Some serious reflections on Sunday May 20th 2012 begin with a little success for as previously mentioned I made a £20 bet on Chelsea winning the Champions League. This was not my money but that of the bookmaker when first placing a bet on the Grand National. I still have the original placement money after several winnings and losses. The odds were 10.1 so the net gain is £200 as understandably the original bet is not given as it was their money and not mine.
Despite the being there atmosphere of 3D I switched off in the 84th minute when they went down 1.0 after struggling throughout the game and where the home side playing in their own stadium squandered a number of chances to put the game beyond redemption. Didier Drogba then scored a bullet header in the 88th minutes taking the game into extra time.
I missed this goal and then the penalty he gave and its saving by the Chelsea goal keeper one of several heroes on the night. I watched the last 30 minutes or so of extra time but could not bear to watch the penalty shoot out after the German Team out the first in to the net. German teams, especially the national side had a reputation of always winning penalty shoot outs against British teams and while Chelsea had lost all their previous penalty events the home side had done the opposite.
I switch channels again to see the team celebrate just after Drogba and won the competition 4.5 on penalties on the night. The last German kicker hitting the post with the ball then running back into the field of play. With Manchester City winning the Premiership there has been two weekends of great football excite. This afternoon just after 4pm I watched the players and backroom staff parade in a blue bus with the banner Champions of Europe. There was a second bus for families of friends of the players and given that most of those in Germany were in the process of returning home the tens of thousands who packed the streets were impressive and genuine in their excitement. Even more so were the players who jumped up and down and sang out for about an hour over the mile and half hour the journey took to Parson’s Green as the parade stopped various congested pointed to enable people to take photos. Here the players chanted in raucous voices, The Russian owner, chief executive and manager were at the back of the bus enjoying themselves throughout the ride. At one point the club captain encourages the players and supporters to please with Drogba to stay with the club as rumours have traversed the sport’s media that he was on his way having allegedly asked for a two contract extension when the club was only prepared to offer one. Similarly all the commentators and pundits pressed for the interim manager to be given a full contract having won the FA cup and the Europeans Championship in his first season with only three defeats during his reign of a few months. The Chief Executive on camera said they would make the decision as previously state once the season had ended.
I shall use the winnings for a weekend in London to view the paralympics with one million tickets on sale tomorrow morning.
A case can be made for saying that the only reason Lord Leveson was given terms of reference which included the relationship between politicians and the print media is because the Prime Minister believed the inquiry process would be more damaging to the Labour Party than the Conservative. This has not and is likely not to be the case although it will damage the standing of Mr Brown and Mr Blair beyond their discredited positions already in the eyes of the general public. It will lead to the departure of the present culture secretary and possibly to the departure of Mr Osborne and Mr Cameron. Do not rule out the election of Boris Johnston Tory leader as a public fart against the body politic although my bet is still on Ed Miliband, more likely as Prime Minister in a coalition with Lib Dems led by Vince ( I will get you Murdoch) Cable. Ed has to shake out any continuing influence of Blair, Brown, Mandelson and Balls on his future administration if he is to survive. The appearances of Blair, Brown and Mandelson (the latter next week) should help his cause.
I say this because all the leading politicians and political commentators agree that leading national politicians became too close to Mr Murdoch and his people and this directly or indirectly affected the culture and practices of the tabloid print media in a destructive and at times criminal way for all interests, particularly those of the “celebrities” and the public in general. The Politicians and the Print bosses have immediately adjusted to the situation and taken instant remedial action, so whatever Leveson now reports and recommends the Political revenge, supported by the general public ire will be prolonged and vicious. Lord Leveson can go on as much as he likes about finding a solution which will not harm the broadsheets: the Daily Mail, the Express, the Sun and the Daily Mirror, the Sunday Sun and the Sunday People, or constrain their freedom to continue to behave like feudal warlords but a combination of political revenge, public antipathy and the changing contemporary technology will do for the print media in a big way. Whether this is a good or a bad thing for the future of British Society I am not sure.
Events in Greece, Spain, Italy, France and Germany all suggest that Europe is going to face a period of economic decline and reductions in general living standards, in some instances in significant ways. In order to prevent rioting and open insurrection “democratic” governments will be forced to take increasing control of communications media unless it maintains political neutrality, marginalizes the extremists and continues to concentrate on the froth. The less bread the more circuses approach to politics will remain necessary for the Britain’s Got talent, Football every hour of the day and Nude Nuns with Guns (a title from the Horror channel this week) masses although orchestrating the equivalent of the Olympic Games in the same year as the Jubilee mark two will require machiavellian creativity and shire England shaking off its continuing colonial mentality as the Irish, Scots and Welsh protestants have done post World War II.
