Normal service will be resumed...

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

Nick, Enjoy your break, but don't take too long as it's quite possible that Gordon Brown will have gone by the time you get back (palace coup or nervous breakdown).

Meanwhile we'll keep the site warm by goading and teasing the loyalist remnants of the once all-powerful Nu-Labour party who are running around squawking like turkeys on christmas eve. Crikey! They're even accusing the BBC - that den of liberal-left iniquity - of right-wing bias....

#2 ScepticMax

Like your analogy about turkeys.

Just been on the news that the current deputy Labour leader Harriet Harman said the vast majority of Labour members were "solidly behind" Mr Brown. She omitted to add “with their packets of Paxo”

Margaret Beckett said Mr Brown must learn from the electorate's "clear desire to see a change”. Appears NuLabour members cant decide which flavour to use!

Meanwhile Mr Bean is down on the funny farm fixing the wheel that has fallen of his tractor.

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

I'm sure you celebrated both victories equally Nick.

As for Septic Max, Goad away, people take their pleasure in different ways. Why not simply celebrate with likeminded individuals,Norman Tebbitt, Michael Howard perhaps.

4# Speaks volumes about you as a person. Anonymous is how you should remain

#6
So Eatonrifle is not a nom de plume?
Anyway, my dad is bigger than yours, so there!

As the politicians are taking time to reflect, the media holiday is some good timing from Nick and a lead we can all take advantage of. I could comment on the issues or respond to some of the bait but life is short. We can all get a little caught up in ourselves and events, and this short break will do everyone some good.

8
Might do Gordon some good, not having to face DC at the dispatch box, but its only postponing it.

Whilst I respect your left wing stance, it is absolutely clear that the tectonic plates have shifted. A Conservative GE win is by no means guaranteed, but with or without Gordon Brown, Labour are on the decline. The "Not the Queens speech"
was a clear indication that Labour have run out of ideas. Don't be to disheartened. After years of Labour mismanagement and profligacy, it might be the election to lose.(as was the 1992 election)

I am disappointed MP's are off for a week. I was looking forward to seeing David Cameron making fun out of Gordon Brown on Wednesday in Prime Ministers Questions.

What is the most likely outcome for Gordon Brown? My views - ranked from most likely to least likely:

1. Following the next big blunder - people take to the streets and demand a Prime Minsiter who has actually been elected.

2. Gordon stumbles on for two years and loses the general election.

3. Senior Ministers call for Gordon to go in public.

4. Gordon calls a 'back me or sack me' vote of confidence among Labour MPs.

5. He steps down voluntarily.

6. Gordon turns the ship around and wins the General Election

For all of living memory, it has been a binary, tribal slugfest between Labour and the Tories, as far as the Government of Britian was concerned.

So, it is somewhat understandable if that paradigm is embedded in the brains of the respective parties politicians.

However, it is very disappointing if political jounalists such as Matthew Parris persist in thinking in this binary way.

I suppose, in essence it is a London/Westminster-centric view of our politics.

Post the 2010 General Election, with the Tories in power at Westminster, the SNP in Scotland and Plaid in Wales then the political situation is going to very, very different for all who live on this island.

So, you'd hope that at least one or two political journalists would realise this and start looking forward in a way that reflects the likely political reality, especially in England.

I am pleased for England, that we English will get our country back again, politically speaking, and the likely emergence of what are currently tiny specks such as the English Democrats to start acting as a counterbalance to the Tories, along with the remnants of Labour in England, Lib-Dems, Greens and others.

Food for political thought during this break.

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

Food for political thought during this break.

The best thing anyone can do is use the holiday for what it's for and not think at all. Let go of your worries and obsessions. Grasping is pointless and the BBC covers this in an opinion piece on obessing and work. It's wrong in many ways but I can't be bothered to argue it out as the general point is useful enough.

One thing people of an older generation used to do is have hobbies. They used to do the garden, build model boats, and tinker with the car. All that stuff's been replaced with browsing the web and other passive entertainment. I don't think it's quite the same thing. If people want to improve things they could make a start by getting a hobby.

Nick,

A well earned rest, my wife enquired on Friday.

'Do BBC people like Nick Robinson and Robert Peston get paid overtime for all these long and irregular hours' ?

No reply needed, thanks.

Have a good one, Nick; everyone deserves a break/holiday.

Charles_E_Hardwidge; excellent advice/thoughts there (posting 14) - there's a lot to be said for taking time-out and having hobbies that are unrelated to the daily grind.

Actually, taking short timeouts during a normal working day does wonders too.

It's also true, as per your posting, that browsing the web doesn't give you the same respite that doing a physical hobby would achieve. Always good to physically get away somewhere/somehow for a bit, even if it's just a walk around the block, or to make a toast-rack in the garden shed.

Hi,
I just wanted to give you my view of Nick Robinson's political presentation. Surely it should be informed political analysis, but it comes over to me as though he is telling us, his audience, what to think. Using the word "failing" to describe the present Government and PM, as he did when he commented on the recent by election result, is surely his opinion and not fact as he seemed to present us with it.
There is one point I would like to make about recent events. A Government's most difficult task is persuading the all-powerful Treasury to finance its policies. In spite of the (in my opinion, rather manic former PM and apparently even more manic wife) the Labour Government seem to have been quite successful in this, until it failed to persuade the Treasury to raise the tax threshholds enough to avoid penalising many on low and fixed incomes when the 10p rate was abolished. In spite of this I am still inclined to think, our present Government is the most likely to be able to persuade the Treasury to make allowances for those of us on limited incomes. After all we can take advantage of paying 2pence in the £ less tax when we take on extra work,

17
I would suggest that the Governments most difficult task is to stop asking the Treasury for more money and start making sure that the taxes they have plucked from the hard working families is well spent.
That would require a U turn from this spendthrift bunch who have proved up to now that they only know how to tax and borrow and have no idea as to how to spend money wisely.

This issue is amply exemplified by their snouts in the expenses trough, £96 to wash windows? At that price I would do it myself.
Pergolas in the back garden? How is that going to help the minister concerned to run her ministry.
We have been taken to the cleaners by this bunch and they might just have twigged that we know it.

Have a great holiday Nick, you deserve it.

