands up to scrutiny. But a most particular reversal of the plain facts was her claim that her Government had delivered “a falling National Debt”.

Beyond absurd. The Office of National Statistics’ last two published totals for the National Debt were published in September last year, and April this year, for March 2018 and December 2018 respectively.  What do they reveal?

The National Debt in March last year was £1,763.8 billion. The figure announced for the end of 2018 was £1,837.5 billion. In other words, the later figure was higher than the earlier figure, therefore the amount has continued to go up. And May says that, “the National Debt is falling”?

Now, as I have pointed out many times in the past, the size of the National Debt – while not unimportant – does not matter nearly as much as the Tories like to make out. But irrespective of that, what May said is still yet another a total reversal of the truth delivered with a mechanical bare face. It is possible to argue that the Debt, as a share of Gross Domestic Product, has fallen. But the problem with that is that the Tories are once again switching measurements whenever it suits them, and without telling anyone.

May resignation speech lie

Theresa May lives in a world of blackwhite, where a rising National Debt means the National Debt is falling.

If, as they should have been, public discussions of the Debt had been conducted in terms of the share of GDP from the time David Cameron became Prime Minister nine years ago, everyone would have known how completely pointless and toxic the Austerity program since then has been.

I would like to think May’s tears as she spoke came from the burden on her conscience that she had scarcely passed a day at Number 10 without deceiving someone, but I reckon it was more just a general haplessness on her part, having to acknowledge her failure to deliver the Brexit, or the “strong-and-stable leadership”, she had guaranteed. She cuts the most crumpled figure of a Prime Minister I have ever seen, and although the only candidates to succeed her from within her party are likely to be even worse, that does not constitute a defence of her. Her resignation may be the only truly right thing she has done as Prime Minister.

So May resigns as she served; by being deceitful, hypocritical, dysfunctional, high-handed, and unable to accept that anything that went wrong was her fault. Amazing how a Prime Minister can be so powerless.

As for the aforementioned Corbyn, that’s two Prime Ministers he has seen off as Leader of the Opposition. Not bad for the guy who was theatrically told after less than a year in the job by David Cameron, “For heaven’s sake, man, go!”

It is the Tory leaders who keep going at the moment, David.