I wrote the above before stopping to watch the Andrew Marr show and was struck how in tune I have become with understanding the depth the nature of the economic and personal finances changes which Europe is facing compared with the Unites States and the north American continent and China, then Indian sub continent and Austroasia, South America and Africa and to some extent Russia ( with its possession of energy resources) whether the economies are highly developed, in transition or presently stuck in overall poverty. The Europeans have the most to lose.
There was an extraordinary editorial this morning as the Sunday Times proclaimed that a political United States of Europe is the only and best solution to creating an economy where a financial union can effectively manage a currency union as is the situation in the United States. Alistair Darling, the previous Chancellor, correctly pointed out that whether this is a good or bad thing it would take a generation to put into effect and the crisis is immediate with decisions needed to be taken now. I was naturally pleased that he argues for the socialist approach of Keynes that investment in long term capital projects is an important solution to bringing the UK out of recession and achieving the social stability that goes along with economic growth.
The biggest criticism against the Tories is that their argument that Britain’s position was akin to that of Greece plummeted national confidence for the short term political gain of blaming the Labour Party for the inherited international and European economic situation, an argument which Cameron and the Chancellor now use themselves at every opportunity to explain why what they said would work two years ago has not.
Watching the late night politics show on Thursday night and the discussion this morning on Marr I am struck by the political division which has emerged in the Tory party whether it would be a good or and thing for Greece to leave the Euro. The right wing which now appears to include Portillo again, and former chancellor Nigel Lawson and the euro sceptics who want the euro to fail to vindicate their position and expedite British economic unilateralism. I was also struck by a statement that the size of the USA military budget is greater than the next ten countries combined (711 billion dollars against China 143(2) Russia 71.9 (3) UK 62.7 (4) and out of a world expenditure of 1630 billion. You have to know this to understand the ability of the US to survive economic downturns, the political power the government has overseas and the political power the arms industry and veteran’s lobby has within the union and why changes by individual European nations within NATO are irrelevant.
This is by way of an introduction to a few bits pieces from Leveson and concerning Leveson which should not await the appearance of the politicians over the coming weeks and which as I have also said will not affect what Leveson decides or what the coalition and opposition parties do in relation to his recommendations.
The first is the charging of Rebekah Brookes, her husband and five of the six others arrested with conspiracy to pervert the coarse of justice. The inclusion of so many including her personal assistant of a couple of decades suggests an attempt to encourage one or more of these to assist the prosecution on charges which if proven usually carry imprisonment of months or years and where the limit is life imprisonment.
The second is the attempt to force the resignation or removal of the Culture Secretary before his appearance before the Leveson Inquiry. Following his statement to the Commons and the exchanges across the despatch box at Prime Minister’s Questions the Prime Minister was forced to come to the House and explain his refusal to refer complaints to the procedure for dealing with the behaviour of Ministers while conducting their office. The argument is that the Culture Minister is in breach of the of Behaviour which says he must accept responsibility for the behaviour of his Advisers and should await the questioning by Leveson who made a statement suggesting that other more immediate inquiries should await his own.
There have been three developments since then which appear to suggest his Lordship has got his way. A number of Labour members put down questions for written answer which in effect requested the Minister to provide information due to given to the Leveson in the form of his statement and accompanying correspondence. The Minister in effect refused and this led to Points of Order being raised with the Speaker of the House of Commons, including a request from the deputy leader of the Opposition. The Speaker reinforced the Supremacy of the Commons and the need for the Minister to recognise where his duties and loyalties first lay.
This led Lord Leveson to announcing he would be making an important statement which explained that he would not be attempting to adjudicate on the political issues being raised which was a matter for the Prime Minister and the present Ministerial Code. However there would be a problem if the statements submitted to the Inquiry by the Minister together with documentation were published in advance of his appearance which is scheduled to take placed after that of Murdochs PR man and The Minister’s Adviser this coming Thursday. If the Ministers statement and documents were published in advance then the scheduled appearances before Leveson would have to be cancelled. While technically the statements and document information could be provided to Parliament without public publication I suspect it has been agreed to await the Leveson hearing on the subject and then for all hell to break lose in which it is difficult to see how the Culture Secretary can survive without irrevocably damaging Cameron, with the Tory party, let alone the country at large. I say this because of some of evidence we have heard to-date and which I hope to report over the coming weeks
Mr Jay defined the scope and purpose of the module in the official opening statement, reminding that the role of the press is to inform, to communicate, to facilitate public debate, to comment and most importantly of all to hold power to account in the pubic interest. Although if the printed word of Fleet street is literally printed on newspaper or electronically delivered, is less important now than it was in the past for the obvious reasons many witnesses have explained. The press still provides an essential function as a disseminator of news and comment. Politicians also need an outlet to get their message across and the press needs to understand and reflect the range of their readers views.