Post 14 - such Zen like wisdom as ever. I remember Blair/ Campbell using similar tactics to avoid things they didn't like to discuss.

Despite this, as always you identify the pressing issue of our time - hobbies. Perhaps Gordon should take something up to help him let off steam from his all obsessive politiking - governing perhaps?

17
Astroturfer alert.

megapoliticajunkie @20 - I agree with you about 17.

The ideal that this government is helpless in the face of the "all-powerful" Treasury is a hoot - especially as up until recently Brown was the Treasury and upon his departure to No 10 he installed his puppet Darling in his place.

Such confused thinking as shown by @17 above could only come from a frothy and air-headed PR source.

A turning point in Gordon Brown's life was going to the US and watching Clinton's election spin. I think from this moment on, both he and Blair felt sure that the British people could be sold anything, and/or told that up was down and black was white.

Mr Brown's divorce from reality has continued ever since, but he is only one symptom of a changing zeitgeist that is irresistible. In every area - arts, the media, sport, economics, banking and politics - the age of Flash Form is drawing to a close. The age of Creative Content is about to dawn.

An excellent site, www.notbornyesterday.org, predicted an unravelling Premiership and economy for Brown in February 2007. Many others do the same thing.

#22: oldbutnofool
A very good assessment of events as they unfolded in recent history.

One question did they predict the date at which spontaneous combustion would happen.

Please, please don’t tell me we have to wait until May 2010.

You colleague Iain Watson reported today about Prescott's support for Brown. He concluded:

"Given this new reputation for openness, his endorsement of Gordon Brown is all the more significant as voters are unlikely to think that John Prescott is the sort of politician who says one thing in public and quite another in private."

Yeah, right! This about a man who pretended to be faithful to his wife in public, while having an affair with his secretary in private.

I wouldn't trust Prescott as far as I could throw him [sick. sic].

Always good to physically get away somewhere/somehow for a bit, even if it's just a walk around the block, or to make a toast-rack in the garden shed.

I try to take a break 2-3 times an hour. It can just be making a cup of tea but it gives me an opportunity for a stretch. The body isn't built for sitting statically or working flat out for any length of time. Idiot bosses hate it but pushing too hard just undermines performance and makes people miserable.

An old friend gave me some advice like yours. He said if you had a sedate job, have an active hobby. If you have an active job, have a sedate hobby. It's only a rough guide but can help people weigh their options. My Doctor's universal cure-all is going for a walk.

I've noticed Nick's writing has become more rounded and even, and he takes more breaks than he used to. He still experiments occasionally and looks like he's taking care not to burn out. Being playful and going at life with a steady pace helps us avoid becoming cynical and jaded.

#17 refers to politics being very different and raises the possibility of a change from the traditional 2 party "slugfest". Crewe and Nantwich was essentially a contest between the two biggest parties and I can see that being the case in many English constituencies at the next General Election, which should prove a fascinating election to try to call for political pundits.

There will be very different contests in England, Scotland and Wales. Labour will be fighting different battles on all fronts.

SNP will push them hard in many scottish constituencies, as will Plaid in Wales. The Tories are now outperforming them in England, and the BNP are polling well in traditional Labour areas - just look at where they won Council seats.

Trying to be all things to all people proved to be the mass appeal of new labour in the last three elections, but will be very tricky to maintain.

However my view is that both Labour and the Tories appear to have sufficient core voters in England to prevent a new political movement such as the english Democrats from gaining any real momentum. If the BNP, however take about 5% of the labour vote, as they appear to have done in the recent elections in London, that could be bad news for many English Labour MPs.

Some labour MPs saying a return to Old Labour is the answer. Realistically it's difficult to see what they can do to win back the Scots, the English Middle Classes and the BNP defectors - all of which will need to come back on board for Gordon to win the next election.

#26: jacook_uk

I totally agree with your assessment. We do live in exciting times.

At least while the rest of us bend under the load created by NuLabour there will be a free show on the political arena - Comedy of errors! Wonder what the final act has in store?

First off, I do agree that some sort of hinterland e.g. hobbies, is very desirable.

My comment about 'food for political thought' was really a plea to the professionals such as Nick et al to consider the view from outside the London/Westminster bubble going forward beyond 2010.

It will be quite difficult for parties such as the English Democrats (ED) to gain traction, but looking forward the the post-2010 era when Britain rapidly is ceasing to be, in the political sense, then this should open a window of opportunity in England for groups like the ED, possibly at the expense of the BNP.

Which at the very least would have to rename itself or look pretty redundant.

At least, there will always be an England.

My comment about 'food for political thought' was really a plea to the professionals such as Nick et al to consider the view from outside the London/Westminster bubble going forward beyond 2010.

Fair enough. I'm just saying that unless people learn to empty their minds they can't let anything new in or allow what's there to work its magic. I figure, we can become super-stressed by policy and peer pressure and letting go a bit can do some good. So, it looks like we agree on the principle.

I'm a bit of a one party state man so in theory we should never agree. In reality, both approaches are indistinguishable and it's probably true of party politics as well. The real problem is ego. So, I breathlessly await Imperious Leader's plan to increase joyous recreational endevour.

*swossh* *swoosh*

By your command

24 Scepticmax. re John Prescotts infidelity you mean the one he stood up in front of congress and apologized for after he had apologized to his wife. You would'nt trust him no further than you could throw him, Is that in the same way that you could'nt trust John Major, Edwina Currie, David Mellor, Tim Yeo, Cecil Parkinson, and dear old Alan Clarke, just to mention a few, Sceptic is just about right, you either have a poor memory or a very selective one.

Grandantidote #30:

It is, I regret, only human to have a somewhat selective memory where the infidelities of politicians are concerned. I am not referring to brain power or size, but surely John Prescott sturdily stands out!

#31 mighty angela. sorry angela, first sentence I'm with you. second I might be a bit slow but I dont quite understand what your getting at, do you mean that the infidelities of the Prime minister and one of the ministers that went on for years, or the antics of Cecil Parkinson when his secretary gave birth to his child. or Alan [lock up your daughters] Clark was caught at it not once but many times, were all less important than John Prescotts brief infidelity with his secretary. Or is it the man they once again want to pillory. not the question of infidelity. I might have the wrong end of the stick but perhaps you could explain to an old man.
But surely John Prescott sturdily stands out as what?

