I have commenced to rewrite something about my life and the surrounding events twice since Sunday, having originally been set on reporting on the two end of season episodes of Lost and the film Batman Forever as well as on the Test Match at the Riverside Chester Le Street and Sunderland’s game at Portsmouth on Monday evening. Then came the announcement that the Speaker of the House of Commons was to make a statement which everyone assumed was to be about his personal position with commentators saying he would indicate retirement at the end of the present Parliament. What happened at 3.30 on Monday afternoon was extraordinary as the man appeared to be in a state of shock and on the point of an emotional breakdown. Far from signalling his own departure, he gave an apology on behalf of the House of Commons, and himself to the nation and then announced he was holding a meeting with all the Party Leaders at 4.30pm to day to achieve immediate solutions to the crisis on expenses. The Prime Minister at his monthly meeting with the press arranged for 5.30pm instead of the usual time of noon said that the meeting had taken place and that proposals submitted by him to removed responsibility for the payment and allowance of Members and disciplinary action into these matters would pass, if the Commons agrees, to an independent body. When asked about his approach to those who had bent the rules he said he had taken steps through the national Party executive to ensure that anyone in this category would not stand for the Party at the next election. When asked to explain why action had been taken against two Members and one Minister had stood down why this had not applied to the his Cabinet Minister Hazel Blears or tot eh one of the Members for Luton, he said their respective behaviour was unacceptable and he had told Hazel Blears so. Understandable immediately afterwards commentators asked why was still a member of the Cabinet and this issue will be taken up in the press tomorrow morning and it would be surprising if Mr Cameron did not raise the issue at Prime Minister’s Questions, if she had not tended her resignation before then.
I had previously written that two events on Monday May 19th summed up the state of the Britain at the present time. It was disclosed that Mr Martin had returned to London on Sunday and met with the Prime Minister and it would be surprising if his personal position was not discussed as well as how to cope with the growing crisis.
How far the Prime Minister and his staff set up what happened next may never be known, at least in my life time. There was an almost full House of Commons assembled at 3.30. Speaker not only read what he had to say but stumbled over the statement almost as if he was written for him and appeared in a state of shock and under considerable emotional pressure, which could explain his previous outburst against Kate Hoey when she raised the appropriateness of instigating a police investigation as to how the Telegraph obtained its information and then against David Winnick a long established Member of Parliament with whom I had contact some forty years ago in relation to child care matters between 1966 and 1970 when he was he Member of Parliament for Croydon South. When he lost his seat in 1970 he obtained a Diploma in Social science and administration at the London School of Economics, similar to my own, but instead of going into social work he stood again for Croydon and was elected for Walsall in the Midland where he has remained an MP since. Ms Hoey had signed a motion calling for a debate on the future position of the Speaker which was to appear on the Order paper the following morning.
Mr Martin explained that while his job was to speak for and to the House of Commons and its Members what he had to say was for the attention of the general public. He apologised on behalf of the House and its Members for what had happened in relation to and include himself in the apology. He then mentioned that he had arranged a meeting of all the Party Leaders within 48 hours and he would report back on its outcome to achieve action which would deal with the immediate crisis before the independent inquiry reported in the Autumn and where witnesses would not be interviewed until June. He said that the Leader of the House would bring orders before the House in order to put the proposals into effect. It subsequently emerged that the Prime Minister had been working on the proposals and these had been circulated to the party Leaders for the meeting arranged for 4.30 on Tuesday and no doubt the Prime Minister suggested that it was important and appropriate that the initiative should seem to come from the Speaker
Mr Martin said nothing about his own position and this clearly shocked the House. Nor did he offer an apology to Ms Hoey and Mr Winnick for losing his temper with them.
This led two of the signatories to what was in effect a motion of no confidence to seek clarification. Fist the Speaker tried to avoid the issue and then claimed it was an early day motion and not a substantive motion.
There are two kinds of motions submitted by Members of Parliament on the House of Commons Business Order Paper for each day. The first is the early Day Motion which Members use to highlight an issue and which is often signed by back benchers across the political spectrum. This is not just about controversial issues, but can be to congratulate a national sporting team or to express concern about a situation in another country, a disaster or some acts of violence. There is no intention or expectation that time will be found for the motion to be debated.
There are also motions which are put down by backbenchers with support from all political parties in a form where the hope is that the issue will be debated but this depends on the numbers of members signing the motion. This it is because it is the government, and the Leader of he House representing the Government who controls what is discussed in the House of Commons, the order of the business conducted every day. The main and other major opposition Parties do have what are called Supply Days when they can decide what is discussed but these are few and therefore used by the Party leaderships for issues which they believe will advance their political position with the general public and the support of their activists and party members. There are also Motions of Confidence which are rarely put unless the outcome is certain by those behind the motion, a government seeking to control its back benchers or the opposition attempting to force an immediate general election. Members are not likely to support a motion which could mean they will be out of a job... Turkeys voting for Christmas!
What happened yesterday afternoon is the inexcusable situation where Mr Martin had the impression or was given the impression that what had been put down was an early day motion and not a substantive motion of confidence so when he indicated as much there was outrage on the part of the signatories who shouted at him across the chamber in unprecedented fashion that he was wrong and Mr Martin then was seen to consult the embarrassed Clerk to the House, the chief Legal adviser on Parliamentary procedures who forced him to admit it was a substantive motion and that either the government had to give time or the opposition, This is clearly something that all the major political parties involved do not want to have because such a debate would involved discussion about what has happened and the extent to which previous governments, political leaders, their Whips officers, knew that the system had evolved in which expense claims were used to supplement the basic incomes, albeit they had also assumed that between those administering the schemes on a day to day basis and those claiming and who are often lawyers- it should never be forgotten, claims would be made in such a way that they could be justified if there was external scrutiny. It is evident that they never appreciated the extent to which officials at the administering office would stretch the rules to help and accommodate Members, or that members usually via their staff would not check what was being submitted and question the reasonableness of some items and situations. That the system was known by all who entered Parliament, although not to its full extent, and to the civil service who used the same system in relation to their own expenses as a substitute for the bonus culture in banks and the international corporations, and to the political staff of all the national media organisations has to be understood in order to also understand the different approaches being taken by the Government, the Conservatives and Liberal Democrats. More on this aspect in a moment
Returning to what happened in the House of Commons yesterday at tea time, David Winnick, who had not signed the motion appealed to the Speaker to advise of the date when he would retire and so to so would be of great assistance to House in moving forward, and the long standing Conservative, Sir Patrick McCormack, kindly suggested to the Speaker that the situation was the same as the Norway debate in which Neville Chamberlain, the Prime Minister, was told to go and although the he won that vote, he retired from office shortly afterwards to be replaced by a national government led by Winston Churchill.
There was then a question which named two Member’s of the House accused of wrong doing and Speaker, apologetically had to stop the intervention for the individual’s protection, because of the risk of slander action which Parliamentary privilege could not protect, or commenting on matters in public which had already become or were shortly to become the subject of a criminal police investigation and court proceedings. It was a tragic and unique occasion which the Speaker appeared to have brought on himself.
At the beginning of the day some of the leading political editors at the BBC, Sky and ITV were not to be seen, presumably because that had been given a scent of what was to take place and what had been decided and the chief political correspondent in one instance appeared to be playing down the situation of what was to happen in the House. It was as if the media led by the Telegraph had achieved sufficient blood and instability over the standing over Parliament and its Members, and realising that they were quickly heading into a revolutionary situation, had decided to reign back. As stated yesterday, and where I only relied on what was in the Mail on Sunday, it appears that the information got to the Telegraph through a shadowy James Bond type former SAS officer with impeccable links to senior police and military figures and the United Nations Task force on Terrorism and International Piracy, and which he is presently engaged with providing security to shipping forms. This suggests to me that someone within the establishment engineered the premature release of the information before the elections and the opportunity of individual Members to doctor the expense forms to exclude address, bank information and information on their staff, as well as they, and their respective political leaderships being in a position to present individual and collective situation to the public in the least damaging way. It is the usual way which Government, political parties and individual politicians work.
