Gorgeous has run foul of the permanent subcommittee of investigations of the US Senate.

Their conclusion is non-equivocal: -

Despite Galloway’s denials, the evidence obtained by the Subcommittee, including Hussein-era documents from the Ministry of Oil and testimony from senior Hussein officials, shows that Iraq granted George Galloway allocations for millions of barrels of oil under the Oil for Food Program. Moreover, some evidence indicates that Galloway appeared to use a charity for children’s leukemia to conceal payments associated with at least one such allocation. Lastly, according to senior Hussein officials, the oil allocations were granted by Iraq because of Galloway’s support for the Hussein regime and his opposition to U.N. sanctions.

You will recall that Gorgeous listed beating the Telegraph (a UK paper) in a libel trial as one of his great achievements of the year. (See this article) Anyway, it seems that even that 'achievement' is a lie. The Telegraph recently won the right to appeal against that verdict, and, as they say, it ain't over till the fat lady sings. Incidentally, if you hadn't guessed, the alleged libel perpetrated on gorgeous by the Telegraph had something to do with Saddam and oil vouchers...

David Blunkett (aka The Bonkster) with his Bonkee

Blunkett is presumably a follower of the school of thought which holds that all women are beautiful in the dark. Yes, he's back in government. Never gave up his free house, and now (blind) Mr Blunkett will take charge of pushing through reforms of Incapacity Benefit - an issue which has provoked backbench Labour rebellions in the past. Not that he himself is particularly worried about incapacity benefit or pensions...

Beverley Hughes

The headlines when she resigned in April 2004 ran: -

Immigration Minister Beverley Hughes has resigned after admitting she "unwittingly" misled people about a suspected visa scam.

She's also described as a "close friend" of the bonkster.... Whooo Hooo!

Anyway, she's back. Her kindest critics last time said that she was just overworked, not telling porkies, so now she's going to look after all your children. Kind of a new nanny for the bonkster?

Shaun (sic) Woodward. MAN OF THE PEOPLE

Yup, a man for all seasons and all political parties. If the TBCs won't make you a minister, try ZNL. He quit the TBCs in December 1999 saying "New millenium, New Party, New Labour!" (OK, so I made that up, but he should have.) Now he's a junior minister in Northern Ireland reporting to Peter Hain. Great!

Peter Hain, leader of the Stop the Seventy Tour

In 2001, secret government documents published under the 30-Year Rule revealed that Peter Hain had been under surveillance in 1970.

Harold Wilson's government had even considered charging him with seditious conspiracy for threatening to disrupt the proposed cricket tour.

Hain now denies he ever dug up cricket pitches, he says he just sat on them, but that's not my memory...

[In fairness it should be pointed out that the famous incident when the Headingley pitch was dug up in the middle of the test match against Australia back in 1975 was nothing to do with apartheid protests, or Mr. Hain. It was, in fact, a "Free George Davis" protest and one Peter Chappell got 18 months for it. A year later Davis was in fact freed, but two years after that got 15 years for robbing a bank (again).]

Anyway, he's now going to sit in Stormont and meet lots of people who have been, or are, under surveilance. He should feel right at home.

Lord Drayson. Smallpox baron

This guy's an expert on procurement, and no, I don't mean for immoral acts. He got the smallpox vaccine contract from HMG (£32,000,000 thank you very much) even though he was just a middleman acting for the Dutch manufacturers. That one cost him a 50 grand bung to ZNL. Then he became a peer. That one seems to have cost him a cool half mil. Now he's a junior minister in the ministry of defense. If it were up to me I'd put him in charge of procurement.

Stop press. According to the Ministry of Defence website he is "Under Secretary of State and Minister for Defence Procurement, and Government Spokesman for Defence to the House of Lords". My old boss always used to say that when your title is longer than your name it's time to worry.

And no, since you ask, he ain't ever been elected by no-one.

All these have been specially selected by Toni who expects them, somewhat egomaniacally, to propel ZNL into a 100 years of power.

Lord help us.

Michael Howard faced a chorus of criticism over his decision to quit just when the TBCs were doing so well.

Fact is, they weren't.

His reason for going, "I'll be too old", may be personally true, but is certainly electorally true. It's this second part which other members of his party would have realised soon enough, and, being ambitious, would have acted on. So we have a scenario whereby a leadership battle was inevitable within the next few years. This will be divisive, will put off the voters, and will be ruthlessly exploited by ZNL. Now ask yourself the question. Should the TBC's expose themselves to this a year or two before the election, or should they get it over with ASAP? And should they seek to make it as smooth a process as possible to minimise the damage? Looked at like that there's only one decision to make. Clean up the TBC internal voting system, and do it as soon as possible. The only motive for staying would be for MH to have some fun at Prime Minister's Question Time. No question he would have done that, he's really quite good at it. But it's of little interest to the voters, the only people who get much out of it are MH and his supporters. So, he's sacrificed that and gone. Principled, intelligent and right. We'll see who we get now.

