What Price ‘Stability’ in the Housing Market?

So Gordon Brown is considering intervening in the housing market in order to kick start the economy. This, only weeks, after the Chancellor has told his Cabinet colleagues that the kitty is dry and any additional spending would need to be met from existing budgets. When will this so-called prudent economist ever learn that it is precisely because of government policies that the economy is in the diabolical state it is? Borrowing more money to shore up his socialist dogma has no benefit; other than to convince the most gullible that he knows what he is doing. If Gordon Brown thinks that he can buy his way back into the hearts of the British public then he is more stupid than I thought. Enabling more people to buy over-priced houses they can’t afford with money the banks haven’t got to lend will not get this country back on track. It would take a lot more than that or the prospect of some cheap loft insulation to pull the wool over the eyes of the beleaguered electorate this time (I hope and pray).

The fall in the value of houses, that some have called a crash, is in fact no more than realignment to the rest of the economy. The vastly over-inflated price of property has been fuelled at the government’s encouragement in order to ensure greater and greater income from taxation. Of course the banks have colluded in this by lending money on properties to people who have little or no hope of ever paying it back. I mean, what on earth is a 120% mortgage all about? Even a normal adjustment in the market would make that seem obviously a bad investment for any sane bank. However, sanity is in pretty short supply with Bush in the White House and Labour in Downing Street. Banks on both sides of ‘pond’ have been allowed put the whole world economy in jeopardy in order to fuel a ‘feel good factor’ among their respective populations and distract them from turmoil and incompetence of their administrations.

But never mind we have yet another cabinet member to keep us entertained; with the Schools Secretary going on TV demonstrating healthy cooking for schoolchildren. I wonder, is he the first government minister to be appointed to his post because he has the same name as the language he speaks (educational balls)?

Jester, Amuse Thyself

So Charles Clarke thinks that Gordon Brown should resign if things don’t improve? So what? Almost everybody else thinks he should have resigned before he came into office. But even so, surely Mr Clarke’s remarks are a bit rich coming from someone who after a few months in charge of a government department, it was described as being ‘unfit for purpose’ by one his own colleagues. Of course, these comments come from a man who has yet to master the art of shaving, has the savoir-faire of a Tourette’s sufferer and the dress sense of a ‘Big Issue’ salesman.

But what else can we expect from a Labour Party politician; the organisation that has brought us the seemingly endless succession of clueless buffoons, incompetents and dogmatic pseudo-socialists we have had the misfortune to call a government over the last eleven years? Let us review this Z list of political wannabes and failures; it includes such illustrious names as: John Prescott, Frank Dobson, David Blunkett, Geoff Hoon, Des Brown and Stephen Byers to name but a few examples of the embarrassingly ineffectual and damaging personalities that we have had to suffer in Westminster over the last few years. Against this lot George W. Bush looks positively erudite.

Ours is a government that has, amongst other things, masterminded the break-up of the United Kingdom; the handover of (for all practical purposes) sovereignty of the nation to a European federal government; and the destruction of our economy. Now, finally, just as it all starts to go to hell in a handcart; they start to spot the inadequacies of each other.

Who Sets The Standards For Our Police?

On 19th August I read that ‘a man was arrested when he photographed a police van outside a fish and chip shop after he had seen it reversing the wrong way along a one-way street’. Apparently an officer came running from the shop and battered the camera from the man’s hand on to the floor and arrested him for three crimes, none of which he had committed. After the incident ‘the officer faced a disciplinary inquiry and was made to apologise in person to Mr Carter but still held on to his job’; and the deputy chief constable also wrote to the man, apologising for the officer's 'totally unacceptable' behaviour.

Today I read ‘that two policemen have been sacked and a third told to resign for assaulting and threatening a 16-year-old boy and then trying to cover up their actions’.

What’s with this ‘unacceptable behaviour 'and 'made to apologise'? And what on earth do they mean ‘sacked and told to resign’? In any just society police officers are held to higher standard of accountability than the rest of us plebs. In both cases there were attempts to pervert the course of justice which would have brought prosecution and automatic imprisonment for those found guilty. But what do I know?

As One ‘Criminal’ To Another

I read that our illustrious government now intends to recruit hundreds of people whose sole job will be to issue ‘on the spot’ fines to people who contravene one of the regulations or bylaws introduced to make us a ‘better’ society. These will include parking, littering, playing in the street, annoying your neighbour, and practically anything to do with wheelie bins, refuse collection or recycling.

If you fill your wheelie bin too full you will be fined; if you leave your wheelie bin too far from the kerb you will be fined; if you leave your wheelie bin the wrong way round you will be fined; if you put additional rubbish bags out with your wheelie bin you will be fined; if you put your rubbish in the wrong container you will be fined; and if you put your rubbish out on the wrong day you will be fined; and what’s more if you obstruct the pavement with your rubbish you will be fined. Of course if you drive any or all of your rubbish to the tip in order to avoid falling foul of any of the afore-mentioned regulations and pump additional greenhouse gases into the atmosphere, that’s okay.

Since coming to power this government has introduced laws creating over 3,000 new criminal offences. These come under guise of improving or protecting the environment, and enhancing law order.

By the time this government leaves office there will only be two classes of people left in this country; criminals and people who work for the government. New Labour, new Stasi.

Now the Olympics Are Over

The magnificent display of sporting prowess is over and the conquering heroes and heroines have returned to well-deserved demonstrations of adulation from the press and public alike. After years of sweat and toil suffering pain and injury, three or more weeks away from their homes loved ones for the sake of their country and sporting glory; and exhausted after 12 hours travelling they still had one more duty to perform. No, I don’t mean running the gauntlet of reporters, cameramen, and TV interviewers asking inane questions which always seem to include the phrases, ‘What does it mean to you…?’ or ‘What does it feel like…?’ I mean the inevitable photo opportunity for Gordon Brown.

