There was a morning after feel about Parliament on Wednesday as reported in the media. It is also important to remember that the work of Government and the House continues.
At Prime Minister’s Question Time Mr Cameron was presented with an extraordinary gaff by the Prime Minister who earlier said that he was against a general election because it would lead to chaos. This would be to be only interpreted as an admission that if a General Election is held now Mr Cameron would be elected the Prime Minister with a substantial Conservative Party majority. Mr Brown then compounded the political error by trying to scare the electorate by saying what would then happen under a Conservative Government.
He was intentionally misleading because whoever wins the next General Election there will substantial increases in taxation, I except VAT to rise to 20% and for more people to find themselves paying the second rate of 40% and a higher rate of 50% to 60% for the biggest earners and for a significant reduction in public expenditure which will affect some existing service provision. A Conservative Government would also have an easy ability to translate national policies and decisions into local practice by being in control of the majority of local authorities in England but with a major swing to the Scottish and Welsh nationalist parties with a query about Northern Ireland.
The problem for Mr Brown is that he knows it is to his advantage for the election to be delayed while the position of more existing conservative Members of Parliament is exposed and he gains in strength to also exclude from standing all existing Members who have become an electoral liability. Whatever both Party leaders and their election fighting team say they will be united in trying to avoid a major swing to the BNP because of its racist and anti immigration position and a change in balance between the House of Commons and the United Kingdom Independence Party because of its anti European stance and pro England. There will be less concern about a swing to the Liberal Democrats and Green Party and concern over a situation of a stalemate, although what has happened in Scotland has positive results with less legislation because with the Scottish Nationalists do not have a majority so what they bring forward has to have either support from individual Members outside their Party structure and policies or support from Labour. In the UK this is likely to be the Conservative Party and the Labour Party depending on how many seats the Labour Party loses.
With major constitutional reform urgently needed involving radical reform of the House of Lords into an elected upper House as in the United States, disestablishment of the Church of England, and a major change in the balance between the role of the House of Commons and the Government, and possibly on the role not so much of the Monarchy as an institution but on the abolition of the use of titles within the confines of the UK so that all Knights, Barons, Viscounts, Counts, Dukes and the female equivalents would be abolished and Prince and Princess only used to the individual in immediate line of succession. My preference is for a Presidency when the Queen dies unless she automatically became the first President with no one standing against her during her ability to conduct the office. Such reforms will only be achieved if they are supported by the major political parties at present and a broad middle ground government.
There are number of key steps or developments between now and the publication of the report on the future of the Salary and expense allowance of Members of Parliament which need to be completed before a General Election takes place, unless the wish is for chaos if as I suspect the public will turn away from the Conservative Party in substantial numbers although not as much as the Labour Party which faces annihilation as everyone other than its core supporters will vote against and the majority of its core supporters will stay away.
I have an open mind about the issue of proportional representation as it is important that local people get the opportunity to directly elect their representative although I am sympathetic to the American Primary System in which the whole electorate gets the opportunity to vote for the candidates of the Parties and I am also in favour of the direct election of the Executive and then for Parliament to scrutinise the appointees of the Executive with the ability to bring in people who are not existing members of Parliament. The Prime Minister has this power, creating peerages to bring people into Parliament but his or her decision is not screened by Parliament before the individual positions are confirmed. This can have repercussions for the continuity of government. I am interested in mixed schemes where a proportion of the House is directly elected through proportional representation from Party Lists with the majority being chosen on a geographical basis, although only if this is part of a change in the balance of power and the scheme encourages rather than prevents an increase in the number of independents. The system of cross benchers in the House of Lords appears to work well and I do not see the argument against a similar balance in the House of Commons.
I have sympathy with those who believe that there should be a General Election this year, but not until the Autumn. The Telegraph has been coy about the extent and nature of its investigation into the expenses claims of Members of Parliament of the past four years. We do not know how many of the total 648 have been investigated, and how many of these have been cleared and therefore how many others remain to do. There are said to be in the order of 1 million and more individual records available which works out at approximately 1500 records per member. The editor said that 25 staff were working on the project which means that each person has 26 Members of Parliament to investigate and 39000 records to study.