Obviously the Members of the House of Commons and their staff kept copies of their claims and the correspondence and would therefore know what was coming if the information was released in its basic form. This explains why the Speaker acting on behalf of the majority of Members attempted to have the information excluded from the Freedom of Information legislation. Therefore I have considerable sympathy with those who argue that the Speaker is being made a scapegoat. He has been doing what he had has done the past nine years is follow the customs and practices built up within his political party and then as Speaker within the Houses of Parliament in General. He is a man who is not articulate and quick witted, in fact is as much the common man, as most of those in pubs and clubs who may criticise him and those like him for enjoying the gravy along with the rest of the their lifestyle diet. He was a man for the House of Commons as the best men‘s club in Town. It was not a place the 21st media and internet dominated society.
However from my personal experience I am still of the opinion that most conspiracy situations are in fact the uncontrolled escalation of blunders and unforeseen events of which politicians are no less prone than the rest of us. However I also know, again from my own experience, that there are those, often in the extremes of politics, or powerful individuals with personal agenda’s who can and do intentionally undermine, de-stable and cause havoc. I obviously do not know the cause of the present situation but it needs to be established in order to ensue that the cure is appropriate for the disease and does not create a worse situation. It is the same as those going into hospital for a comparatively minor disease or routine problem but because of the weakness of their immune system then die from a secondary hospital based infection.
Events just before the statement by the speaker and immediately afterwards also revealed the position being taken by the three political leaders. By an amazing piece of good fortune ( but was it) the Leader of the Conservative Party, and all things equal, the next Prime Minister, should a General Election be held between now and the Autumn, seized the political initiative by concentrating on the expenses issue as part of his launch of the Manifesto and campaign for the European Elections. At one level he ticks all the boxes of what needs to be done to regain public confidence
He has immediately set up an internal inquisition of all his Member of Parliament expenses. It would be surprising and would reveal major incompetence if this had not already been done immediately it was known that the information was to be released. The same applies to the Labour, Liberal Democrat and other parties. They would have collated the information to be published on their Members of the House of Commons and then contacted each Member that they would expect to be warned of any matters which could not cause the individual Member and Party embarrassment or more serious problems. The problem all the Party’s and indeed the court’s will face that you cannot take action against individuals because they have done what everyone else has down, especially if they can produce evidence that they were officially advised to do something or advised that what they were claiming was in order. A similar situation applies to income tax. This means that prosecutions and party expulsions are unlikely and which will cause further embarrassment and public reaction. The problem all the Parties face is that at present gestures will not be acceptable.
David Cameron recognises that holding the Inquisition in these circumstances will not be good enough. He therefore has quickly developed a several level approach. Every Member of Parliament who is found under his system to have made claims and received payments will pay those back or lose the Party Whip and face automatic de-selection. I understand two who have refused to attend the inquisition have lost the Party Whip with consequential implications should their attitude persist. Mr Cameron hopes this will both appease the public and protect his Members from further action. The one area where I disagree is that Members are only paying capital gains tax on profits made from homes bought or physically maintained at public expense. Unless there is justification for the move of the subsidised home, such as moving into their constituency in they already have a main home in London, or moving to inner London from outer London, or for reasons of security when they become Members of the Government then the whole profit should have been repaid to the taxpayer. It should not have been used to buy a better lifestyle property. Capital gains tax is only part of the problem. It is about personal gain at public expense and which was not the intention of the expense and allowance system. (or was it?)
Mr Cameron had required all his shadow government members to immediately hold public meetings to explain their position to their local electorate, and not just their party members. He is also advising all existing Members to do this as quickly as possible. This is an excellent move because it gives the opportunity for his Members to hear at first hand the anger and concerns and also prevents a build up of resentment which could defuse organised moves for de-selection prior to a General Election. Yesterday he also mentioned that it was comparatively simple for Party members to seek a de-selection or re-selection meeting as this required a minimum of fifty members or ten percent of the paid up membership. However this is not something to be entered lightly and there are risks that the opportunity will be taken to get rid of a good Member who has fallen out with his local Party, or the local Party Leadership, or for local Party’s to endorse their Member even if there is major cause concern as is what has not happened in relation to the Luton Member and where Esther Ranzen is considering standing against her in the next General Election if she does not step down beforehand.
Mr Cameron also indicated that he would take action to direct de-selection or immediate dismissal from the Party where the evidence was produced or legal action taken. This is common sense to remove anyone who has become or becomes a election liability.
His next level of action is to insist that the Shadow Cabinet, to be extended to all Members publish their expense claims as they are made and he has insisted on a number of self imposed restraints or more fundamental changes in advance of any new system introduced by the government and House and subsequently by the independent inquiry. There is a flaw in the apparent insistence on an independent inquiry and on removing the payment system from political control which is a standard manoeuvre. Removing day to day and overall managements removes liability and accountability. It would have let the Speaker off the hook. Someone else is then responsible. However in the present circumstances this may be the only option, but consider what will be the situation if the Independent Body recommends a vast increase in the salaries of Members of Parliament
At present the salary of a Member of Parliament who is not a paid member of the Government and Shadow, Committee chairs and other specific appointments is £63281 a year since April of last year and is therefore due for change. This is significantly less than General Practitioners, Head teachers, and senior managers in government including local government and in industry and commerce. It is debatable whether this amount is therefore adequate. However this the worst possible moment to consider a radical change with the state of the economy, the likelihood of increased taxation and reductions in public service expenditure and the bonus culture paid to bankers, especially the departure deals for those who failed. Members of Parliament therefore have a grievance and therefore there will have to be appropriate blood letting before any change will be acceptable to the public and certainly this cannot happen before a General Election.
To put this in perspective, excluding staffing costs where the maximum is £100205 Members have been able to claim a total of about £65000 plus travelling which appears to have been in the order of £10000 to over £22000, with Sir Stuart Bell much in evidence one of the highest claimers. In addition there is a sum of 10% of salary for pension payments and £40000 for winding up, I assume when a Member losses his seat or leaves the House.
These figures cover claims on the taxpayer. There is nothing to stop individuals having other jobs or using their own money or the money donated to them by business, Trade Unions and other interest groups, to provide additional income and service costs. They are free to accept invitations to conferences, meetings, events, food etc which limit their need for personal expenditure with from their own funds or from the state. So to talk of just £63000 is misleading although tit also true that often those earning significantly more than them also have a range of other benefits in kind from provision of vehicles including chauffeured vehicles, private education for their children, private medical and hospital treatment and such like. We should ensure that no one is prevented from representing people in Parliament for financial reasons juts we try and ensure that everyone has the opportunity for further education.
Parliament should represent all sections, classes and interests of society and the political party system should reflect this and it is scandal that there has been under presentation of women, of non white individuals and others of non UK backgrounds, and of younger people. The majority have been middle and old aged men, former lawyers, university graduates from Oxbridge. The composition does change from time to time with the majority having served in World War Two for over a decade afterwards or with a Trade Union background in the Labour Party until the Tony Blair revolution
Faced with the approach of David Cameron and the undertakings he is requiring from all those standing for the European Elections and one can presume when the General Election takes place, and in due course for those standing in the local elections where the media will also turn its attention at the right time, the leader of the Liberal Democrats has had to find a way to switch attention to the position his own Party, and who it is thought should have been the main beneficiaries of the present situation together with the other minority parties including the BNP. While his approach has been similar to Mr Cameron he has taken two different positions. The first is to be in the vanguard of calling for the Speaker to resign. Mr Cameron clearly wanted the Speaker to go, especially after the Damien Green affair during which the police were allowed to enter and remove papers from the House of Commons Office of the Shadow Cabinet. He was not able to declare the position of his Shadow Government for as was the Prime Minister because of the justifiable convention that to do so would create a situation where the Speaker became the instrument of Party Politics. Given the outcome announced during Tuesday the Liberal Democrat Leader will gain political brownie points from having taken the position. Having listened to Mr Blair and Mr Cameron during to day I now not sure that they wanted the Speaker to leave before the next General Election. Both leaders will be concerned that the price of House of Commons accepting the departure of several colleagues and the considerable limitation on their income and expenses will be a change in the balance of power between the Commons and the Executive.