"152. At 12:46 pm on 25 May 2008, grandantidote wrote:
131 AE Miller Re John- punch -em -in -the -face Prescott, I'm a little tired of these stupid glib remarks.If some idiot three feet away from you deliberately threw an egg in your face, I suppose you would turn the other cheek..."
My point was not that Mr Prescott did something beyond the pale by hitting back but that he's never struck me as a tolerant man without a temper... so for him to criticise someone else as being short tempered when he is himself has
exhibited a very short temper on a number of occasions is a bit po-faced in my view. He wasn't called Prescott the "bruiser" for nothing. In many ways it was a good thing as his temper fitted his function of keeping people in line and he has many other good qualities that make up for this in my view but for him to call someone else short tempered when he's been filmed throwing your fists about does make him a bit of a hippo in my book...
"ask the men in the forces what they would have done, I know, and thank God they've got that spirit, but perhaps youre not one of them"
Sadly I can't say I live up to your ideal of manhood.

#32
In reply to Grandantidote #32.
With the exception of Alan Clark, the other gentlemen (for use of a better word which the moderators would forbid), were in my opinion such poor specimens of manhood, that their infidelities pale into insignificance compared to the mighty Prescott.

Alas, poor Grandantidote, if you can't work out what John Prescott stands out for, then you are even older than I am!

grandantidote @32:
I hold no brief (or admiration) for John Major, Edwina Currie, David Mellor, Tim Yeo or Cecil Parkinson. (I did admire Alan Clark for his 'don't give a sh!t' attitude and his entertaining diaries - but then he never claimed - or had claims made about him - that he was a man of fidelity).

My criticism was at the notion that the adulterous and lying John Prescott "is [not] the sort of politician who says one thing in public and quite another in private". The only reason the 'bulimic' glutton apologised at all was because he was caught with his pants down.

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

It seems an appropriate time to reflect on the New Labour project and why it went wrong.

I struggled through Peter Mandelson's book* on Tony Blair/NL a while back to try and understand it but really finished the book not much wiser.

As I now comprehend it, the project failed, not because there were'nt any good ideas in it, but because once New Labour were in Government, Gordon Brown basically blocked most of Blairs reforms.

Whether he did this because of a personal antipathy or because he (Brown) was more towards 'Old' Labour, only those on the inside could tell.

Whatever, New Labour still managed to spend vast amounts of taxpayers money over the past dedace, much which has been perceived to have been utterly wasted during these past ten years, and it is indeed fortunate that the economy was large enough to cope with this level of wastage.

Now, we are going to be going into an entirely new political framework around 2010, whereby England, Scotland and Wales operate more-or-less independently of each other.

I am not interested in Scotland or Wales, politically speaking, but look forward very much to England's political rebirth - an English renaissance.


* One of only two 'political' books I have ever read - the other being Barack Obama's Audicity of Hope - much more like it.

Do you feel (Nick, being a political analyst/expert) that the Tories' recent plans to force young people back into work are:
a)discriminating on the basis of age -
who is to say that young people should have to work while older people may still work the benefits system?
b)decidedly radical and communist due to the elements of forced labour.

I must correct something - I said that I've only read two political books - that is wrong.

I forgot to mention Jonathon Freedland 'Bring Home the Revolution' which really opened this posters eye's to just how little meaningful democracy we English have.

It is truly pitiful, our democratic structures are literally hundreds of years out-of-date and the botched Blair reforms of the HoL were only a token measure towards dragging our democracy forward.

It really does need a revolution - which fortunately is exactly what we English are about to get - once we regain control of our country around 2010, then we can modernise the democracy, using technology to leap beyond even what Freedland proposed in his book.

35sceptic max, John was caught with his pants down,you know that do you? of course the Tory culprits probably confessed all without ever getting caught, but of course Prescott is a socialist so whatever he did had to be at least justified by five Tories caught at it thats about power for the course for someone like you. your even happy after his confession to being a bulimic to use that in a derogatory way against him and none of the others ever told a lie did they,you are really unpleasant person are'nt you, it might interest you to know that the man you give credit to Alan Clark is the only man ever to be found to be drunk at the dispatch box, you are an excellent judge of character thats for sure tells us something about you does'nt it

34 mighty angela.I really am quite sure that I know what John Prescott stands for but I am still not sure what you think he stands for.
Not only gentlemen but also lady dont leave her out.

The days of Blair's grin and spin Nulabour are looking decidedly over. The problem being that we will end up with a one party state . Perhaps to ensure a sort of socialist dimension the Co-Operative Party will have the Balls to put its head above the parapet - sever its links with the Tories ( sorry NuLabour) and give those of a socialist leaning something to look to.

In Nick's absence, it is interesting to try to predict what particular head of steam will have built over these few days, and for me a few points very much signpost the most likely movement of public opinion, hence the issues to be tapped by an astute opposition. In fact I think Mr Cameron has already made a start.

If government has its way:

1. a motorist with a perfectly MOT-legal gas ticket will pay extra punitive tax based on the actual reading. This will hurt the less well off more than most.

2. we will be issued with personal carbon allowances. It can all be checked centrally;it is a swingeing instrument of taxation

3. it will be not be the done thing to mention the possibility of positive police action against the appalling rise in violent youth crime

4. the belief that school holidays cause the current deficits in literacy and numeracy will be promulgated

5. fuel tax will carry on carrying on

Oh dear, more yet more of the same arrant fuss and nonsense. Policy making by neither party will win or lose the next election. The goverment's own maniacal death wish will handle everything, and soon.

Nick, the Phoeneix Mars lander deployed by NASA has found evidence on Mars that a Stalking Horse should challenge Gordon for the leadership of the Labour party, according to the 'Daily Mash'.

I am alarmed at this for obvious reasons:

1. Why has the BBC not reported this event?

2. We pay for the BBC and expect a service.

3. YOU! Are expected to report such things.

4. Satellite TV news may beat you to this.

5. Should the BBC therefore be privatised?

What is it with newsmen when they can't see a story rolled out before them?