This however is only the start of any investigation because for each individual identified that there is a property issue, the journalist will have to find out how many properties the Member has now or uses and where they are and what changes have been made over the past four years. Many members have a home in London, in their constituency and a family residence, which may be rented out if the family has moved into the constituency/constituency area or to London. The degree of commuting will depend on family occupation of partner, schooling of children, need to be close or to provide direct care for elderly, or disabled relatives. Some may have holiday homes or have a financial interest in the home or homes of their children and children‘s families. The issue is which property and why have tax payers funds been used to buy, maintain and furnish. Why have these homes been changed during the period when the Member sat in Parliament. Were they sold for profit and was capital gains tax paid. How were the expenses treated in relation to income tax submissions? Some of this information will not be available to the Telegraph. The rest of the media has been disadvantaged and will want to also scrutinise the information when is becomes generally available in the hope of detecting newsworthy items missed by the Telegraph or where the Telegraph has been intentionally selective for political reasons.
The Telegraph may have carried out a preliminary check on the records of everyone. Chris Mullin, for example, who like Anne Widdecombe has been mentioned as an interim speaker, was contacted by the Telegraph and asked why he claimed for only a Black and White TV Licence. He explained that he only had a black and white TV which he had owned for 33 years. This suggests he is unlikely to have inappropriately claimed for anything else. However this can only be established by a thorough check on all the information that has been submitted. It has been announced that this will be carried out by an independent body from the House of Commons and the individual political parties. This will take time.
I assume that the official investigation will determine if inappropriate claims have been made and passed by the Claims payment office and then what action should be taken. I would like to see a list published naming every Members of Parliament where the investigation has shown no matters of concern in relation to the standards, procedures and systems being judged.
There should be a list where has been a clear breach and the matter should be referred to the Disciplinary system of the House of Commons, unless the new independent disciplinary system has been established. It is unlikely that the public will accept the decisions of the existing disciplinary system, although it may do so if the members have themselves all been cleared as being above reproach. A balance has to be achieved between getting quick action which satisfies the general public and applying the same standards and protections as should be available in all situation when employment and conditions of employment are involved.
Then there is question of referral for a possible criminal prosecution and in this respect there is issue of misconduct in a public office and conspiracy. I say this because after eight months the Metropolitan Police has announced the prosecution of a senior police office with these two charges following a complaint and his suspension after an investigation which has taken eight months.
This is all separate from the position of the Members of Parliament in relation to Party Discipline. The first stage of control and discipline is within the Parliamentary Party. The National Executive of the Party has a role in relation to issues of standing as Members of Parliament, for those who have been elected and those standing for the Party at an Election. There is the power to withdraw the Parliamentary Whip, and to deselect, and to expel from the Party. There is the role of Constituency Parties and their Executives both in relation to action taken by Party Officers and Executives and to action initiated by them either on their own initiative or from requests from Party members. Complaints can in fact be made by any Member of Public. This formal process has been instigated by the main political parties and will itself take time.
It also has to be said that a substantial number of Members of Parliament are qualified lawyers and that all those named or who become the subject of investigation have rights, including legal rights to representation, especially if their Contracts of Employment are an issue.
In terms of the Political Parties they have to take account of their existing rules and the political implications of taking action or not taking action.
In terms of criminal Prosecutions there are three stages. Is there evidence of an offence having been committed. In the present situation there is the issue of potential conspiracy to defraud the tax payer as statements have been made and documents revealed to indicate that individual went for official advice and received official advice about how to submit qualifying claims under the rules. The issue will be was the claimant fully open and honest about their position and the individual request and did officials sanction the claims. I believe it will be difficult to impossible to prosecute anyone who made claims with official approval in full knowledge or who made claims which were approved, or where claims were made which were also made by others who are not prosecuted.
It will appreciated that all the processes and procedures take time and internal action may have to be halted and remain pending until criminal investigations have been completed. I believe that any action will be the subject of the appeals system if the action is considered unfair.
This may explain why the actions of Cabinet Minister Hazel Blears have been described by the Prime Minister as wholly unacceptable, strengthening his condemnation on the second occasion but she remains a Members of the Cabinet. His office has also issued a statement to say that she retain his confidence as a Minister for the work she has already undertaken. This suggests that he had hoped she would accept his request to stand down or volunteer to stand down but she has instructed lawyers on the expenses issue to defend her interests. There are various issues of Parliamentary Privilege and this appears to have been at root of much of the approach previously taken by Speaker Martin who appears to have felt his duty for which he was elected by a majority of Members nine years ago, was to protect the rights and interests of Members first. And why the Conservatives had no confidence following his handling of the Damien Green Affair in particular. There has been the suggested that he leaned towards the government and was more impatient with opposition speakers and those who questioned his rulings than should be expected.