Mr Cameron, in the light of the latest opinion polling which showed Labour seriously damaged by events over the past two weeks, but his party holding position, is calling for an immediate General Election. Mr Clegg who understands that this will not be in the immediate interests for his Party, is calling for more fundamental change to the political system, including proportional representation. He knows that it would be better for the public to rebel strongly in the European elections against Labour and the Conservatives, for the expenses scandal to fully unfold and for solutions to been agreed before going to the electorate with a plan for radical reform. He would then hope that the Conservatives will not have a majority and that his Party with others will be able to achieve a more radical reform than is presently likely.
ll this has left the Prime Minister appearing to lag in their wake and indeed he has the biggest problem in terms of what has been revealed about his Party’s Members of Parliament, his own problems with his backbenchers, the rules of his Party and the approach of the National Executive of the Political party. Understandably he wanted to concentrate on the economic and financial problems facing the UK in the hope that signs of improvement would change public attitudes towards his party and himself in particular. He expected damage at the European and County Council elections but having managed to defer the release of the information on expenses until the Summer recess he hoped to then lower the temperature by saying everyone should wait for the report of the independent inquiry presently due in the Autumn and which in turn would allow for any radical proposals to be brought in after the General Election anticipated for the end of May early June of next year. This would also enable him to deal with any of the worst perpetrators of expense claims and in doing so maintain hold over the Parliamentary party and which would have been an increasingly difficult enough task in any event as a General Election became closer and their political futures were in question. This was written yesterday before events unfolded today.
In the evening we learnt that the Prime Minister was having an unscheduled meeting with his backbenchers and that he proposed to meet the executive committee of the Party in the morning. A former leader of the House was said to have advised the meeting that the Government would have to make time for the motion of no confidence in the Speaker to be debated thus confirming my view that not to do so would cause the Labour support and vote to implode.
This morning it was confirmed that the Prime Minister had obtained authority to deny reselection for the next Parliament for anyone who has transgressed the rules in a major way, whether they are accused of criminal fraud or not. However there was no indication of what this means in practice
Then mid morning it was announced that the Speaker would make a further statement to the House at 2.30 to announce his retirement as soon as a successor is appointed. This likely to trigger an election for his seat. Just before 2.30 there appeared to be more Members in he House than the previous day. The Speaker made the briefest of statements. He had believed the House worked best when there was unity. Now there was not and he would resign to take effect on June 21st, a Sunday so that his replacement could be chosen on June 22nd. That was that in half a minute and he move don to next business. The House seemed stunned. They had expected an emotional speech. There was a sense of anti climax. The reason for the brevity quickly became apparent.
Before the Prime Minister’s monthly meeting with the Media I had watch news the event on CNN who seemed even more shocked than the British media. It was three hundred years since a Speaker was last forced from office. People were interviewed. Both those who set out to end the reign of the Speaker and those horrified that he had been made a scapegoat and that the media having achieved this major scalp would set of for others, now attempted to switch attention to their medium and longer term objectives and then within hours there was talk of who would succeed and the opening odds of the bookmakers. The BBC planned an hour long special with Andrew Neil in the Chair, Roy Hattersley and Michael Portillo, a Liberal Democrat and a History professor.
All the Party leaders then met with the Speaker at 4pm. The |Prime Minister opened his 5.30pm Media meeting with a brief statement of praise for the work of the Speaker and then announced that the Speaker would make a statement to the house later the same evening on the details of what had been agreed at the 4 m meeting. He wanted to talk in general terms of the approach being taken. The Speaker would announce measures to take immediate effect. The Prime Minister had presented and would be circulating a consultation document which proposed that responsibility for the salaries, allowances and expenses of Members of Parliament and disciplinary action for breaches of the system would undertaken by an independent body. This change would go alongside the actual system and levels proposed by the independent body which had been set up.
He then made two statements which were aimed at matching those from David Cameron. No one would stand as a Labour candidate at the next General Election who was found to have intentionally manipulated the rules. When asked for his position in relation to Cabinet Member Hazel Blears and the Labour Member for Luton who had claimed £22000 for a house which was not in her constituency or close to Westminster, he described both actions as unacceptable. What was then Hazel Blears doing remaining in the Cabinet as a senior Minister? The Labour Member for Luton is at her holiday home in Spain and is therefore not here to face the music. Ms Blears will attend Prime Minister’s Question time tomorrow when he position is bound to be raised if she has not tended her resignation overnight. She like the Speaker yesterday is now dead woman walking in political terms.
I listened to what the Speaker had to say and all the tension appeared to have gone from his voice and demeanour. I believe he enjoyed socking it to them what they could or could not do immediately. However this is shutting the stable door after it has bolted and the public will want to see individuals sacked, some prosecuted and many lose their seats at the next electoral opportunity before they wills settle down and fully accept what ever new systems and structures emerge.
The public ensure that fundamental and lasting change happens by not voting for either the Labour or Conservative Parties at the next election. I am with Norman Tebbit on this one although I suspect we will be voting for candidates at opposite ends of the spectrum.
Sunday was a quiet a day for me as early as on I went to buy from what is now the present supermarket and fell flat on my front in the process. Over a year ago when I fell over in the shop I required hospital treatment for a cut on my nose and which left a small scar. This time there was only hurt pride although there was no one else on street at the time. Returning home I decided to open the remaining bottle of Asti which I drank with a roast chicken meal. Later I finish the bottle with a smoked mackerel salad. There were some aches rather than pains over the following 24 hours. My big toe is causing less of a problem
I began the piece by saying that there were two events which summoned up Britain on Monday. The new 24 hour Azda supermarket opened and the majority of South Shields popped in to see what it was like. When I returned on Tuesday afternoon it was still busy. The supermarket can be reached by car from only two roads. The minor route involves taking sides streets from the roadway into South Shields from Sunderland and it was interesting to note on Tuesday that there were significant fewer cars from this direction than previously reached the old store via a route passed the Town Hall and crossing over the junction between the pedestrian area of Ocean Road and the open road down to the sea front. I joined into this traffic from the Law Top Hill. The other old route meant that those from the Whiteleas and adjacent former Council estates and the older properties before the town centre, those out on thee Newcastle Road and in the Laygate and Fredericke Street areas had to come passed the location of the new store, passed the Ferry landing and on to Law Top. For some Tesco on the Newcastle Road was closer and for others there was Lidl on the way from Whiteleas and from Laygate. In terms of walking distance the new store is about the same from the buses, depending on in which bus stop you need but further away from the Metro Station. The main Taxi services were around the corner from the old store and the entrance is to the new will require a detour travelling in the opposite direction in order to reach the riverside side road.
I mention the roadways because whereas the public could reach the old store from the pedestrian area of the Town centre using escalators to the shopping level they now have to cross the road used by the majority of cars going to the car parking area. There are two crossing points one controlled by traffic lights.
There are 500 spaces in the car park with about one hundred under cover forming the ground floor of the store which is regarded as the basement level. There is a nominal charge of £1 for 90 minutes of free stay, returnable if £5 or more is spent at the store. You can stay another 90 minutes for an additional £1 which is not refundable. There are no barriers and I presume and I assume traffic wardens will manage with a fine of £60 prescribed for those not showing the appropriate ticket. There are few ticket purchase points, This system only operates from 9am to 6pm weekdays. If the same level of fresh produce vegetables, bakery and fish supplies for example si kept up then there will be need to go early morning and afternoon as with the old store
You reach the first level called ground floor by moving pavements or two lifts and it was evident that here is an increase in mothers and disabled people using the store without having car access. The store seemed to me as big as that at Bolden and Morrison’s at Jarrow, possible larger than Morrison’s at Sunderland and larger that Tesco’s on the Newcastle Road. Four major supermarkets, two operating 24 hours weekdays with two in town centres and one next to the cinema multiplex and food four restaurants. The new store had the clothing area George on the same level as household and then food and drink. It is over twice the size of the former store with the addition of a pharmacy, delicatessen and fishmongers and an enlarged bakery. The range and quantities available appeared to be significantly better than any of the other stores or any I have seen elsewhere. I was impressed in this respect. There were twice as many checkouts and more than twice the number of staff employed overall. I found some who I recognise and one who recognise me and said hullo which would not have happened in the old store and an indication that even the staff found the place overwhelming. There was a little moment of oh no when I realised I had left my card wallet at home but fortunately I had sufficient cash, was seven pounds in credit. The things left and for which I went back for this afternoon came to six pounds, but I am not good at keeping running totals in my head especially when trying work out what was where.