We demand more and more 'Gordon faces a challenge from within' stories, no matter where they are dug from.

We particularly prefer the 'sources' items or 'junior minister' stuff, so come on, pull your socks up. Those rabid Tories need a feeding.

Way to go!

Gary

44 Gary, a great post but though these stories are indeed probably out there in the boonies nestling up against Saddam's WMD, Shergar and so on, more likely that the real stories will be forecasts of lost votes in the Commons (the 28+ days' detention measures for example) either by backbench abstention or (as the shark pool beckons) voting with the opposition. Not with a bang but a whimper.

Interesting enough times nevertheless

Take a break? The one person who can't take a break from his relentless downward spiral into the history books is Gordon Brown.

He's achieved their worst poll ratings for three decades, got them kicked out of London, lost a safe seat in their Midlands heartlands and managed to bankrupt a bank for the first time in 140 years.

There's no way any of us should take a break from commenting on Gordon Brown's relentless record breaking. This man is gold dust. (no pun intended) If Roy Castle and Norris and Ross McWhirter were alive today they'd be banging his door down to get him a special entry in the Guinness book of records.

'He's a record breaker' 'Dedication, dedication, dedication, is what it takes'

This may look like negative thinking to some but I call it factual reporting of an appalling track record in office. Any attempt to say otherwise is burying your head in the sand - something all governments are prone to when they get it so tragically wrong.

I should think there are a few hundred NuLabour MPs who would like a break from all the negative reporting, but it will just go on until they rid themselves of their dithering and incompetent leader. He plotted for ten years to get rid of his predecessor, I don't see why the debate about how to get rid of Gordon. Someone need to go in and tell him in the same way he told Blair. When are you going to leave? (Except I understand it was a little stronger than that)

Any NuLabour MP still dithering about this decison needs to get on a plane and find out what has happened to our standing internationally since Gordon Brown took over..sterling down 25% against the Euro and no-one outside the UK understands why on earth he got the job. This is a serious country that needs a serious leader who will stand up for our country. Not someone who ignores manifesto pledges, doesn't bother to turn up to sign treaties and spins his way to a 'different' kind of relationship with the US. Poppycock, all of it.

Gary (GaryElsby 44), you are such a poet. As I understand it, 'the stalking horse on mars' story is a complete fabrication, conjured up by New Labour to steal our attention from the real story New Labour are currently suppressing: That Ms Blair's autobiography (chazzer to her friends) is revealing so much about the inside dealings in the new labour camp. It's creating an amazing buzz of excitement across the globe. Just a few extracts for you: 'Tony looked at me and cried when I told him I loved him', or how about, 'surely, I thought, how could anyone not love Tony.' hang on, what about 'In my eyes the only thing lovlier than Tony is a Greggs cream bun'. and my favourite, 'I asked Tony how we could increase happiness (one for you Charles) and he said, with love we can achieve anything'. Stirring stuff!

#47 The journey changes people.

Whatever Cherie Blair/Booth was, she certainly is not now.

Even the brightest star in the political firmament right now, Senator Barack Obama, is being changed by the journey.

Literally, as he flies around the USA courtesy of private jet with Robert (DeNiro) and Oprah.

The detachment from the reality of the people is simply part of that journey, as we saw all too clearly with the Blair's.

48 JohnConstable:

Ahhh the journey indeed, such sweet thoughts, lifes long (this is where you come in Charles) pursuit of happiness, turned turgid by the sterile disbelief of our detractors, pheeew! Carry on like this and i'll be in with a chance at the next Booker.

Re: 44 Gary, never mind the Daily Mash, it's all in last week's Spectator. Or did you know that?

Alan Johnson, anyone?

#50

Alan Johnson - no.

As he said himself when introducing himself to Jamie Oliver recently :

"Hi, I'm this weeks education secretary".

In that single sentence, you can see why it really is a terrible idea for Government to have any 'hands-on' role in our English children's education.

In my opinion, Government should get out of the business of 'providing' a virtual monopoly education 'service' for the English people's children.

For the simple reasons that :

a) they are not very good at it

b) it is a monopoly (unless you are wealthy) which is bad for consumers

We don't need no thought control, ... hey, gummint, leave them kids alone.

Ahhhh, how sweet and affectionate Conservatives are. 'Tony cried', they say as Cherie told him she loved him.

Laugh and the world will laugh with you. Just ask William Hague (No.2).

Aren't we missing the point!

David Miliband has categorically stated that he is neither a horse, a stalking horse, a possible or even a possible contender for the vacancy of Prime Minister that is neither vacant or open to a vacancy.

Should the story be, whether we or they like it or not, a 'David Miliband denies he is a horse or a stalker' story?

I'm getting very concerned with the quality of journalists and journalism.

I'm more used to journalistic crackpots who have a fear of water and express such by foaming at the mouth.

Take any Chief Political correrspondent you like in a satellite setting and you'll see what I mean.

'David Miliband denies!' says the ex Daily Mail reporter.

David Miliband denies he's David Miliband but why would he wish to?

As a Labour Party member who relies entirely on my news by journailists (rather than make it up myself) I question the legitimacy of the quality of journalism and I say please, spare us.

Just tell me the truth. Is David Miliband a stalking horse who wants to be the Prime Minister or is he the Foreign Secretary?
Why should I believe that he is actually David Miliband?

The REAL David Miliband wants to be the Prime Minister (I know this) and the satellite one denies this (because he just said so).

I'm nobody's fool and I'm not stupid, I'm just confused (of Stoke).

I understand that medication will help but I can't get it through my television screen to administer it to him.

So if you happen to stumble across an ex Daily Mail Chief Political correspondent at throwing out time please inform him that Cherie loves Tony, that Gordon is the Prime MInister and that we are convinced that David Miliband is who he says he is and he doesn't want to be Prime Minister just yet.

Phew!

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

# scepticmax you really are a piece of work are'nt you? to be frank I'm amazed that your last paragraph got past the moderator they must have been at lunch when this garbage slipped through the net, there are some people in life that you come across that although they are rude and offensive you try to be kind and helpful and understanding towards them, but you old chum are not at all worth the effort, I could say so much more but my comments unlike yours probably would'nt get past the moderator. as much as I enjoy these blogs and the rather odd people you meet on them I'm afraid that I cant be doing with you.