So far it has been announced that three Conservative Members have indicated their intention not to contest the next General Election. The latest was given the alternative of having the whip immediately withdrawn or standing down. Members will be financially better off is they retire at the next General Election, as well as having time to arrange an alternative occupation for themselves and alter their livings arrangements. There is a pension upon retirement and a £40000 payment to cover leaving costs. There will therefore be issues in relation to staff, their redundancy/pension entitlements and other entitlements if they retire or are defeated at a General Election or if they are forced out beforehand. Speaker Martyn is said to be able to receive a pension estimated initially at £68000 a year more than the salary of a Member Parliament and a Peerage which has an attendance and travel allowance and he will no doubt receive invitations to lecture and to write about his experience which will be very lucrative. especially in the circumstances of being asked to leave. The general public is usually fair but not at times like these and information about he ongoing financial rewards of the Speaker and Members of Parliament will not help to reduce the anger or help regain public confidence.
The Telegraph is continuing with further revelations today. I assumed that they want to concentrate next on anyone who become an official candidate for the position as Speaker. I would not be surprised if papers are also working hard on finding out similar information on sitting Members of the European Parliament and where I understand up to £200000 of expenses a year is possible. It would not be surprising if some information was also held back until just before the general release of he information previously planned for July during the Summer recess but which may now be brought forward.
As expected with the European and County Council Elections only a couple of week’s away Mr Cameron was expected to call for an immediate General Election at Prime Minister’s Question Time. It is in Mr Cameron’s and his Party’s interest for their to be an early General Election as the Opinion Polls had shown that the voters were turning to the UKIP and other presently minor parties from Labour while the Conservatives were holding a significant percentage majority over everyone else. This suggested they would hold and possibly gain seats in the European Elections and win control of councils in the County Council Elections. It would also kick into the long grass the impact of his own and the official investigation of Member’s of Parliament until after the General Election. Having gained power he could change the rules to protect his position having received a public mandate. Whatever constitutional changes were then necessary, he would be in charge of them.
I therefore have considerable sympathy with the position of the Prime Minister and his government. He has to continue to deal with the greatest set of problems since the outbreak and aftermath of World War 2. Attempting to fight a General Election with public support already at an all time low and without knowing the full extent of the expenses problem in relation to his existing members would create chaos for him. He needs time to learn the full extent of who has done what and then to be able to get rid of those who have transgressed without having to so with his trusted political allies and supporters but not being able to get rid of his main critics and rivals. With time he should be able to do this.
Over the past two day there has been some progress in practical aspects of my life. The bus and metro pass replacement arrived yesterday. As anticipated the news on the mobile phone was not good as the repair replacement argued the phone had been damaged rather than there was a fault. However a replacement was under £25 and I was pleased get a phone which I was confident in using. Today I transferred my gas and electricity to British Gas who presently service my central heating system and cooker and extended the service agreement to electricity and water. The outstanding action required is in relation to telephone account where the transfer of balance into my bank account and reduction in monthly debit has not taken place and will be tomorrow’s task of the day.
Because the weather was poor and the forecast changeable with severe showers I decided against going to the last of the Friend Provident Games yesterday. Durham could only get themselves off the bottom of the table with a win and their opponents were already guaranteed a quarter final home draw. The game was held and Durham won which omens better for the 20 20 challenge which begins this weekend but does not conclude until after the world championship has been completed during June. I telephone for my five home match pass which costs only £25. Non members can buy a similar pass for £40 or pay £15 on the day, £12 in advance for individual matches.