As it started to rain I parked under cover and found this area almost deserted and was able to park close to the entrance and lifts. I also took the opportunity to view the small first floor area which includes restaurant toilets. Tea and coffee is 98p more than Morrison’s and a sausage or bacon bap is a further £1.34 so the Ship and Royal is still the best deal in town.. My conclusion on two visits over the first two days at different times is that more people were shopping and spending more which will be good for the store but must have considerable impact on stores at the Market end of town. As a PS The frozen food area was also impressive.
I enjoyed watching the Test Match in the comfort and warmth of the settee and the first good drink since New Year. By the end of the day England was in the driving seat having dismissed the West Indies for 310 some 260 runs short of England’s first innings and had taken a further three wickets before the close of the play. It was a sparse Sunday crowd and cold. With tickets only £10 on Monday I was tempted but the weather forecast was not good. Only a handful appeared to take up the offer and the game was over by the time I returned home from the supermarket around 2pm after a middle and end order collapse from 140 for 3 to 176 all out. A win by an innings and 83 runs. The West Indian team was clearly unhappy about the tour with several of the major players stating they would have preferred to be playing 20 20 in South Africa.
At lunchtime on Sunday West Bromwich Albion had the opportunity to give Boro, Newcastle, Hull and Sunderland further cause to worry by drawing winning against Liverpool. They lost by two goals and were officially relegated back to the Championship. They have become a yo yo club, getting promoted and relegated not once but twice in recent years. On Monday evening Sunderland faced Portsmouth at Fratton Park and had several good chances to score and put themselves beyond catch up during the first half. Portsmouth were professional but clearly having secured their own safety and showed little over the first 45 minutes although I slept a little and did not see all, awoken by a phantom phone call. The second half was very different from the first with Sunderland scoring a break away goal and then Portsmouth not only equalising within seconds but going on to score two more as Sunderland were desperate to get a win and make themselves safe. Now they have to beat Chelsea on Sunday to achieve this position. If Newcastle and Hull win and Sunderland lose they are relegated. Newcastle go to Aston Villa and given the mixed season of Villa, a win is not out of the question. Hull entertain Manchester United who already have won the Championship and who have the European Cup to play. If Hull manage a draw, Sunderland will have to lose by six goals to be relegated on goal difference so in effect Hull has to win. I believe the situation is grim for Sunderland in this situation.
For entertainment on Sunday I watched the 1995 Batman Forever, fifth feature film, which was the right way round because it was not until 2008 and the eighth film that we had explained why Tommy Lee Jones as Two Face wanted to kill Batman. In The Dark Knight, we learn that Two Face was originally a leading crusader against crime and corruption in a situation where Batman was given the choice to save his girl friend or his friend and failed in relation to the girl and his friend badly disfigured one side of his face and becoming torn between the good and bad sides of his character. In Batman Forever the main villain is The Riddler, played by Jim Carrey who worked for Batman and then went his own way discovering device which beams Television direct to an individual’s brain. It is not clear how this is different from actual TV viewing except that it also enabled the Riddler to read the minds of individual viewers and harness their collective knowledge and energy. There is the statutory Batman girlfriend, played by Nicole Kidman who is unconvincing as a psychiatrist specialising in people with divided personalities. The film also explains how Robin, played by Chris O’Donnell joins the team in which Michael Gough plays the faithful Butler father figure, although it is his lack of awareness which causes Batman, the girl and Robin all to be captured and only escape death after a series of great escapes. The film is full of divided souls in need of spiritual and psychological healing.
The most look forward to event of the day was the two end of season episodes of Lost which prepared viewers for the final season. The season had commenced ad the Oceanic Flight survivors returned to the USA, Jack, the former leader of and fugitive criminal Kate with the daughter of Claire which she is raising as her own, Sun, the wife of Jin from South Korea and her daughter, the disturbed Hurley, winner of the lottery using numbers which were of significance once reaching the island, and Sayid former Iraqi torturer, were faced with pressure to return to the island.
The pressure came from Ben the former leader of the Islanders known as the Others, brought to the island as a child by his father as a Dharma Initiative worker. They are all persuaded, that they must return to the Island to put things right and much of the season was devoted to the their reluctance and eventual persuasion to do this.
At the conclusion of the previous season Locke had been instrumental in creating a time and space instability and moving the island and those on it. In order to resolve the movement Locke also leaves the island to persuade the others to return. Key figures in the present day are also Charles Widmore who we learn was responsible for the fake discovering of the plane with the bodies of everyone at the bottom of the ocean and the mother of the Mathematician who is part of the Widmore expedition which leads to the six escaping and the rest of the island being moved. During the series we learn that both Charles and the mother of mathematician were on the island some thirty years before as part of a cult group which became the Others. The Mathematician is their son. The mother becomes a key figure is getting the seven back to the Island.
However when go back and their second plane ride together crashes there are different outcomes for those on board. Jack Kate, Said and Hurley find themselves back on the Island in 1974 where they also find. These include James Sawyer who became the lover of Kate and Dr Juliet Burke. James has become a senior member of the security Team and Juliet his effective wife. There are also three members of the then expedition team sent on the freighter by Charles Widmore, including his son. The husband of Sun, Jin also survived the blowing up of the freighter and has became part of the 1974 era Dharma Initiative. They have been on the island in the new time for three years the same period as those who returned to the USA
There are also survivors of the new flight who do not return to 1974 but land on the Island or on an island close to the Island but fidn the situation different from went Sun, Ben and Locke left it. This includes the body of John Locke as well as his resurrected state
Locke was murdered Ben but Jack is told that it is essential that the body also returns with them. Ben is amazed that Locke is alive and tries to turn one of the others against Locke before Locke reveals what has happened. Sun has learnt her husband survived the explosion and wants to find him, prepared to leave her daughter to do so. There is humour over the existence of Locke who Ben previously. Ben full of angst because he witnessed the death of his daughter who he could have saved and he is required by Locke to visit the base of the smoke monster where his daughter appears to him and orders him to obey everything which John Locke tells him.
During the series we go back to have even earlier point in time the 1950’s where Richard Alpert is seen with Jacob who is the human face of the island. Throughout the series Jacob appears to have been the leader of the islanders, telling them what to do and this includes Ben who at the end of this season admits to Locke that he has never met the being. Locke persuades Ben that he is the one to kill the being Jacob in the final episode. Richard Alpert is also a major figure who has appeared in and out of the series, but always as an ageless individual and he takes Locke and Ben to where he knows Jacob resides. In the last two episodes we learn that Jacob has appeared to the Oceanic group in the USA to help them at key points in the period leading to their return.
There are three other potential key moments before the grand seasonal finale. The first is when the returnees and those who stayed on the island but were taken back to 1974 find a young Ben who is shot and they take him to the cult Others to be saved. The second is that the Mathematician Daniel Faraday is sent back in time to the island by his mother to explode the hydrogen bomb which was placed on the island for a test explosion but is then buried underground because of concern about leaking radioactivity.
In the earliest series we find that something happened on the island which caused a switch in polarity and that Desmond when he comes to the island is told that he has to press a computer button to ensure the polarities remain in balance and that without doing this not only will the island destroy itself but the whole world if not the universe. A way is found of stopping the need for the button to be pressed. The reason why all the surviving Oceanic flight victims have to return to be on the island in 1974 is because in that year a scientist on the Dharma Initiative is boring into the island’s core and strikes the force which creates the whole chain of events. Faraday is told by his mother (with the help of Charles Widmore) that if the bomb is exploded at the same time as the Island’s core is breached then everything will be different and Oceanic Flight 316 will not crash.
The third key aspect is that the scientist working on the project has a son. The son is part of he Widmore freighter team with psychic abilities. He has the unusual experience of seeing himself as a child and of identifying himself to his father. At one point the submarine which is able to visit the island crossing time leaves the island with all the children and most if not all the women folk and scientist see his wife and son depart and then is faced with his son in the present day who is killed in the fracas that follows.
I now come to the two finale climaxes to the season. Ben does kill Jacob at the behest of Locke while members of the second flight reveal to Sun and the flight captain the anomaly that the hold of the plane was the body of Locke while he has been claiming leadership of all the survivors of both flights in the present time. There are therefore two of Locke existing at the same time.