The fact that particular titles may not provide a politically balanced or neutral viewpoint on events is irrelevant to this issue. Newspapers are entitled to be partisan in a democracy, to campaign in favour of causes, policies and political parties and were the State to legislate otherwise that would be undemocratic as well as under our current settlement an abrogation of human rights. The only boundaries on free comment are those imposed by the criminal law, the law of defamation, and broadly analogous constraints, themselves imposed in the interests pf democracy and the public at large.
The general terms Mr Jay is right especially as the print media should use their power to destroy the reputation of individuals by invasions of their privacy which have no basis for meeting the test of what is in the public interest. The print media is useful in the provision of entertainment, and providing information on the availability of circuses and the culture experiences available as well as having general educational and information functions beyond the body politic.
The question is also whether the cause of democracy and the interests of the general public are served by print owners who dictate the political opinions of their paper, Should editors be allowed to individually dictate political direction should they reflect the corporate view of the editorial team, or even further their should be a greater balance in the presentation of political issues making clear what is editorial comment and what is intended to be accurate reporting. Some witnesses have suggested an approach along such lines rather than copying the requirements placed upon the licensed broadcasters. I see nothing wrong in restricting the ownership of British national print media to individuals and their corporations with at the most one daily and one Sunday combined, or insisting the owners restrict themselves to the business and commercial basis of their papers, leaving Editorial comment to the Editorial team and being clear in the distinction between comment and news reporting and for any British national or temporary resident publishing written works on political matters to be licensed by the profession in terms of required to agree to certain standards and with the power of the licence being withdrawn but where the individual would have the right for representation and judicial type hearings and an appeal system before licence removal can occur. I do not see that such a system will have a chilling effect on freedom of speech and written expression although it should eliminate those found guilty of criminal acts and serious and repeated breaches of the code. But I know most in in the printed media and body politic will not agree with me. So far the inquiry has not heard from those of like minded.
Despite the being there atmosphere of 3D I switched off in the 84th minute when they went down 1.0 after struggling throughout the game and where the home side playing in their own stadium squandered a number of chances to put the game beyond redemption. Didier Drogba then scored a bullet header in the 88th minutes taking the game into extra time.
I missed this goal and then the penalty he gave and its saving by the Chelsea goal keeper one of several heroes on the night. I watched the last 30 minutes or so of extra time but could not bear to watch the penalty shoot out after the German Team out the first in to the net. German teams, especially the national side had a reputation of always winning penalty shoot outs against British teams and while Chelsea had lost all their previous penalty events the home side had done the opposite.
I switch channels again to see the team celebrate just after Drogba and won the competition 4.5 on penalties on the night. The last German kicker hitting the post with the ball then running back into the field of play. With Manchester City winning the Premiership there has been two weekends of great football excite. This afternoon just after 4pm I watched the players and backroom staff parade in a blue bus with the banner Champions of Europe. There was a second bus for families of friends of the players and given that most of those in Germany were in the process of returning home the tens of thousands who packed the streets were impressive and genuine in their excitement. Even more so were the players who jumped up and down and sang out for about an hour over the mile and half hour the journey took to Parson’s Green as the parade stopped various congested pointed to enable people to take photos. Here the players chanted in raucous voices, The Russian owner, chief executive and manager were at the back of the bus enjoying themselves throughout the ride. At one point the club captain encourages the players and supporters to please with Drogba to stay with the club as rumours have traversed the sport’s media that he was on his way having allegedly asked for a two contract extension when the club was only prepared to offer one. Similarly all the commentators and pundits pressed for the interim manager to be given a full contract having won the FA cup and the Europeans Championship in his first season with only three defeats during his reign of a few months. The Chief Executive on camera said they would make the decision as previously state once the season had ended.
I shall use the winnings for a weekend in London to view the paralympics with one million tickets on sale tomorrow morning.