Instead of going to the cricket I went to see the film which is a follow up to the Da Vince Code. I enjoyed the film and the book which I bought subsequently. The film had a very serious aspect. The film, Angels and Demons, was very disappointing. Tom Hanks is not credible in his role as a serious Academic turned detective and the religious historical component about the Illuminati proved to be a gigantic red herring. The new thing on which the story is based is not the Illuminati but the particle mover which has been built in Switzerland in the multi billion project to try and establish the scientific origin of the universe and confirmation of the big bang. The crucial aspect of the film is the stealing of a vial of anti matter from the Swiss project. The Illuminati were a society of progressive thinkers interest in science as well as religion to found themselves persecuted by the Catholic Church who feared their work would destroy the faith of those who took the bible literally. The premise of the film is that Illuminati has reformed in order to use the latest scientific knowledge destroy the Catholic Church once and for all. It is presented that they first kill the Pope in time to coincide with the successful experiment to create anti matter and then blow up the cardinals while they are in conclave. In addition for some reason inexplicable reason the four preferred cardinals under consideration to become Pope and kidnapped, branded and three are killed before the fourth is rescued. There is an elaborate plot which involves a history of the Illuminati, and tour of religious centres and churches in Rome. There are lots of explosions and killings before it is revealed that the Pope has been killed by his adopted son because he had considered the work undertaken in Switzerland to confirm rather than destroy the concept of God and the Illuminati conspiracy was a means to attack science and for the individual concerned instead of being prosecuted for conspiracy to murder and kill the Pope, a Cardinal, the Head of the Swiss Guard, the head of Vatican security and of anti terrorism in Rome, three Cardinals and a dozen members of the security forces and police, is about to be proclaimed Pope! Only the brilliance of non believer Hanks and a leading female scientist at the Swiss project prevent this from happening.
I attended an afternoon performance which was attended and for once I accepted the need for some of the audience to try and explain what was beings said to their friends or partners. James Berardinelli is always fair but even he had to admit that aspects are so preposterous that you are immediate aware as the films is being shown and you are tempted to laugh at out loud. I did a couple of times. The also admits the plot is convoluted with the whole effect dumb. Limp and lifeless. I did not have the impression that there were any real people in this film. His comment that it is a film aimed viewers who are half asleep, drugged, drunk, or simply uncaring also hits the target. In order to appease the Catholic Church who refused to agree to filming within the Vatican there is a little sermon about the need for faith and science to coexist. The Spirituality and Practice duo who like good Christians see good in everything and everyone fore they see the evil, liked the Tom Hank Performance and enjoyed the mini lectures and mini sermons. I wish I could be as charitable. This was a waste of money and time but I needed the break. At least it was cheaper where I had considered going first I found out I could have slept in the car if that way inclined well in theory at least because the car park ticket if endorsed when going to the cinema is valid for 24 hours which means free car parking to return and shop if you want to leave the car, take the bus home and back the following morning.
At Prime Minister’s Question Time Mr Cameron was presented with an extraordinary gaff by the Prime Minister who earlier said that he was against a general election because it would lead to chaos. This would be to be only interpreted as an admission that if a General Election is held now Mr Cameron would be elected the Prime Minister with a substantial Conservative Party majority. Mr Brown then compounded the political error by trying to scare the electorate by saying what would then happen under a Conservative Government.
He was intentionally misleading because whoever wins the next General Election there will substantial increases in taxation, I except VAT to rise to 20% and for more people to find themselves paying the second rate of 40% and a higher rate of 50% to 60% for the biggest earners and for a significant reduction in public expenditure which will affect some existing service provision. A Conservative Government would also have an easy ability to translate national policies and decisions into local practice by being in control of the majority of local authorities in England but with a major swing to the Scottish and Welsh nationalist parties with a query about Northern Ireland.
The problem for Mr Brown is that he knows it is to his advantage for the election to be delayed while the position of more existing conservative Members of Parliament is exposed and he gains in strength to also exclude from standing all existing Members who have become an electoral liability. Whatever both Party leaders and their election fighting team say they will be united in trying to avoid a major swing to the BNP because of its racist and anti immigration position and a change in balance between the House of Commons and the United Kingdom Independence Party because of its anti European stance and pro England. There will be less concern about a swing to the Liberal Democrats and Green Party and concern over a situation of a stalemate, although what has happened in Scotland has positive results with less legislation because with the Scottish Nationalists do not have a majority so what they bring forward has to have either support from individual Members outside their Party structure and policies or support from Labour. In the UK this is likely to be the Conservative Party and the Labour Party depending on how many seats the Labour Party loses.
With major constitutional reform urgently needed involving radical reform of the House of Lords into an elected upper House as in the United States, disestablishment of the Church of England, and a major change in the balance between the role of the House of Commons and the Government, and possibly on the role not so much of the Monarchy as an institution but on the abolition of the use of titles within the confines of the UK so that all Knights, Barons, Viscounts, Counts, Dukes and the female equivalents would be abolished and Prince and Princess only used to the individual in immediate line of succession. My preference is for a Presidency when the Queen dies unless she automatically became the first President with no one standing against her during her ability to conduct the office. Such reforms will only be achieved if they are supported by the major political parties at present and a broad middle ground government.