51 John Constable, re Alan Johnson, time for a sense of humor check John he was talking to an arch joker at the time.

grandantidote @54

I see you've been successful at activating the censors. Oh. Well done!

For the benefit of those who would like to actually read what incensed your sensitivities, for the forth time, I'll try again, with ironics.

My main point was that a obviously deluded reporter was portraying Prescott as someone "voters are unlikely to think that John Prescott is the sort of politician who says one thing in public and quite another in private.".

Furthermore, Prescott's 'confession' to being 'bulimic' is indeed a cry for help: help in selling his worthless memoirs.

Only in the cloud-cuckoo land of Nu Labour supporters could Prescott's [one of the seven deadly sins beginning with 'g'] be called 'bulimia'.

All this, of course, doesn't excuse Tory flaws, crimes, mistakes and peccadillos. But they were not the subject of my original post. I was talking about the highly talented, fit [as in healthy!], faithful, competent, moderately behaved and honest former deputy prime minister.

Clear now?

As for me being 'unpleasant' (your post @40): Sure, the truth sometimes is unpleasant.

I may disagree with what you say, grandantidote, but I would not censor you. Herein lies the difference between us: I may be obnoxious in your eyes. You, on the other hand, are a danger to everyone's freedom.

BBC Moderator - what element of my previous (censored) post is not factually true?

#56 sceptic max, If you write with a little respect you'll be fine. there are a number of people in the house of commons that I dislike intensly but I as a child I was always taught, that manners cost nothing, whether you like John Prescott or not is beside the point, The man was there doing his job to the best of his ability,and I think well, you may not agree with that and thats your right but your spiteful childlike and offensive remarks were well beyond what any decent person would accept, I suppose you think its alright to ridicule the man for being bulemic but if you had a child that was bulemic you might, just might feel differently, if he had a heart problem or cancer would you be equally offensive. As for me chum I have always been able to look after myself adequately in every way and I mean every way. I am not endangering anyones freedom I just dont like intimmidation whether against myself or people who through decorum are not able to answer themselves.I am afraid that you have learnt nothing so best take a tablet for the fourth time and lay down.

grandantidote @57 You are not just censorious, you are pompous too.

Respect - so far a public figures are concerned - needs to be earned.

I'll continue to write as I please.

Re: #57 Grandantidote

I must state that I find your style of writing fits perfectly with your thoughts. You appear to be a man bent on defending the sensibilities of politicians, whom are basically the thickest skinned creatures in the universe. The only way you can hurt a politician, of any party, is through his/her purse, and yet you insist on expecting people to treat them with respect.

I do not believe in censureship, would never call upon moderators to remove fellow-bloggers postings, but then I am not a Marxist, nor a repressed humanbeing.

It seems you enjoy berating those with whom you do not agree, sometimes you appear to be literally foaming at the mouth. I don't wish to agitate you further, but as a woman I will conclude by saying Prescott is one of the most revolting slobs it has ever been the misfortune of the public to subsidise. If he was a travelling comedian of the old type, on the Variety Empire circuit, one could either laugh at him, or more likely bring out a long hooked stick and whisk him off the stage and away from the spotlight.

Re: 55

And indeed my point (that there are stalking horses galore; or two to date, which for stalking horses is a fair good number) is made in the belief that if what we are meant to be blogging about is political news, then we really ought to start by trying to know what it is.

Or is this all just about lunchtime?

#55

I saw the piece, I think Jamie was trying to get decent school dinners for children, and I realised at the time that Alan Johnson meant it as some sort of wry joke.

But when you consider that people in industry spend sometimes decades to get to the top of their organisations, learning everything about it on the way, it is completely and utterly absurb for some politician to be placed in these jobs by the PM, in huge organisations like the NHS, MoD and the Education department, like some sort of sweets being handed out.

Totally insane and no way to run a country.

It is not us, the people of England who need to be carefully controlled, it is the politicians, but unfortunately we have a massive democratic deficit, which means the inverse is true.

Grandantidote my friend you can't try and explain anything about respect or common decency to some of the rabid right wingers on here.
All of them when talking about the Prime Minister always make their criticisms personal. Why should they be any different when commenting on John Prescott?
When "mighty"angela comes out with
"I will conclude by saying Prescott is one of the most revolting slobs it has ever been the misfortune of the public to subsidise." you know that reasoned debate is pointless.
They always resort to the politics of personality because when it comes to policies they have no clue whatsoever.

The effect of John Prescott's affair on the perception of his honesty is not really an issue to get worked up about.

The issue is that he is a serial liar when it comes to his reflections on what has happened in the Government. During his time as deputy prime minister he repeatedly denied that there were any disagreements between Blair and Brown. Every time stories appeared in the papers he dismissed them as 'prattle'.

But when it came to selling his book, he was quite happy to confirm that the stories had been true all along and to demonstrate that we should not have believed a word he ever said.

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

Re No.2 septicmax wrote

"....Meanwhile we'll keep the site warm by goading and teasing the loyalist remnants of the once all-powerful Nu-Labour party who are running around squawking like turkeys on christmas eve. Crikey! They're even accusing the BBC - that den of liberal-left iniquity - of right-wing bias."

an interesting point, I suppose we can only judge on the basis of our own personal centre ground whether the media is left or right wing bias. In relation septicmax judges the centre to be on the right. so he thinks their is a left wing bias. Mine is slightly to left so I will judge it as right wing bias.

Thankfully, We live in a liberal country. liberal is a positive word not a negative word. it means open minded, willing to change.

You have every write to say that John Prestcott is overweight and is flogging his book. Just as I have a right to say that Ken Clarke is overweight and has worked for a company which sells cancer sticks to the third world.

Since we don't have a strand on the governments probable next U turn can I canvass opinion on the motoring debate

I have two questions

First, do WE pay tax on fuel from our already taxed income and is ALL of the price (Fuel + Tax) subject to VAT, ie taxed a third time?

Second, if the government's proposed licence fee is implemented will the older cars, which are mainly owned by the poorer of the population, including pensioners, then become of no resale value. If this is the case would those people thus be priced out of car ownership altogether, possibly leading to an increase in car crime?