A case can be made for saying that the only reason Lord Leveson was given terms of reference which included the relationship between politicians and the print media is because the Prime Minister believed the inquiry process would be more damaging to the Labour Party than the Conservative. This has not and is likely not to be the case although it will damage the standing of Mr Brown and Mr Blair beyond their discredited positions already in the eyes of the general public. It will lead to the departure of the present culture secretary and possibly to the departure of Mr Osborne and Mr Cameron. Do not rule out the election of Boris Johnston Tory leader as a public fart against the body politic although my bet is still on Ed Miliband, more likely as Prime Minister in a coalition with Lib Dems led by Vince ( I will get you Murdoch) Cable. Ed has to shake out any continuing influence of Blair, Brown, Mandelson and Balls on his future administration if he is to survive. The appearances of Blair, Brown and Mandelson (the latter next week) should help his cause.
I say this because all the leading politicians and political commentators agree that leading national politicians became too close to Mr Murdoch and his people and this directly or indirectly affected the culture and practices of the tabloid print media in a destructive and at times criminal way for all interests, particularly those of the “celebrities” and the public in general. The Politicians and the Print bosses have immediately adjusted to the situation and taken instant remedial action, so whatever Leveson now reports and recommends the Political revenge, supported by the general public ire will be prolonged and vicious. Lord Leveson can go on as much as he likes about finding a solution which will not harm the broadsheets: the Daily Mail, the Express, the Sun and the Daily Mirror, the Sunday Sun and the Sunday People, or constrain their freedom to continue to behave like feudal warlords but a combination of political revenge, public antipathy and the changing contemporary technology will do for the print media in a big way. Whether this is a good or a bad thing for the future of British Society I am not sure.
Events in Greece, Spain, Italy, France and Germany all suggest that Europe is going to face a period of economic decline and reductions in general living standards, in some instances in significant ways. In order to prevent rioting and open insurrection “democratic” governments will be forced to take increasing control of communications media unless it maintains political neutrality, marginalizes the extremists and continues to concentrate on the froth. The less bread the more circuses approach to politics will remain necessary for the Britain’s Got talent, Football every hour of the day and Nude Nuns with Guns (a title from the Horror channel this week) masses although orchestrating the equivalent of the Olympic Games in the same year as the Jubilee mark two will require machiavellian creativity and shire England shaking off its continuing colonial mentality as the Irish, Scots and Welsh protestants have done post World War II.
I wrote the above before stopping to watch the Andrew Marr show and was struck how in tune I have become with understanding the depth the nature of the economic and personal finances changes which Europe is facing compared with the Unites States and the north American continent and China, then Indian sub continent and Austroasia, South America and Africa and to some extent Russia ( with its possession of energy resources) whether the economies are highly developed, in transition or presently stuck in overall poverty. The Europeans have the most to lose.
There was an extraordinary editorial this morning as the Sunday Times proclaimed that a political United States of Europe is the only and best solution to creating an economy where a financial union can effectively manage a currency union as is the situation in the United States. Alistair Darling, the previous Chancellor, correctly pointed out that whether this is a good or bad thing it would take a generation to put into effect and the crisis is immediate with decisions needed to be taken now. I was naturally pleased that he argues for the socialist approach of Keynes that investment in long term capital projects is an important solution to bringing the UK out of recession and achieving the social stability that goes along with economic growth.
The biggest criticism against the Tories is that their argument that Britain’s position was akin to that of Greece plummeted national confidence for the short term political gain of blaming the Labour Party for the inherited international and European economic situation, an argument which Cameron and the Chancellor now use themselves at every opportunity to explain why what they said would work two years ago has not.
Watching the late night politics show on Thursday night and the discussion this morning on Marr I am struck by the political division which has emerged in the Tory party whether it would be a good or and thing for Greece to leave the Euro. The right wing which now appears to include Portillo again, and former chancellor Nigel Lawson and the euro sceptics who want the euro to fail to vindicate their position and expedite British economic unilateralism. I was also struck by a statement that the size of the USA military budget is greater than the next ten countries combined (711 billion dollars against China 143(2) Russia 71.9 (3) UK 62.7 (4) and out of a world expenditure of 1630 billion. You have to know this to understand the ability of the US to survive economic downturns, the political power the government has overseas and the political power the arms industry and veteran’s lobby has within the union and why changes by individual European nations within NATO are irrelevant.
This is by way of an introduction to a few bits pieces from Leveson and concerning Leveson which should not await the appearance of the politicians over the coming weeks and which as I have also said will not affect what Leveson decides or what the coalition and opposition parties do in relation to his recommendations.