In general, of course, the seats where the incumbent had a small majority were more likely to fall, but there are a substantial number of exceptions. ZNL held Dumfries and Galloway where they only had a tiny majority, though boundary changes render comparison difficult. They also held Dorset South however, where previously they had a majority of 153 seats, with a substantially increased majority.

By contrast they lost Gravesham where they previously had close to a 5000 majority.

Talking of Galloway, gorgeous George won. The campaign was vitriolic, ZNL candidate, Oona King, needed police protection after the tyres of her car were slashed. But this Blair Babe will be back. She was less than 30 years old when she got in in '97, and is media savvy and photogenic. Coupled with a first class degree from York and work experience in the EU and for the GMB, she'll find a by-election to win I'm sure.

Oona

George appears to be a fan of this blog. This is one of his campaign posters: -

Remarkably similar to the one posted on this site here on the 26th.

What happens now?

Well, first of all everyone claims victory. The problem, of course, is, that ZNL are still in power, with a substantial, and workable, majority. This means that the disasters forecast here are likely to eventuate.

Mind you, as a predictor I'm a dead loss. The only crumb of comfort I have is that I'm not a gambler, I'd have lost my shirt backing my prediction of the ZNL majority with money. The other crumb of comfort is that almost no-one else came any closer to an accurate prediction.

The End

Well, not quite. In it's present form the end, true, but "I'll be back!"

Thanks to all who read this. The full blog is available as a word document, compiled in date order, for anyone who wants to see how the blog developed.

If you read the Mirror you'll be told to vote ZNL.

If you read the Telegraph you'll be told to vote TBC.

If you read the Economist you should vote ZNL.

If you're a fan of Rupert "The dirty digger" Murdoch you have a problem. The Sun came out for ZNL, The Times for the TBCs.

What does this blog say?

Well, a poll in yesterday's Telegraph gave the share of vote as follows: -

So let's take them in order.

1) Don't vote. Not a starter, though it's what I'll be doing having not lived in UK for nearly 25 years and not having voted for about 33.

2) ZNL. Do not vote for them. Having got over an attack of fiscal prudence in their first term they're back to tax'n spend. The country is near a balance of payments crisis, and public debt is getting out of control. Another 5 years will see real damage, and more elites destroyed. They'll finish the job at the house of lords, but they'll also be well under way at Oxford and Cambridge. The morally bankrupt Byers, Mandelson, and Blunkett will be back in cabinet, and Brown will do even less to restrain them than Toni did. In 5 years by a combination of gerrymandering constituency borders and greatly increased public employment (which employees will be beholden to ZNL) it is highly unlikely that the socialist hegenomy will be breakable. Don't go down this road.

3) TBC. Strategically inept campaigning, and a strident tone at the hustings have made them virtually unelectable. It's a shame, because, fundamentally, the arguments for smaller government, more self reliance and greater choice, represent the ONLY way that Britain can remain prosperous. This includes self reliance of the UK within the European context, which was a dog that didn't bark this election. They won't win, but vote for them anyway. It needs something, anything, to keep ZNL aware that some people disagree.

4)Lib-dems. They have established an attractive veneer of principle, having been the only party consistently against the war in Iraq, with no ifs and no buts. At least partly because of this, their high tax and spend version of the economy is mostly seen as principled and honest. But make no mistake. It is high tax and spend, more so even than ZNL, and the benefits, if any, of this policy are to be exclusively distributed amongst the middle class in the Lib-dem vision. The only intellectually defensible argument for high tax'n spend is redistribution. You might not like the argument but it can be defended. The lib-dems are doing no such thing, they just squeeze the distribution of wealth to be narrow and high in the middle ground with long tails (but small numbers) at the very poor, and very wealthy ends of the scale. Do not vote for them. Not because it's a vote wasted, and not because you might let someone else in by the back door. Don't vote for them because they have bad financial policies.

So, Who will Win?

ZNL with a 95 seat overall majority.

The biggest problem, if we're to believe the pols, is CO2. Dreadful stuff, a greenhouse gas, and guaranteed to lead to world doom if not checked.