There he was standing on the tarmac with that nauseating simpering smile which makes him look like a schoolboy that has just masturbated in the toilet. Who was it that said, ‘The secret of success is sincerity. Once you can fake that you've got it made.’?. I don’t think there is anything more sickening than to see a politician trying to take credit for something for which they played no part. I would love to know what was going through the minds of the athletes as he stood there shaking their hands, making patronising remarks as if he knew what he was talking about, and attempting to bathe in their reflected glory.

It is difficult to imagine how the head of a government that has sold more school sports fields and closed more public swimming pools than any other, has the nerve to do anything other than apologise to the sporting community for making it so difficult for them to achieve anything at all. The Labour government’s only contribution has been to spend at least some of the lottery money for what it was intended in the first place, rather than steal it all for things that are supposed to be funded from taxation.

If this is reality give me fantasy any day

Oh joy of joys, a glance at the new edition of the Radio Times informs me that a new series of 'X Factor' begins this evening. This means that with judicious use of my DVR, I will be able to fill my whole evening with 'reality' vote-off shows like ‘Last Choir Standing’, ‘X Factor’ and ‘Big Brother’.

Big Brother; whose idea was this exercise in collective madness? People sit down and tune in to watch a group of individuals who at best belong in some sort of counselling, and at worst in a psychiatric hospital or prison. These characters (known as housemates) are then teased, goaded and provoked into committing various activities of a dubious moral or sexual nature with other housemates (mates?). Some of these acts seem specifically designed to speed up an admission to one of the afore-mentioned psychiatric hospitals or prisons. For some reason for next three months (yes THREE months) the tabloid press the become obsessed with this drivel until thankfully a phone-in vote determines the winner and we are given a few months respite until it all begins again.

For those among us who bemoan the passing of bear-baiting, cock-fighting and dog-fighting as a legitimate pastime we now have the option of the ‘X Factor’. For those that have had the good judgement not to have tuned into this programme. It is a ‘talent’ show where people, mostly with anything they might have had approaching talent, genetically substituted by some sort of medical, physical or psychological disorder, are paraded for public humiliation. These unfortunate creatures are then ‘judged’ by a panel of ‘celebrity’ has-beens, themselves of little or no talent and an over-inflated view of their own worth. The adjudication is seen by these irritating twerps as an opportunity to further mortify those that they do not want to get through or to give unrealistic expectations to those they do. The former then further degrade themselves by begging or pleading with the judges to change their mind; and the former embarrass themselves by displays sycophancy not seen since the days of Saddam Hussein. After weeks of shows where the producers have sought to find and broadcast the most hideously embarrassing incidents of the pre-selection process, they then move to the knock-out stage where performers are voted in or out (I’m not sure which) by the public using an 0900 phone-in voting system (most of these have been discredited over the last year or two but people still seem prepared to use them.

What I'd like to know is what number do I have to call to get them all off the air?

Are we really this stupid?

It seems that TV producers consider viewers to have the memory of Alzheimic goldfish. Whilst watching 'The Hotel Inspector' last evening, at beginning of the hour long show we were treated to a précis of what was about to be shown, including a brief curriculum vitae of the presenter (in spite of the fact we are nearing the end of the series and most of us could probably recite her qualifications backwards), as we approached the first commercial break we were reminded of what we had just seen and told what would happen after the ads. (This included much of the information we were given at the start of the show).

Having sat through five minutes of inane advertisements for loans, hair products, cars and life improvement products for geriatrics, accompanied by music and sound effects played at 20 decibels above the rest of the broadcast; the programme recommenced. And, just in case we had forgotten, we were given a run down on what had gone before. The programme briefly continued before we were presented another reminder of what had happened before the break and a clue of what to expect after the next interlude.

Following a repeat showing of the same commercials at the same ear-splitting volume as before; the third section began with, yes you guessed it, a summary of what had gone before and a hint or two of what was to come. A few more minutes of the actual programme content and then, wait for it, yes more scintillating indications of what to expect after the third break of deafening adverts for products that by now you wouldn’t buy if they were the last on the planet.

When the fourth section of the programme commenced our memory was jogged yet again about what we had seen and what we were about to see before we moved on to the weightier matters of what the programme had been attempting put across. By this time, most of us had lost the will to live, and were beginning to imagine we had been reincarnated into a remake of ‘Groundhog Day’.

I suppose you might call this a déjà review.

What are TV listing magazines for?

What with the European Cup and the Olympics it has been almost impossible to find an evenings TV viewing this summer. Summertime TV is notorious for repeats and naff programmes imported from America; but this year the TV companies have surpassed themselves. If you're not interested in sport, reality knockout shows, soap operas with plotlines that would stretch the ability of the brain dead to suspend disbelief, or programmes about people with too much money either building or buying expensive houses; then forget it.

We were promised that the advent of digital TV would end all of this; and when the service was enhanced by a DVR our viewing habits would be transformed as we became dazzled by choice. But what has happened? Our channel choice has expanded to include ones that repeat what was on an hour ago, what was on yesterday, what was last year and what was on decades ago.

As if all this wasn't bad enough, when you sit down with you listing magazine to cherry pick the few programmes that might be worth viewing and plan your viewing in conjunction with your DVR; You find that some imbecile at the broadcasting agency has decided that what you really want to watch is a football match between teams competing for a place in a competition that is until next year. Thank you Radio Times what is the point; wrong two nights running.