In the final finale the bomb does not detonate as planned as the core breached and the reversal of polarity begins and Juliet is swept into the bore shaft and crashes to the bottom where seriously injured she comes to her senses and manages to explode the bomb. Will this do what was believed could happen or did this act actual create the situation which subsequently happened in a circular event. The only reason that they are able to find the bomb and take it to the drilling site is because Faradays mother kills her son thinking he is one of the enemy. They persuade his mother to help them although she has no memory of her future. The proposition is that when the bomb explodes those who have recently died will be resurrected.
Kate has left Claire’s child with her grandmother and it is understood Claire will reappear in the final season. Desmond who was not on the flight but who was stranded on the island when his boat was forced there is reunited with Penny the daughter of Charles Widmore. They marry and have a child which stops Ben Killing Penny after he blames Charles for the death of his own daughter. Desmond is shot but survivors and their role in the final season is unclear. There are other original flight survivors who have been reintroduced in the fifth series or when it has been said will reappear in the final series when he reason for what has happened is expected to be revealed. I for one cannot wait.
I had previously written that two events on Monday May 19th summed up the state of the Britain at the present time. It was disclosed that Mr Martin had returned to London on Sunday and met with the Prime Minister and it would be surprising if his personal position was not discussed as well as how to cope with the growing crisis.
How far the Prime Minister and his staff set up what happened next may never be known, at least in my life time. There was an almost full House of Commons assembled at 3.30. Speaker not only read what he had to say but stumbled over the statement almost as if he was written for him and appeared in a state of shock and under considerable emotional pressure, which could explain his previous outburst against Kate Hoey when she raised the appropriateness of instigating a police investigation as to how the Telegraph obtained its information and then against David Winnick a long established Member of Parliament with whom I had contact some forty years ago in relation to child care matters between 1966 and 1970 when he was he Member of Parliament for Croydon South. When he lost his seat in 1970 he obtained a Diploma in Social science and administration at the London School of Economics, similar to my own, but instead of going into social work he stood again for Croydon and was elected for Walsall in the Midland where he has remained an MP since. Ms Hoey had signed a motion calling for a debate on the future position of the Speaker which was to appear on the Order paper the following morning.
Mr Martin explained that while his job was to speak for and to the House of Commons and its Members what he had to say was for the attention of the general public. He apologised on behalf of the House and its Members for what had happened in relation to and include himself in the apology. He then mentioned that he had arranged a meeting of all the Party Leaders within 48 hours and he would report back on its outcome to achieve action which would deal with the immediate crisis before the independent inquiry reported in the Autumn and where witnesses would not be interviewed until June. He said that the Leader of the House would bring orders before the House in order to put the proposals into effect. It subsequently emerged that the Prime Minister had been working on the proposals and these had been circulated to the party Leaders for the meeting arranged for 4.30 on Tuesday and no doubt the Prime Minister suggested that it was important and appropriate that the initiative should seem to come from the Speaker
Mr Martin said nothing about his own position and this clearly shocked the House. Nor did he offer an apology to Ms Hoey and Mr Winnick for losing his temper with them.
This led two of the signatories to what was in effect a motion of no confidence to seek clarification. Fist the Speaker tried to avoid the issue and then claimed it was an early day motion and not a substantive motion.
There are two kinds of motions submitted by Members of Parliament on the House of Commons Business Order Paper for each day. The first is the early Day Motion which Members use to highlight an issue and which is often signed by back benchers across the political spectrum. This is not just about controversial issues, but can be to congratulate a national sporting team or to express concern about a situation in another country, a disaster or some acts of violence. There is no intention or expectation that time will be found for the motion to be debated.
There are also motions which are put down by backbenchers with support from all political parties in a form where the hope is that the issue will be debated but this depends on the numbers of members signing the motion. This it is because it is the government, and the Leader of he House representing the Government who controls what is discussed in the House of Commons, the order of the business conducted every day. The main and other major opposition Parties do have what are called Supply Days when they can decide what is discussed but these are few and therefore used by the Party leaderships for issues which they believe will advance their political position with the general public and the support of their activists and party members. There are also Motions of Confidence which are rarely put unless the outcome is certain by those behind the motion, a government seeking to control its back benchers or the opposition attempting to force an immediate general election. Members are not likely to support a motion which could mean they will be out of a job... Turkeys voting for Christmas!
What happened yesterday afternoon is the inexcusable situation where Mr Martin had the impression or was given the impression that what had been put down was an early day motion and not a substantive motion of confidence so when he indicated as much there was outrage on the part of the signatories who shouted at him across the chamber in unprecedented fashion that he was wrong and Mr Martin then was seen to consult the embarrassed Clerk to the House, the chief Legal adviser on Parliamentary procedures who forced him to admit it was a substantive motion and that either the government had to give time or the opposition, This is clearly something that all the major political parties involved do not want to have because such a debate would involved discussion about what has happened and the extent to which previous governments, political leaders, their Whips officers, knew that the system had evolved in which expense claims were used to supplement the basic incomes, albeit they had also assumed that between those administering the schemes on a day to day basis and those claiming and who are often lawyers- it should never be forgotten, claims would be made in such a way that they could be justified if there was external scrutiny. It is evident that they never appreciated the extent to which officials at the administering office would stretch the rules to help and accommodate Members, or that members usually via their staff would not check what was being submitted and question the reasonableness of some items and situations. That the system was known by all who entered Parliament, although not to its full extent, and to the civil service who used the same system in relation to their own expenses as a substitute for the bonus culture in banks and the international corporations, and to the political staff of all the national media organisations has to be understood in order to also understand the different approaches being taken by the Government, the Conservatives and Liberal Democrats. More on this aspect in a moment
Returning to what happened in the House of Commons yesterday at tea time, David Winnick, who had not signed the motion appealed to the Speaker to advise of the date when he would retire and so to so would be of great assistance to House in moving forward, and the long standing Conservative, Sir Patrick McCormack, kindly suggested to the Speaker that the situation was the same as the Norway debate in which Neville Chamberlain, the Prime Minister, was told to go and although the he won that vote, he retired from office shortly afterwards to be replaced by a national government led by Winston Churchill.
There was then a question which named two Member’s of the House accused of wrong doing and Speaker, apologetically had to stop the intervention for the individual’s protection, because of the risk of slander action which Parliamentary privilege could not protect, or commenting on matters in public which had already become or were shortly to become the subject of a criminal police investigation and court proceedings. It was a tragic and unique occasion which the Speaker appeared to have brought on himself.
At the beginning of the day some of the leading political editors at the BBC, Sky and ITV were not to be seen, presumably because that had been given a scent of what was to take place and what had been decided and the chief political correspondent in one instance appeared to be playing down the situation of what was to happen in the House. It was as if the media led by the Telegraph had achieved sufficient blood and instability over the standing over Parliament and its Members, and realising that they were quickly heading into a revolutionary situation, had decided to reign back. As stated yesterday, and where I only relied on what was in the Mail on Sunday, it appears that the information got to the Telegraph through a shadowy James Bond type former SAS officer with impeccable links to senior police and military figures and the United Nations Task force on Terrorism and International Piracy, and which he is presently engaged with providing security to shipping forms. This suggests to me that someone within the establishment engineered the premature release of the information before the elections and the opportunity of individual Members to doctor the expense forms to exclude address, bank information and information on their staff, as well as they, and their respective political leaderships being in a position to present individual and collective situation to the public in the least damaging way. It is the usual way which Government, political parties and individual politicians work.
Obviously the Members of the House of Commons and their staff kept copies of their claims and the correspondence and would therefore know what was coming if the information was released in its basic form. This explains why the Speaker acting on behalf of the majority of Members attempted to have the information excluded from the Freedom of Information legislation. Therefore I have considerable sympathy with those who argue that the Speaker is being made a scapegoat. He has been doing what he had has done the past nine years is follow the customs and practices built up within his political party and then as Speaker within the Houses of Parliament in General. He is a man who is not articulate and quick witted, in fact is as much the common man, as most of those in pubs and clubs who may criticise him and those like him for enjoying the gravy along with the rest of the their lifestyle diet. He was a man for the House of Commons as the best men‘s club in Town. It was not a place the 21st media and internet dominated society.
However from my personal experience I am still of the opinion that most conspiracy situations are in fact the uncontrolled escalation of blunders and unforeseen events of which politicians are no less prone than the rest of us. However I also know, again from my own experience, that there are those, often in the extremes of politics, or powerful individuals with personal agenda’s who can and do intentionally undermine, de-stable and cause havoc. I obviously do not know the cause of the present situation but it needs to be established in order to ensue that the cure is appropriate for the disease and does not create a worse situation. It is the same as those going into hospital for a comparatively minor disease or routine problem but because of the weakness of their immune system then die from a secondary hospital based infection.