The first is the charging of Rebekah Brookes, her husband and five of the six others arrested with conspiracy to pervert the coarse of justice. The inclusion of so many including her personal assistant of a couple of decades suggests an attempt to encourage one or more of these to assist the prosecution on charges which if proven usually carry imprisonment of months or years and where the limit is life imprisonment.
The second is the attempt to force the resignation or removal of the Culture Secretary before his appearance before the Leveson Inquiry. Following his statement to the Commons and the exchanges across the despatch box at Prime Minister’s Questions the Prime Minister was forced to come to the House and explain his refusal to refer complaints to the procedure for dealing with the behaviour of Ministers while conducting their office. The argument is that the Culture Minister is in breach of the of Behaviour which says he must accept responsibility for the behaviour of his Advisers and should await the questioning by Leveson who made a statement suggesting that other more immediate inquiries should await his own.
There have been three developments since then which appear to suggest his Lordship has got his way. A number of Labour members put down questions for written answer which in effect requested the Minister to provide information due to given to the Leveson in the form of his statement and accompanying correspondence. The Minister in effect refused and this led to Points of Order being raised with the Speaker of the House of Commons, including a request from the deputy leader of the Opposition. The Speaker reinforced the Supremacy of the Commons and the need for the Minister to recognise where his duties and loyalties first lay.
This led Lord Leveson to announcing he would be making an important statement which explained that he would not be attempting to adjudicate on the political issues being raised which was a matter for the Prime Minister and the present Ministerial Code. However there would be a problem if the statements submitted to the Inquiry by the Minister together with documentation were published in advance of his appearance which is scheduled to take placed after that of Murdochs PR man and The Minister’s Adviser this coming Thursday. If the Ministers statement and documents were published in advance then the scheduled appearances before Leveson would have to be cancelled. While technically the statements and document information could be provided to Parliament without public publication I suspect it has been agreed to await the Leveson hearing on the subject and then for all hell to break lose in which it is difficult to see how the Culture Secretary can survive without irrevocably damaging Cameron, with the Tory party, let alone the country at large. I say this because of some of evidence we have heard to-date and which I hope to report over the coming weeks
Mr Jay defined the scope and purpose of the module in the official opening statement, reminding that the role of the press is to inform, to communicate, to facilitate public debate, to comment and most importantly of all to hold power to account in the pubic interest. Although if the printed word of Fleet street is literally printed on newspaper or electronically delivered, is less important now than it was in the past for the obvious reasons many witnesses have explained. The press still provides an essential function as a disseminator of news and comment. Politicians also need an outlet to get their message across and the press needs to understand and reflect the range of their readers views.
The fact that particular titles may not provide a politically balanced or neutral viewpoint on events is irrelevant to this issue. Newspapers are entitled to be partisan in a democracy, to campaign in favour of causes, policies and political parties and were the State to legislate otherwise that would be undemocratic as well as under our current settlement an abrogation of human rights. The only boundaries on free comment are those imposed by the criminal law, the law of defamation, and broadly analogous constraints, themselves imposed in the interests pf democracy and the public at large.
The general terms Mr Jay is right especially as the print media should use their power to destroy the reputation of individuals by invasions of their privacy which have no basis for meeting the test of what is in the public interest. The print media is useful in the provision of entertainment, and providing information on the availability of circuses and the culture experiences available as well as having general educational and information functions beyond the body politic.
The question is also whether the cause of democracy and the interests of the general public are served by print owners who dictate the political opinions of their paper, Should editors be allowed to individually dictate political direction should they reflect the corporate view of the editorial team, or even further their should be a greater balance in the presentation of political issues making clear what is editorial comment and what is intended to be accurate reporting. Some witnesses have suggested an approach along such lines rather than copying the requirements placed upon the licensed broadcasters. I see nothing wrong in restricting the ownership of British national print media to individuals and their corporations with at the most one daily and one Sunday combined, or insisting the owners restrict themselves to the business and commercial basis of their papers, leaving Editorial comment to the Editorial team and being clear in the distinction between comment and news reporting and for any British national or temporary resident publishing written works on political matters to be licensed by the profession in terms of required to agree to certain standards and with the power of the licence being withdrawn but where the individual would have the right for representation and judicial type hearings and an appeal system before licence removal can occur. I do not see that such a system will have a chilling effect on freedom of speech and written expression although it should eliminate those found guilty of criminal acts and serious and repeated breaches of the code. But I know most in in the printed media and body politic will not agree with me. So far the inquiry has not heard from those of like minded.
No comments:
Post a Comment