There are number of key steps or developments between now and the publication of the report on the future of the Salary and expense allowance of Members of Parliament which need to be completed before a General Election takes place, unless the wish is for chaos if as I suspect the public will turn away from the Conservative Party in substantial numbers although not as much as the Labour Party which faces annihilation as everyone other than its core supporters will vote against and the majority of its core supporters will stay away.
I have an open mind about the issue of proportional representation as it is important that local people get the opportunity to directly elect their representative although I am sympathetic to the American Primary System in which the whole electorate gets the opportunity to vote for the candidates of the Parties and I am also in favour of the direct election of the Executive and then for Parliament to scrutinise the appointees of the Executive with the ability to bring in people who are not existing members of Parliament. The Prime Minister has this power, creating peerages to bring people into Parliament but his or her decision is not screened by Parliament before the individual positions are confirmed. This can have repercussions for the continuity of government. I am interested in mixed schemes where a proportion of the House is directly elected through proportional representation from Party Lists with the majority being chosen on a geographical basis, although only if this is part of a change in the balance of power and the scheme encourages rather than prevents an increase in the number of independents. The system of cross benchers in the House of Lords appears to work well and I do not see the argument against a similar balance in the House of Commons.
I have sympathy with those who believe that there should be a General Election this year, but not until the Autumn. The Telegraph has been coy about the extent and nature of its investigation into the expenses claims of Members of Parliament of the past four years. We do not know how many of the total 648 have been investigated, and how many of these have been cleared and therefore how many others remain to do. There are said to be in the order of 1 million and more individual records available which works out at approximately 1500 records per member. The editor said that 25 staff were working on the project which means that each person has 26 Members of Parliament to investigate and 39000 records to study.
This however is only the start of any investigation because for each individual identified that there is a property issue, the journalist will have to find out how many properties the Member has now or uses and where they are and what changes have been made over the past four years. Many members have a home in London, in their constituency and a family residence, which may be rented out if the family has moved into the constituency/constituency area or to London. The degree of commuting will depend on family occupation of partner, schooling of children, need to be close or to provide direct care for elderly, or disabled relatives. Some may have holiday homes or have a financial interest in the home or homes of their children and children‘s families. The issue is which property and why have tax payers funds been used to buy, maintain and furnish. Why have these homes been changed during the period when the Member sat in Parliament. Were they sold for profit and was capital gains tax paid. How were the expenses treated in relation to income tax submissions? Some of this information will not be available to the Telegraph. The rest of the media has been disadvantaged and will want to also scrutinise the information when is becomes generally available in the hope of detecting newsworthy items missed by the Telegraph or where the Telegraph has been intentionally selective for political reasons.
The Telegraph may have carried out a preliminary check on the records of everyone. Chris Mullin, for example, who like Anne Widdecombe has been mentioned as an interim speaker, was contacted by the Telegraph and asked why he claimed for only a Black and White TV Licence. He explained that he only had a black and white TV which he had owned for 33 years. This suggests he is unlikely to have inappropriately claimed for anything else. However this can only be established by a thorough check on all the information that has been submitted. It has been announced that this will be carried out by an independent body from the House of Commons and the individual political parties. This will take time.
I assume that the official investigation will determine if inappropriate claims have been made and passed by the Claims payment office and then what action should be taken. I would like to see a list published naming every Members of Parliament where the investigation has shown no matters of concern in relation to the standards, procedures and systems being judged.
There should be a list where has been a clear breach and the matter should be referred to the Disciplinary system of the House of Commons, unless the new independent disciplinary system has been established. It is unlikely that the public will accept the decisions of the existing disciplinary system, although it may do so if the members have themselves all been cleared as being above reproach. A balance has to be achieved between getting quick action which satisfies the general public and applying the same standards and protections as should be available in all situation when employment and conditions of employment are involved.
Then there is question of referral for a possible criminal prosecution and in this respect there is issue of misconduct in a public office and conspiracy. I say this because after eight months the Metropolitan Police has announced the prosecution of a senior police office with these two charges following a complaint and his suspension after an investigation which has taken eight months.