Events just before the statement by the speaker and immediately afterwards also revealed the position being taken by the three political leaders. By an amazing piece of good fortune ( but was it) the Leader of the Conservative Party, and all things equal, the next Prime Minister, should a General Election be held between now and the Autumn, seized the political initiative by concentrating on the expenses issue as part of his launch of the Manifesto and campaign for the European Elections. At one level he ticks all the boxes of what needs to be done to regain public confidence
He has immediately set up an internal inquisition of all his Member of Parliament expenses. It would be surprising and would reveal major incompetence if this had not already been done immediately it was known that the information was to be released. The same applies to the Labour, Liberal Democrat and other parties. They would have collated the information to be published on their Members of the House of Commons and then contacted each Member that they would expect to be warned of any matters which could not cause the individual Member and Party embarrassment or more serious problems. The problem all the Party’s and indeed the court’s will face that you cannot take action against individuals because they have done what everyone else has down, especially if they can produce evidence that they were officially advised to do something or advised that what they were claiming was in order. A similar situation applies to income tax. This means that prosecutions and party expulsions are unlikely and which will cause further embarrassment and public reaction. The problem all the Parties face is that at present gestures will not be acceptable.
David Cameron recognises that holding the Inquisition in these circumstances will not be good enough. He therefore has quickly developed a several level approach. Every Member of Parliament who is found under his system to have made claims and received payments will pay those back or lose the Party Whip and face automatic de-selection. I understand two who have refused to attend the inquisition have lost the Party Whip with consequential implications should their attitude persist. Mr Cameron hopes this will both appease the public and protect his Members from further action. The one area where I disagree is that Members are only paying capital gains tax on profits made from homes bought or physically maintained at public expense. Unless there is justification for the move of the subsidised home, such as moving into their constituency in they already have a main home in London, or moving to inner London from outer London, or for reasons of security when they become Members of the Government then the whole profit should have been repaid to the taxpayer. It should not have been used to buy a better lifestyle property. Capital gains tax is only part of the problem. It is about personal gain at public expense and which was not the intention of the expense and allowance system. (or was it?)
Mr Cameron had required all his shadow government members to immediately hold public meetings to explain their position to their local electorate, and not just their party members. He is also advising all existing Members to do this as quickly as possible. This is an excellent move because it gives the opportunity for his Members to hear at first hand the anger and concerns and also prevents a build up of resentment which could defuse organised moves for de-selection prior to a General Election. Yesterday he also mentioned that it was comparatively simple for Party members to seek a de-selection or re-selection meeting as this required a minimum of fifty members or ten percent of the paid up membership. However this is not something to be entered lightly and there are risks that the opportunity will be taken to get rid of a good Member who has fallen out with his local Party, or the local Party Leadership, or for local Party’s to endorse their Member even if there is major cause concern as is what has not happened in relation to the Luton Member and where Esther Ranzen is considering standing against her in the next General Election if she does not step down beforehand.
Mr Cameron also indicated that he would take action to direct de-selection or immediate dismissal from the Party where the evidence was produced or legal action taken. This is common sense to remove anyone who has become or becomes a election liability.
His next level of action is to insist that the Shadow Cabinet, to be extended to all Members publish their expense claims as they are made and he has insisted on a number of self imposed restraints or more fundamental changes in advance of any new system introduced by the government and House and subsequently by the independent inquiry. There is a flaw in the apparent insistence on an independent inquiry and on removing the payment system from political control which is a standard manoeuvre. Removing day to day and overall managements removes liability and accountability. It would have let the Speaker off the hook. Someone else is then responsible. However in the present circumstances this may be the only option, but consider what will be the situation if the Independent Body recommends a vast increase in the salaries of Members of Parliament
At present the salary of a Member of Parliament who is not a paid member of the Government and Shadow, Committee chairs and other specific appointments is £63281 a year since April of last year and is therefore due for change. This is significantly less than General Practitioners, Head teachers, and senior managers in government including local government and in industry and commerce. It is debatable whether this amount is therefore adequate. However this the worst possible moment to consider a radical change with the state of the economy, the likelihood of increased taxation and reductions in public service expenditure and the bonus culture paid to bankers, especially the departure deals for those who failed. Members of Parliament therefore have a grievance and therefore there will have to be appropriate blood letting before any change will be acceptable to the public and certainly this cannot happen before a General Election.
To put this in perspective, excluding staffing costs where the maximum is £100205 Members have been able to claim a total of about £65000 plus travelling which appears to have been in the order of £10000 to over £22000, with Sir Stuart Bell much in evidence one of the highest claimers. In addition there is a sum of 10% of salary for pension payments and £40000 for winding up, I assume when a Member losses his seat or leaves the House.
These figures cover claims on the taxpayer. There is nothing to stop individuals having other jobs or using their own money or the money donated to them by business, Trade Unions and other interest groups, to provide additional income and service costs. They are free to accept invitations to conferences, meetings, events, food etc which limit their need for personal expenditure with from their own funds or from the state. So to talk of just £63000 is misleading although tit also true that often those earning significantly more than them also have a range of other benefits in kind from provision of vehicles including chauffeured vehicles, private education for their children, private medical and hospital treatment and such like. We should ensure that no one is prevented from representing people in Parliament for financial reasons juts we try and ensure that everyone has the opportunity for further education.
Parliament should represent all sections, classes and interests of society and the political party system should reflect this and it is scandal that there has been under presentation of women, of non white individuals and others of non UK backgrounds, and of younger people. The majority have been middle and old aged men, former lawyers, university graduates from Oxbridge. The composition does change from time to time with the majority having served in World War Two for over a decade afterwards or with a Trade Union background in the Labour Party until the Tony Blair revolution
Faced with the approach of David Cameron and the undertakings he is requiring from all those standing for the European Elections and one can presume when the General Election takes place, and in due course for those standing in the local elections where the media will also turn its attention at the right time, the leader of the Liberal Democrats has had to find a way to switch attention to the position his own Party, and who it is thought should have been the main beneficiaries of the present situation together with the other minority parties including the BNP. While his approach has been similar to Mr Cameron he has taken two different positions. The first is to be in the vanguard of calling for the Speaker to resign. Mr Cameron clearly wanted the Speaker to go, especially after the Damien Green affair during which the police were allowed to enter and remove papers from the House of Commons Office of the Shadow Cabinet. He was not able to declare the position of his Shadow Government for as was the Prime Minister because of the justifiable convention that to do so would create a situation where the Speaker became the instrument of Party Politics. Given the outcome announced during Tuesday the Liberal Democrat Leader will gain political brownie points from having taken the position. Having listened to Mr Blair and Mr Cameron during to day I now not sure that they wanted the Speaker to leave before the next General Election. Both leaders will be concerned that the price of House of Commons accepting the departure of several colleagues and the considerable limitation on their income and expenses will be a change in the balance of power between the Commons and the Executive.
Mr Cameron, in the light of the latest opinion polling which showed Labour seriously damaged by events over the past two weeks, but his party holding position, is calling for an immediate General Election. Mr Clegg who understands that this will not be in the immediate interests for his Party, is calling for more fundamental change to the political system, including proportional representation. He knows that it would be better for the public to rebel strongly in the European elections against Labour and the Conservatives, for the expenses scandal to fully unfold and for solutions to been agreed before going to the electorate with a plan for radical reform. He would then hope that the Conservatives will not have a majority and that his Party with others will be able to achieve a more radical reform than is presently likely.
ll this has left the Prime Minister appearing to lag in their wake and indeed he has the biggest problem in terms of what has been revealed about his Party’s Members of Parliament, his own problems with his backbenchers, the rules of his Party and the approach of the National Executive of the Political party. Understandably he wanted to concentrate on the economic and financial problems facing the UK in the hope that signs of improvement would change public attitudes towards his party and himself in particular. He expected damage at the European and County Council elections but having managed to defer the release of the information on expenses until the Summer recess he hoped to then lower the temperature by saying everyone should wait for the report of the independent inquiry presently due in the Autumn and which in turn would allow for any radical proposals to be brought in after the General Election anticipated for the end of May early June of next year. This would also enable him to deal with any of the worst perpetrators of expense claims and in doing so maintain hold over the Parliamentary party and which would have been an increasingly difficult enough task in any event as a General Election became closer and their political futures were in question. This was written yesterday before events unfolded today.