I would value your opinions.

dhwilkinson@65, Thank you for your support of free speech.

Funnily, I happen to agree with your assessment of Ken Clarke - and could heap much more opprobrium on the old fox! But as a politician and a thinker he is leagues ahead of Prescott (but then, who is not?).

BTW, there is a world of difference between the good old values of 'liberal' and the PC madness and straight-jacket mindset of 'liberal-left'. I know it's confusing, but the very meaning of words has become distorted to reflect political bias. I guess I'm as guilty as any of such usage: Mea culpa.

@66 mikepko

What is wrong with a U turn in this case?

There is a problem with the price of fuel leading to high inflation. Should the prime minister be stopped from acting on this by playing politics?

Refusing to U turn could be seen as strength, but it could also be seen stubborn and closed minded. So conservatives win whatever the prime minister does.

Dear points of View,

I'm writing in an angry protest at the deliberate ingnoring by the BBC of the great Nick Pisani of Question Time.

For years this man has silently toiled to bring us the best ever political show on the telly but he is constantly ignored by Jonathan's brother, David Dimbleby.

Mr. Pisani forever has his hand up pleading to ask his question but is constantly overlooked.

Please can Mr. Dimbleby let Mr. Pisani ask his question?

I'm sure it is the following: Should Gordon Brown be challenged for the leadership of the Labour Party?

Could David ask the panel to comment, starting with the Author (and part time shadow Foreign secretary) William Hague?(who will answer, YES) and could every member of the Labour Party be allowed to give a response (which will be NO).

Thank you for your consideration in this request.

Mr. Angry from Stoke.

PS. Has the BBC sussed out that the Conservative Party have no policies? Not a sausage.

#65 dh wilkinson,I agree totally that sceptic max has the right to free speech no one denies that but perhaps you did'nt read the post before it was removed if you did and you think that it was OK then perhaps you also need to think what free speech really means. If you did'nt read it then it is difficult for you to give an independant opinion about what it contained,I too think that John Prescott is fat so are about three quarters of all the MPs in parliament including Ken Clark who incidentally is one of the few Tories that I respect, he also al;ways had a glass of whisky by his side when at the dispatch box, so should we call him a glutinous[because he's fat] fat alcoholic, this was very mild compared to what sceptic max called Prescott had he have made the same comments about Ken or any other MP then I should have reacted in the same way. my argument with sceptic max was not that he did'nt show no respect to John Prescott thats his yours and my choice, my argument was that he used bulimia as a part of his disrespect, bulimia is a scourge on many young people out there and many parents are worried sick about this complaint, Prescott admitted that he had suffered with bulimia for years, how sceptic max thought that Prescott considered that it would help him sell more books is beyond me but then much of sceptic max's rhetoric is beyond me . You can hate John Prescott or love him thats each persons choice but enough people thought good of him for some thirty years to make and keep him as an MP and people close to him thought enough of him to make deputy PM for ten years without a challenge, but this was not about Prescott, and certainly not about the right of free speech, it was about the derogatory remarks regarding bulemia and the lack of sensitivity contained in those remarks. those that didnt read the post need to wind their necks back in and take a reality check, and dont comment on something you didnt read.

@70 grandantidote.
relating to @67 dhwilkinson

I would suggest you look at scepticmax@2 2nd paragraph. He seems to be doing very well at winding you up.

I was not talking about freedom of speech. I was talking about this trivial pointless name calling celebrity gossip column style subject that this thread is on at the moment.

grandantidote @70,

Amusing that you rebuke someone ("dont comment on something you didnt read.") for commenting on something that they couldn't read because your Mary Whitehouse sensitivities got it pulled by the censors.

If John Prescott had/has bulimia then I'm a banana. His corporeal appetites were just very large - nearly as large as his ego. As for him being an elected MP for 30 years, that says much about his party and voters. In some Labour seats you could nominate a thick, thuggish, oaf and he'd be elected. And in some they did just that.

59 mighty angela, At last I can make some sense about what your saying, in your case you hate all politicians in mine I dont, thats
simple is'nt it.You say you believe in free speech so do I with one or two exceptions,
I dont believe that people should be able to roam our streets encouraging people to kill or maim their hosts, and I dont think that neo nazi's should be allowed to make rabid speeches against people from another race, so you see free speech is what we pertain to think it is perhaps you think differently and thats your choice and thats free speech,
With regard to the moderator perhaps you hav'nt found anything offensive enough to report to the moderator maybe one day you will, this is not a playground were you say I saw him/her do wrong but I'm not going to dob him in, I'm afraid that that sort of mindset is leading to why so many silly kids are able to go about stabbing one and other, I'm not going to dob him ineven if he has a bloodstained knife!
Your last paragraph does'nt require an answer anyone reading it will form their own opinions about the sort of person you are.

It strikes me that the valid criticisms of John Prescott are:
(1) That he prioritised governmental unity over being open about Blair and Brown's dislike of each other. (True but what else was he supposed to do as Deputy Party Leader?)
(2) He has also cashed in on this in an attempt to sell his memoirs which are being released at a particularly unhelpful time for the Prime Minister.
All the rest of the nonsense about bulimia, extra-marital affairs, "thuggishness" etc is just spiteful tripe and given the source of the criticisms pretty much par for the course.
Maybe some of the rabid right wingers on here just "get off" on personal attacks.

68 wilco

Nothing wrong with a U turn here at all. It is a good idea not to penalise the poor.

Unfortunately it will be seen as not thinking policy through, yet again so I thin GB and AD will resist as long as possible.

A few days' break???
Holidays aren't compusory, you know!
Have a good one.

peteholly @28. It might be 'spiteful' but it's not tripe - it's truth.

I don't 'get off' on personal attacks, but I do admit to enjoying goading and teasing Labour supporters. (Not as much fun as fox hunting, though. I'm told the foxes are smarter).

Tally ho!

I think it is a pretty futile exercise picking over the various attributes of individual politicians.

These politicians are human beings doing whatever they are doing within the system.

If the system itself is perceived by us, the English people, to not be functioning particularly well, then we have work towards changing it.

It may be too much to expect the politicians working within this system of Government to be the actors for reform.