This is all separate from the position of the Members of Parliament in relation to Party Discipline. The first stage of control and discipline is within the Parliamentary Party. The National Executive of the Party has a role in relation to issues of standing as Members of Parliament, for those who have been elected and those standing for the Party at an Election. There is the power to withdraw the Parliamentary Whip, and to deselect, and to expel from the Party. There is the role of Constituency Parties and their Executives both in relation to action taken by Party Officers and Executives and to action initiated by them either on their own initiative or from requests from Party members. Complaints can in fact be made by any Member of Public. This formal process has been instigated by the main political parties and will itself take time.
It also has to be said that a substantial number of Members of Parliament are qualified lawyers and that all those named or who become the subject of investigation have rights, including legal rights to representation, especially if their Contracts of Employment are an issue.
In terms of the Political Parties they have to take account of their existing rules and the political implications of taking action or not taking action.
In terms of criminal Prosecutions there are three stages. Is there evidence of an offence having been committed. In the present situation there is the issue of potential conspiracy to defraud the tax payer as statements have been made and documents revealed to indicate that individual went for official advice and received official advice about how to submit qualifying claims under the rules. The issue will be was the claimant fully open and honest about their position and the individual request and did officials sanction the claims. I believe it will be difficult to impossible to prosecute anyone who made claims with official approval in full knowledge or who made claims which were approved, or where claims were made which were also made by others who are not prosecuted.
It will appreciated that all the processes and procedures take time and internal action may have to be halted and remain pending until criminal investigations have been completed. I believe that any action will be the subject of the appeals system if the action is considered unfair.
This may explain why the actions of Cabinet Minister Hazel Blears have been described by the Prime Minister as wholly unacceptable, strengthening his condemnation on the second occasion but she remains a Members of the Cabinet. His office has also issued a statement to say that she retain his confidence as a Minister for the work she has already undertaken. This suggests that he had hoped she would accept his request to stand down or volunteer to stand down but she has instructed lawyers on the expenses issue to defend her interests. There are various issues of Parliamentary Privilege and this appears to have been at root of much of the approach previously taken by Speaker Martin who appears to have felt his duty for which he was elected by a majority of Members nine years ago, was to protect the rights and interests of Members first. And why the Conservatives had no confidence following his handling of the Damien Green Affair in particular. There has been the suggested that he leaned towards the government and was more impatient with opposition speakers and those who questioned his rulings than should be expected.
So far it has been announced that three Conservative Members have indicated their intention not to contest the next General Election. The latest was given the alternative of having the whip immediately withdrawn or standing down. Members will be financially better off is they retire at the next General Election, as well as having time to arrange an alternative occupation for themselves and alter their livings arrangements. There is a pension upon retirement and a £40000 payment to cover leaving costs. There will therefore be issues in relation to staff, their redundancy/pension entitlements and other entitlements if they retire or are defeated at a General Election or if they are forced out beforehand. Speaker Martyn is said to be able to receive a pension estimated initially at £68000 a year more than the salary of a Member Parliament and a Peerage which has an attendance and travel allowance and he will no doubt receive invitations to lecture and to write about his experience which will be very lucrative. especially in the circumstances of being asked to leave. The general public is usually fair but not at times like these and information about he ongoing financial rewards of the Speaker and Members of Parliament will not help to reduce the anger or help regain public confidence.
The Telegraph is continuing with further revelations today. I assumed that they want to concentrate next on anyone who become an official candidate for the position as Speaker. I would not be surprised if papers are also working hard on finding out similar information on sitting Members of the European Parliament and where I understand up to £200000 of expenses a year is possible. It would not be surprising if some information was also held back until just before the general release of he information previously planned for July during the Summer recess but which may now be brought forward.
As expected with the European and County Council Elections only a couple of week’s away Mr Cameron was expected to call for an immediate General Election at Prime Minister’s Question Time. It is in Mr Cameron’s and his Party’s interest for their to be an early General Election as the Opinion Polls had shown that the voters were turning to the UKIP and other presently minor parties from Labour while the Conservatives were holding a significant percentage majority over everyone else. This suggested they would hold and possibly gain seats in the European Elections and win control of councils in the County Council Elections. It would also kick into the long grass the impact of his own and the official investigation of Member’s of Parliament until after the General Election. Having gained power he could change the rules to protect his position having received a public mandate. Whatever constitutional changes were then necessary, he would be in charge of them.