In the evening we learnt that the Prime Minister was having an unscheduled meeting with his backbenchers and that he proposed to meet the executive committee of the Party in the morning. A former leader of the House was said to have advised the meeting that the Government would have to make time for the motion of no confidence in the Speaker to be debated thus confirming my view that not to do so would cause the Labour support and vote to implode.
This morning it was confirmed that the Prime Minister had obtained authority to deny reselection for the next Parliament for anyone who has transgressed the rules in a major way, whether they are accused of criminal fraud or not. However there was no indication of what this means in practice
Then mid morning it was announced that the Speaker would make a further statement to the House at 2.30 to announce his retirement as soon as a successor is appointed. This likely to trigger an election for his seat. Just before 2.30 there appeared to be more Members in he House than the previous day. The Speaker made the briefest of statements. He had believed the House worked best when there was unity. Now there was not and he would resign to take effect on June 21st, a Sunday so that his replacement could be chosen on June 22nd. That was that in half a minute and he move don to next business. The House seemed stunned. They had expected an emotional speech. There was a sense of anti climax. The reason for the brevity quickly became apparent.
Before the Prime Minister’s monthly meeting with the Media I had watch news the event on CNN who seemed even more shocked than the British media. It was three hundred years since a Speaker was last forced from office. People were interviewed. Both those who set out to end the reign of the Speaker and those horrified that he had been made a scapegoat and that the media having achieved this major scalp would set of for others, now attempted to switch attention to their medium and longer term objectives and then within hours there was talk of who would succeed and the opening odds of the bookmakers. The BBC planned an hour long special with Andrew Neil in the Chair, Roy Hattersley and Michael Portillo, a Liberal Democrat and a History professor.
All the Party leaders then met with the Speaker at 4pm. The |Prime Minister opened his 5.30pm Media meeting with a brief statement of praise for the work of the Speaker and then announced that the Speaker would make a statement to the house later the same evening on the details of what had been agreed at the 4 m meeting. He wanted to talk in general terms of the approach being taken. The Speaker would announce measures to take immediate effect. The Prime Minister had presented and would be circulating a consultation document which proposed that responsibility for the salaries, allowances and expenses of Members of Parliament and disciplinary action for breaches of the system would undertaken by an independent body. This change would go alongside the actual system and levels proposed by the independent body which had been set up.
He then made two statements which were aimed at matching those from David Cameron. No one would stand as a Labour candidate at the next General Election who was found to have intentionally manipulated the rules. When asked for his position in relation to Cabinet Member Hazel Blears and the Labour Member for Luton who had claimed £22000 for a house which was not in her constituency or close to Westminster, he described both actions as unacceptable. What was then Hazel Blears doing remaining in the Cabinet as a senior Minister? The Labour Member for Luton is at her holiday home in Spain and is therefore not here to face the music. Ms Blears will attend Prime Minister’s Question time tomorrow when he position is bound to be raised if she has not tended her resignation overnight. She like the Speaker yesterday is now dead woman walking in political terms.
I listened to what the Speaker had to say and all the tension appeared to have gone from his voice and demeanour. I believe he enjoyed socking it to them what they could or could not do immediately. However this is shutting the stable door after it has bolted and the public will want to see individuals sacked, some prosecuted and many lose their seats at the next electoral opportunity before they wills settle down and fully accept what ever new systems and structures emerge.
The public ensure that fundamental and lasting change happens by not voting for either the Labour or Conservative Parties at the next election. I am with Norman Tebbit on this one although I suspect we will be voting for candidates at opposite ends of the spectrum.
Sunday was a quiet a day for me as early as on I went to buy from what is now the present supermarket and fell flat on my front in the process. Over a year ago when I fell over in the shop I required hospital treatment for a cut on my nose and which left a small scar. This time there was only hurt pride although there was no one else on street at the time. Returning home I decided to open the remaining bottle of Asti which I drank with a roast chicken meal. Later I finish the bottle with a smoked mackerel salad. There were some aches rather than pains over the following 24 hours. My big toe is causing less of a problem
I began the piece by saying that there were two events which summoned up Britain on Monday. The new 24 hour Azda supermarket opened and the majority of South Shields popped in to see what it was like. When I returned on Tuesday afternoon it was still busy. The supermarket can be reached by car from only two roads. The minor route involves taking sides streets from the roadway into South Shields from Sunderland and it was interesting to note on Tuesday that there were significant fewer cars from this direction than previously reached the old store via a route passed the Town Hall and crossing over the junction between the pedestrian area of Ocean Road and the open road down to the sea front. I joined into this traffic from the Law Top Hill. The other old route meant that those from the Whiteleas and adjacent former Council estates and the older properties before the town centre, those out on thee Newcastle Road and in the Laygate and Fredericke Street areas had to come passed the location of the new store, passed the Ferry landing and on to Law Top. For some Tesco on the Newcastle Road was closer and for others there was Lidl on the way from Whiteleas and from Laygate. In terms of walking distance the new store is about the same from the buses, depending on in which bus stop you need but further away from the Metro Station. The main Taxi services were around the corner from the old store and the entrance is to the new will require a detour travelling in the opposite direction in order to reach the riverside side road.
I mention the roadways because whereas the public could reach the old store from the pedestrian area of the Town centre using escalators to the shopping level they now have to cross the road used by the majority of cars going to the car parking area. There are two crossing points one controlled by traffic lights.
There are 500 spaces in the car park with about one hundred under cover forming the ground floor of the store which is regarded as the basement level. There is a nominal charge of £1 for 90 minutes of free stay, returnable if £5 or more is spent at the store. You can stay another 90 minutes for an additional £1 which is not refundable. There are no barriers and I presume and I assume traffic wardens will manage with a fine of £60 prescribed for those not showing the appropriate ticket. There are few ticket purchase points, This system only operates from 9am to 6pm weekdays. If the same level of fresh produce vegetables, bakery and fish supplies for example si kept up then there will be need to go early morning and afternoon as with the old store
You reach the first level called ground floor by moving pavements or two lifts and it was evident that here is an increase in mothers and disabled people using the store without having car access. The store seemed to me as big as that at Bolden and Morrison’s at Jarrow, possible larger than Morrison’s at Sunderland and larger that Tesco’s on the Newcastle Road. Four major supermarkets, two operating 24 hours weekdays with two in town centres and one next to the cinema multiplex and food four restaurants. The new store had the clothing area George on the same level as household and then food and drink. It is over twice the size of the former store with the addition of a pharmacy, delicatessen and fishmongers and an enlarged bakery. The range and quantities available appeared to be significantly better than any of the other stores or any I have seen elsewhere. I was impressed in this respect. There were twice as many checkouts and more than twice the number of staff employed overall. I found some who I recognise and one who recognise me and said hullo which would not have happened in the old store and an indication that even the staff found the place overwhelming. There was a little moment of oh no when I realised I had left my card wallet at home but fortunately I had sufficient cash, was seven pounds in credit. The things left and for which I went back for this afternoon came to six pounds, but I am not good at keeping running totals in my head especially when trying work out what was where.
As it started to rain I parked under cover and found this area almost deserted and was able to park close to the entrance and lifts. I also took the opportunity to view the small first floor area which includes restaurant toilets. Tea and coffee is 98p more than Morrison’s and a sausage or bacon bap is a further £1.34 so the Ship and Royal is still the best deal in town.. My conclusion on two visits over the first two days at different times is that more people were shopping and spending more which will be good for the store but must have considerable impact on stores at the Market end of town. As a PS The frozen food area was also impressive.
I enjoyed watching the Test Match in the comfort and warmth of the settee and the first good drink since New Year. By the end of the day England was in the driving seat having dismissed the West Indies for 310 some 260 runs short of England’s first innings and had taken a further three wickets before the close of the play. It was a sparse Sunday crowd and cold. With tickets only £10 on Monday I was tempted but the weather forecast was not good. Only a handful appeared to take up the offer and the game was over by the time I returned home from the supermarket around 2pm after a middle and end order collapse from 140 for 3 to 176 all out. A win by an innings and 83 runs. The West Indian team was clearly unhappy about the tour with several of the major players stating they would have preferred to be playing 20 20 in South Africa.