The available evidence seems to indicate that they are more comfortable with 'was is', rather than 'what could be'.

Once there was a way to get back home ... and we English need to find that way.

71 D h wilkinson 1 was refering to your last paragraph 67which although not mentioning my title it implied that I had suggested that I was opposed to free speech since you or he have'nt any idea why he was reported other than what I have told you, although he probably has but with ref to 71 I can assure your that he isnt winding me up he has'nt the intelligence for that if you want to compare personalities and how wound up I am as compared to him then read the post addresses to you#70 and now read sceptic max's letter72 were his rantings not only include John Prescott but the whole government and cast doubt on the sanity of thousands of voters,I think thats certainly opening up the spectrum. but not for me I suppose that in life we come up against ignorance I fell for it now I will Ignore it, sceptic max is a literary bully he knows that its safe for him to spiel vitriolic remarks on all and sundry but only from the security of his computer. I'm afraid that in life I do not bother with people of that kind and I dont wish to here.

# 62/ 74 Pete Holly thank you my friend I endorse every thing you say the only policy they have is, if you cant think of anything intelligent to say then lets see who we can vilify today that will take their mind of the lmportant things that we have to deal with on a daily basis, paragraph two I do agree with you but he had been beaten to the post by cherie and levy. but your right he should have waited.

#72 so sceptic max is a banana well that tells us a lot , and there was I hoping that he'd say something intelligent, its all become abundantly clear now , well we cant expect to much from a banana, can we!

# 78 John Constable, I agree almost totally with you except for your last sentence it should read "and we british need to find that way"

67 ScepticMax

I enjoy fox hunting too. Lots of people I know - all very working class and NOT TOFFS - enjoy the hunt, either on horseback or following.

When the Fox Hunting Bill went through I suggested another version - Labour MP Hunting with Dogs, but my friends said it wouldn't be much fun as Prescott would only get a few yards and Brown would bore the hounds to sleep.

Pity. It would have saved us a lot of problems now.

# 58 sceptic max , you say i'll continue to write as I please, well my rather thick friend thats clearly not the case on these blogs as you have very recently found out to your obvious embarrassment and consternation.Your post would'nt have been removed if it had'nt been offensive not only to me but to the moderators, try to take it like a man, if thats what you are.

# 82

Who is British today?

a) Scottish politicians plying their trade at Westminster.

b) recent immigrants who are understandably looking for a new identity.

c) anybody else who is not Cornish*, English, Scottish or Welsh.

* I had some complaints from the Cornish last time I composed this list as they were inexplicably left off.

# 83 mikepko, why am i not surprised that you and sceptic max like fox hunting, You sit on a horse and chase until exhausted a little animal about a tenth of your size, not alone though you need about forty or fifty other idiots on horses to bolster your courage and of course lets not forget that you need about the same amount of dogs to protect you, their only reward is to be able to rip the fox to shreds when exhaustion finally beats the little fellow.
he has no chance to defend himself just like you two bravely vilify beyond reason on a daily basis the government of this country much to the glee of our enemies knowing that there is no chance that they can fight back, your either secure on a horse or sitting behind a computer knowing you cant be touched,both of you giggling away like schoolchildren but with a little less brain power.

#73 Grandantidote

Sir,

Read your comments with regret. Will not be responding to them any further because I think you are, to put it gently, nasty, and I do not wish to have a feud by computer.
I would defend free speech even of those whom I hate and whom hate me. That is true democracy. I would encourage them to spill all their bile out and use rhetoric to defend my cause and expose them as fools.
Finally, may I suggest that the kids who stab each other have been raised in such an atmosphere of political correctness that they cannot speak out what they feel, cannot tell others what they think of them, so just shove in a knife or use a gun.
That is the heritage that nu-labour and the practitioners of political correctness have endowed to our miserable youth. Obviously you are a true proponent of political correctness!

85John constable. all that you mention are british we may have our preferences for an example in sport but when faced with adversity we forget these things and become the United Kingdom I am Welsh you presumably are English but we fought side by side as Britainsfor decades when I meet a Scot or a guy from Nortern ireland a Cornishman they may have a slightly different accent thats true but we all are British subjects, I am proud to be Welsh but I am also proud to be British and quite pleased to be a citizen of Europe I have lived in many of the above coumtries and have always been treated with respect except for one or two exceptions, and lets face it you get that on these blogs, buts thats what being British is to me. Stand by for the racist comments from the less educated amongst us.

#88

Being 'British' intrinsically means belonging to a political entity.

I believe that that political entity is very near the end of its shelf-life and in a few years time will be no more than a memory.

Throughout history, political entities have come and gone.

I too am proud to be English, a member of the Commonwealth, a citizen of the EU and of the world.

I just do not see the need to be British as well, which in effect is merely bolstering a defunct political class at Westminster.

Ref my post #77: I've never been fox hunting, probably never will - not my cup of tea. But I'll be damned if I let my tastes dictate to others what they may or may not do. I have a lot of respect for country people and their way of live.

I'll not reply to grandantitode's attempts at insult - he's doing a good enough job of holding up himself to ridicule.

Meanwhile, back in the [un]real world: The Spectator reports that TV cameras trooped in to film the beginning of Gordon Brown and Alistair Darling’s meeting with various oil big-wigs this morning. After Brown thought they’d stopped filming, he announced:

“Well that was an unreal start to a meeting… Now we can relax!”

This really is Potemkin politics. It is hard to imagine that many voters will be fooled by today’s ‘summit’.

All Brown needs to do is cut tax and duty on fuel (we already pay over 70% of the pump price on duty, tax and VAT) and the problem's solved. Except, of course, that he doesn't have any money in the kitty having wasted £2.7 billion in an unsuccessful attempt to bribe the voters of Crewe and Nantwich, and has untold billions tied up as security for Northern CRock.

#90 sceptic max perhaps I should have checked you post 67 mikepoko83 I am afraid threw me and for that I apologize.
I also like country folk having been born on a farm and brought up for a number of years on one, but dont be fooled by the Idea that all country folk love fox hunting as that patently is'nt true. I am afraid that I do let my tastes dictate what others do or hopefully try to, hence the destuction of Hitler and his cronies not by my hand alone thank goodness but suported by millions of like minded people I use that as just one example of what I dont accept, a pretty powerful argument in favour of argument in imposing your beliefs on other people I guess but neverthless valid.there are limits to what all of us will accept in life even you old chum. Nice to see that your post has become more moderate despite your attempt to embarress me.