I therefore have considerable sympathy with the position of the Prime Minister and his government. He has to continue to deal with the greatest set of problems since the outbreak and aftermath of World War 2. Attempting to fight a General Election with public support already at an all time low and without knowing the full extent of the expenses problem in relation to his existing members would create chaos for him. He needs time to learn the full extent of who has done what and then to be able to get rid of those who have transgressed without having to so with his trusted political allies and supporters but not being able to get rid of his main critics and rivals. With time he should be able to do this.
Over the past two day there has been some progress in practical aspects of my life. The bus and metro pass replacement arrived yesterday. As anticipated the news on the mobile phone was not good as the repair replacement argued the phone had been damaged rather than there was a fault. However a replacement was under £25 and I was pleased get a phone which I was confident in using. Today I transferred my gas and electricity to British Gas who presently service my central heating system and cooker and extended the service agreement to electricity and water. The outstanding action required is in relation to telephone account where the transfer of balance into my bank account and reduction in monthly debit has not taken place and will be tomorrow’s task of the day.
Because the weather was poor and the forecast changeable with severe showers I decided against going to the last of the Friend Provident Games yesterday. Durham could only get themselves off the bottom of the table with a win and their opponents were already guaranteed a quarter final home draw. The game was held and Durham won which omens better for the 20 20 challenge which begins this weekend but does not conclude until after the world championship has been completed during June. I telephone for my five home match pass which costs only £25. Non members can buy a similar pass for £40 or pay £15 on the day, £12 in advance for individual matches.
Instead of going to the cricket I went to see the film which is a follow up to the Da Vince Code. I enjoyed the film and the book which I bought subsequently. The film had a very serious aspect. The film, Angels and Demons, was very disappointing. Tom Hanks is not credible in his role as a serious Academic turned detective and the religious historical component about the Illuminati proved to be a gigantic red herring. The new thing on which the story is based is not the Illuminati but the particle mover which has been built in Switzerland in the multi billion project to try and establish the scientific origin of the universe and confirmation of the big bang. The crucial aspect of the film is the stealing of a vial of anti matter from the Swiss project. The Illuminati were a society of progressive thinkers interest in science as well as religion to found themselves persecuted by the Catholic Church who feared their work would destroy the faith of those who took the bible literally. The premise of the film is that Illuminati has reformed in order to use the latest scientific knowledge destroy the Catholic Church once and for all. It is presented that they first kill the Pope in time to coincide with the successful experiment to create anti matter and then blow up the cardinals while they are in conclave. In addition for some reason inexplicable reason the four preferred cardinals under consideration to become Pope and kidnapped, branded and three are killed before the fourth is rescued. There is an elaborate plot which involves a history of the Illuminati, and tour of religious centres and churches in Rome. There are lots of explosions and killings before it is revealed that the Pope has been killed by his adopted son because he had considered the work undertaken in Switzerland to confirm rather than destroy the concept of God and the Illuminati conspiracy was a means to attack science and for the individual concerned instead of being prosecuted for conspiracy to murder and kill the Pope, a Cardinal, the Head of the Swiss Guard, the head of Vatican security and of anti terrorism in Rome, three Cardinals and a dozen members of the security forces and police, is about to be proclaimed Pope! Only the brilliance of non believer Hanks and a leading female scientist at the Swiss project prevent this from happening.
I attended an afternoon performance which was attended and for once I accepted the need for some of the audience to try and explain what was beings said to their friends or partners. James Berardinelli is always fair but even he had to admit that aspects are so preposterous that you are immediate aware as the films is being shown and you are tempted to laugh at out loud. I did a couple of times. The also admits the plot is convoluted with the whole effect dumb. Limp and lifeless. I did not have the impression that there were any real people in this film. His comment that it is a film aimed viewers who are half asleep, drugged, drunk, or simply uncaring also hits the target. In order to appease the Catholic Church who refused to agree to filming within the Vatican there is a little sermon about the need for faith and science to coexist. The Spirituality and Practice duo who like good Christians see good in everything and everyone fore they see the evil, liked the Tom Hank Performance and enjoyed the mini lectures and mini sermons. I wish I could be as charitable. This was a waste of money and time but I needed the break. At least it was cheaper where I had considered going first I found out I could have slept in the car if that way inclined well in theory at least because the car park ticket if endorsed when going to the cinema is valid for 24 hours which means free car parking to return and shop if you want to leave the car, take the bus home and back the following morning.
No comments:
Post a Comment