At lunchtime on Sunday West Bromwich Albion had the opportunity to give Boro, Newcastle, Hull and Sunderland further cause to worry by drawing winning against Liverpool. They lost by two goals and were officially relegated back to the Championship. They have become a yo yo club, getting promoted and relegated not once but twice in recent years. On Monday evening Sunderland faced Portsmouth at Fratton Park and had several good chances to score and put themselves beyond catch up during the first half. Portsmouth were professional but clearly having secured their own safety and showed little over the first 45 minutes although I slept a little and did not see all, awoken by a phantom phone call. The second half was very different from the first with Sunderland scoring a break away goal and then Portsmouth not only equalising within seconds but going on to score two more as Sunderland were desperate to get a win and make themselves safe. Now they have to beat Chelsea on Sunday to achieve this position. If Newcastle and Hull win and Sunderland lose they are relegated. Newcastle go to Aston Villa and given the mixed season of Villa, a win is not out of the question. Hull entertain Manchester United who already have won the Championship and who have the European Cup to play. If Hull manage a draw, Sunderland will have to lose by six goals to be relegated on goal difference so in effect Hull has to win. I believe the situation is grim for Sunderland in this situation.
For entertainment on Sunday I watched the 1995 Batman Forever, fifth feature film, which was the right way round because it was not until 2008 and the eighth film that we had explained why Tommy Lee Jones as Two Face wanted to kill Batman. In The Dark Knight, we learn that Two Face was originally a leading crusader against crime and corruption in a situation where Batman was given the choice to save his girl friend or his friend and failed in relation to the girl and his friend badly disfigured one side of his face and becoming torn between the good and bad sides of his character. In Batman Forever the main villain is The Riddler, played by Jim Carrey who worked for Batman and then went his own way discovering device which beams Television direct to an individual’s brain. It is not clear how this is different from actual TV viewing except that it also enabled the Riddler to read the minds of individual viewers and harness their collective knowledge and energy. There is the statutory Batman girlfriend, played by Nicole Kidman who is unconvincing as a psychiatrist specialising in people with divided personalities. The film also explains how Robin, played by Chris O’Donnell joins the team in which Michael Gough plays the faithful Butler father figure, although it is his lack of awareness which causes Batman, the girl and Robin all to be captured and only escape death after a series of great escapes. The film is full of divided souls in need of spiritual and psychological healing.
The most look forward to event of the day was the two end of season episodes of Lost which prepared viewers for the final season. The season had commenced ad the Oceanic Flight survivors returned to the USA, Jack, the former leader of and fugitive criminal Kate with the daughter of Claire which she is raising as her own, Sun, the wife of Jin from South Korea and her daughter, the disturbed Hurley, winner of the lottery using numbers which were of significance once reaching the island, and Sayid former Iraqi torturer, were faced with pressure to return to the island.
The pressure came from Ben the former leader of the Islanders known as the Others, brought to the island as a child by his father as a Dharma Initiative worker. They are all persuaded, that they must return to the Island to put things right and much of the season was devoted to the their reluctance and eventual persuasion to do this.
At the conclusion of the previous season Locke had been instrumental in creating a time and space instability and moving the island and those on it. In order to resolve the movement Locke also leaves the island to persuade the others to return. Key figures in the present day are also Charles Widmore who we learn was responsible for the fake discovering of the plane with the bodies of everyone at the bottom of the ocean and the mother of the Mathematician who is part of the Widmore expedition which leads to the six escaping and the rest of the island being moved. During the series we learn that both Charles and the mother of mathematician were on the island some thirty years before as part of a cult group which became the Others. The Mathematician is their son. The mother becomes a key figure is getting the seven back to the Island.
However when go back and their second plane ride together crashes there are different outcomes for those on board. Jack Kate, Said and Hurley find themselves back on the Island in 1974 where they also find. These include James Sawyer who became the lover of Kate and Dr Juliet Burke. James has become a senior member of the security Team and Juliet his effective wife. There are also three members of the then expedition team sent on the freighter by Charles Widmore, including his son. The husband of Sun, Jin also survived the blowing up of the freighter and has became part of the 1974 era Dharma Initiative. They have been on the island in the new time for three years the same period as those who returned to the USA
There are also survivors of the new flight who do not return to 1974 but land on the Island or on an island close to the Island but fidn the situation different from went Sun, Ben and Locke left it. This includes the body of John Locke as well as his resurrected state
Locke was murdered Ben but Jack is told that it is essential that the body also returns with them. Ben is amazed that Locke is alive and tries to turn one of the others against Locke before Locke reveals what has happened. Sun has learnt her husband survived the explosion and wants to find him, prepared to leave her daughter to do so. There is humour over the existence of Locke who Ben previously. Ben full of angst because he witnessed the death of his daughter who he could have saved and he is required by Locke to visit the base of the smoke monster where his daughter appears to him and orders him to obey everything which John Locke tells him.
During the series we go back to have even earlier point in time the 1950’s where Richard Alpert is seen with Jacob who is the human face of the island. Throughout the series Jacob appears to have been the leader of the islanders, telling them what to do and this includes Ben who at the end of this season admits to Locke that he has never met the being. Locke persuades Ben that he is the one to kill the being Jacob in the final episode. Richard Alpert is also a major figure who has appeared in and out of the series, but always as an ageless individual and he takes Locke and Ben to where he knows Jacob resides. In the last two episodes we learn that Jacob has appeared to the Oceanic group in the USA to help them at key points in the period leading to their return.
There are three other potential key moments before the grand seasonal finale. The first is when the returnees and those who stayed on the island but were taken back to 1974 find a young Ben who is shot and they take him to the cult Others to be saved. The second is that the Mathematician Daniel Faraday is sent back in time to the island by his mother to explode the hydrogen bomb which was placed on the island for a test explosion but is then buried underground because of concern about leaking radioactivity.
In the earliest series we find that something happened on the island which caused a switch in polarity and that Desmond when he comes to the island is told that he has to press a computer button to ensure the polarities remain in balance and that without doing this not only will the island destroy itself but the whole world if not the universe. A way is found of stopping the need for the button to be pressed. The reason why all the surviving Oceanic flight victims have to return to be on the island in 1974 is because in that year a scientist on the Dharma Initiative is boring into the island’s core and strikes the force which creates the whole chain of events. Faraday is told by his mother (with the help of Charles Widmore) that if the bomb is exploded at the same time as the Island’s core is breached then everything will be different and Oceanic Flight 316 will not crash.
The third key aspect is that the scientist working on the project has a son. The son is part of he Widmore freighter team with psychic abilities. He has the unusual experience of seeing himself as a child and of identifying himself to his father. At one point the submarine which is able to visit the island crossing time leaves the island with all the children and most if not all the women folk and scientist see his wife and son depart and then is faced with his son in the present day who is killed in the fracas that follows.
I now come to the two finale climaxes to the season. Ben does kill Jacob at the behest of Locke while members of the second flight reveal to Sun and the flight captain the anomaly that the hold of the plane was the body of Locke while he has been claiming leadership of all the survivors of both flights in the present time. There are therefore two of Locke existing at the same time.
In the final finale the bomb does not detonate as planned as the core breached and the reversal of polarity begins and Juliet is swept into the bore shaft and crashes to the bottom where seriously injured she comes to her senses and manages to explode the bomb. Will this do what was believed could happen or did this act actual create the situation which subsequently happened in a circular event. The only reason that they are able to find the bomb and take it to the drilling site is because Faradays mother kills her son thinking he is one of the enemy. They persuade his mother to help them although she has no memory of her future. The proposition is that when the bomb explodes those who have recently died will be resurrected.
Kate has left Claire’s child with her grandmother and it is understood Claire will reappear in the final season. Desmond who was not on the flight but who was stranded on the island when his boat was forced there is reunited with Penny the daughter of Charles Widmore. They marry and have a child which stops Ben Killing Penny after he blames Charles for the death of his own daughter. Desmond is shot but survivors and their role in the final season is unclear. There are other original flight survivors who have been reintroduced in the fifth series or when it has been said will reappear in the final series when he reason for what has happened is expected to be revealed. I for one cannot wait.
No comments:
Post a Comment