91 grandantidote

Interesting you helped destroy Hitler. My mother, who likes seeing the hunt, saw Hitler in 1943 after she had been taken to Germany for slave labour. She is a country girl and oddly I am a town, or outskirts of, from guess where - Tunbridge wells, And oddly again I am not disgusted by hunting.

I am disgusted however by the waste of huge amounts of money by governments, the erosion of human rights by governments, and the stupidity and violence of human beings.

I think we should get things in proportion and look at each and every event as it comes, not be swayed by any idealogy.

And while I vote Conservative it is not to put TOFFS in power but because I believe in the individual and not in the state, as it is doing now, trying to control the lives of individuals in each and every way. In this I take after my mother who has fought hard to keep our home going and experienced the nasty side of life with the murder of her family during the war.

Be pragmatic!!!

@90 scepticmax"All Brown needs to do is cut tax and duty on fuel (we already pay over 70% of the pump price on duty, tax and VAT) and the problem's solved. Except, of course, that he doesn't have any money in the kitty having wasted ?2.7 billion in an unsuccessful attempt to bribe the voters of Crewe and Nantwich, and has untold billions tied up as security for Northern CRock."

Maybe you are right the fuel duty should be brought down to avoid inflation. but didn't your party favour tax allowances instead of tax credits and the 10p rate? The fuel price is not only to do with price. So what is your party going to do about the green agenda or is it just hot air? I too hope the Northern Rock affair turns out well.

@90 scepticmax"All Brown needs to do is cut tax and duty on fuel (we already pay over 70% of the pump price on duty, tax and VAT) and the problem's solved. Except, of course, that he doesn't have any money in the kitty having wasted ?2.7 billion in an unsuccessful attempt to bribe the voters of Crewe and Nantwich, and has untold billions tied up as security for Northern CRock."

Maybe you are right the fuel duty should be brought down to avoid inflation. but didn't your party favour tax allowances instead of tax credits and the 10p rate? The fuel price is not only to do with tax. So what is your party going to do about the green agenda or is it just hot air? I too hope the Northern Rock affair turns out well.

Re: 90#
Brown's comment is simply an "icebreaker"which all meeting chairmen use.
Seems strange that even the most innocuous of comments by our Prime Minister sends you into convulsions. Let go of some of the bile, it's obviously poisoning your brain. It might aid you in producing some arguments with credibility.
Mind you the cleansing process might take you a while.

dhwilkinson @93:

Firstly, I don't have a party, I'll vote Tory in the forthcoming General Election (which ain't, incidentally, forthcoming enough), but that is due to a lack of any better alternative.

70% of the fuel price is totally due to tax. If it were not, then we - as major producers of crude oil - could have fuel as cheap as it is in the US - or cheaper still. The UK government chooses how much tax/duty to levy, and what to 'invest'/spend/waste it on. These are totally political decisions, nothing to do with the price of crude.

As for the so-called 'green agenda' that's worse than hot air - it's fraud. Peeking outside this miserable May, I'm not much enjoying any 'global warming'. Ooops, sorry! This week it's 'climate change'. I really must keep abreast of the ever changing terminology enviro-fundamentalists and other collectivists use to keep us taxed to the max, guilt-ridden and miserable.

peteholly @95: Try this 'bile' for size: "our 'Prime Minister' " (it has to be written in inverted commas, one surely cannot describe him as such with a straight face) Brown will surely need the services of a truly skillful proctologist to excise some of the more zealous of his sycophantic followers.

And as you say: "the cleansing process might take you a while".

Tootle pip.

Why does the time of Nick's blog be shown in such a mongrelised way? 08:36 AM surely should be 8:36 am (12 hour clock) or 0836 (24 hour clock). the system seems to have got it right on all the comments, why not on the blog?

92 mikepko I am sorry to hear that your mother suffered so during the war but it only strengthens my point that sometimes you have to impose you tastes on others as sceptic max puts it we dont all think the same and sometimes some people have to be put under control for an example the man who disrespected your mother and family.
I 'm sorry that you mum likes fox hunting strange that someone who has been so badly treated would want to see such pain inflicted on a small creature but then it takes all kinds to make a World, other than the fox hunting I wish you mother every thing she wishes herself, she deserves it after her appalling beginnings.

59 mighty angela so you think I am nasty that is because I ask people to respect polititions, now thats nasty.
You suggest that I'm a marxist or at the very least a repressed human being, and your suggestion makes me nasty!
You suggest that I foam at the mouth when annoyed, you know me so well, thats nasty.
You imply that I should never have complained to the moderaters and that you would'nt and yet the facility is there to be used, I received a letter from the moderaters thanking me for pointing out this post which had been overlooked and said that this post definately broke the rules and should under no circumstances have been allowed to go past the moderaters, and I'm nasty.
You went on to deliberatly denigrate John Prescott in a very unladylike manner knowing full well that I would not agree with you, not that you had to please me but you intended your remarks to offend me. And I'm the nasty one.
You say that you would defend free speech even of those you hate, very noble probably to the death I guess but you did'nt quite go that far, there is an answer to me from Mikepko not to far away ask him about how free speech would have affected his life if they had exersized their right,to free speech if you dear lady were to find yourself in certain situations you would forget free speech and say what you were told to say, its easy to be brave when the consequences are of a minor nature. but I'm sure that on reflection you will realise how fatuous that remark is. the moderaters are there for a purpose, to stop inflamitory remarks and thats what they did.
You go on to say I enjoy berrating those that dont agree with me, of course I do if I can put them on the straight and narrow then there's nothing like a little berating to cheer things up but then Angela I guess I'm the only one on this blog doing any berating.
Finally of course these children are busy stabbing one and other because of a labour government, who else.
You would be surprised if I had the inclination to tell you just how far removed from political correctness I am.
it's strange that you and sceptic max came onto this blog like lions but you appear to be going out like lambs, Wonder why.