Here are few things the Greens say: -

"Greens have warned voters that "a vote for Labour is a vote for economic disaster", following the release of their new "Costs of climate change" briefing, which outlines how the bill from climate change damages will increase dramatically in the future under the "business as usual" scenario."

and

"THE GREEN Party has unveiled its ice sculpture of Tony Blair melting on College Green, warning that 33 Billion sq metres of polar ice melting annually"

As an aside it should be noticed that the Green party web site is one of the slowest I've ever visited. Probably using one of those low energy computers...

Their full manifesto is available here.

There's a few exciting policy initiatives here, like banning fur, banning battery hens. They're also going to replace the EU's Common Agricultural policy, and its Fisheries policy, nationalise all public transport, and ban genetically modified food. There is talk of renewable energy resources but, interestingly, not once does the word 'tide' or 'tidal' appear, though there are a few references to wind and wind/wave sources.

What they have got hold of is the story in the Telegraph yesterday that Ms Toni is planning to re-look at nuclear power after the election. Nobody trusts nuclear. It produces the biggest bangs the world has ever seen, and allows the making of movies like the China Syndrome. It also produces no CO2. Like zero. Needless to say the Greens will "close the nuclear fuel programme". In fact, by 2020, nuclear power will fall to 4% of the nations consumption if just left alone, as stations come to the end of their useful life, and the greens say in the smaller print, that they will do nothing to accelerate this.

There is certainly a major issue in attempting to meet the Kyoto agreement. Of course evil Bush is not bothering his ass trying, but the question is "why are we?"

According to The Sceptical Environmentalist by Bjorn Lomborg full conformance would slow the effect of global warming by somewhat less than 6 years at the end of this century. And this could cost upwards of $300 Billon per YEAR to achieve. Bjorn has been universally villified by green's and environmentalists, but all he is trying to do is ensure that the best facts available are used for policy making. In Science 19th December 1997 Jerry Mahlman of Princeton said it might take 'another 30 Kyotos over the next century' to control warming. And, of course, each one is potentially MORE expensive than the last, because the job is getting harder. Now of course the COST of having global warming is non zero also, estimates run up to around $500 Billion annually, but to all intents and purposes Kyoto puts an additional cost of 300 billion on that for effectively zero (5 and a bit years) gain.

Clearly under these cirumstances someone has to think the unthinkable, and by thinking about nuclear power Toni does herself great credit. Of course, it's not an easy option, but nor are any of the others.

Especially as, as Margaret Beckett admitted last night, the UK is falling way behind on its Kyoto commitments.

Margaret trained as a metallurgist but never worked in industry, and apart from a few years as a researcher for Granada Television has spent a lifetime as a public parasite (sorry, I meant servant...). She is 62 years old but retains the supercilious air of much younger person and is guaranteed to enrage anyone in search of real dialogue.

And currently she's in charge of Environment.

Scary-lady!

Toni Bliar

Sometimes it takes a foreign newspaper to put things in context.

Today's Irish Times has a corruscating article on Blair, Goldsmith and Iraq. The quotes from the earlier, leaked, Goldsmith opinion on the legality of the war are damning. Unfortunately the paper does not allow access without a subscription to many areas so you will not be able to read it. Vincent Browne's extracts make it clear that Goldsmith believed that Toni knew the war could be illegal, and that he, Goldsmith, knew he had to come up with something to get Toni off the hook. This is much stronger than the opinion change which has been sold through the UK meeja.

She's gotta go. But won't.

Political Betting's Balance of Money Projection:- ZNL by 92 seats

The Guardian

In Shipley, a Tory stronghold for more than 50 years, the ICM poll suggests that junior minister Chris Leslie will retain the seat he unexpectedly won at the age of 24 in 1997. Tenth on the Tory target list, it will take a swing of only 1.3% to the Tories to unseat him.

Charles Kennedy increased the pressure on Tony Blair in the closing stages of the election campaign yesterday by publicly ending a pact to back Labour candidates in key marginal constituencies.

The Daily Telegraph

Now there are often anomalies at by-elections, so in the normal way of things you might expect the seat to revert to ZNL, but Yamin has powerful allies.

Yesterday's blog

Vote Liberal Democrat, get Left-wing activists

ZNL poster. (OK then, a cartoon about it...)

The polls continue their reassuring litany of statistics giving ZNL some sort of landslide win, but in seats that are anything but rock solid there seems to be confusion.

So what's happening?

It seems that there are a number of things, and it certainly is beginning to seem that the spread betters are closer to the mark than the official polls.

This blog expected a landslide just a few days ago. This view was based on the flawed TBC strategy of drip feeding good new, the cheap attempts by them to buy votes, and the fact that they were treating the voters like children with their puerile handwritten slogans. But ZNL is catching up. Their voters now have to be told that if they don't vote for ZNL they may end up with someone they don't want. Well doh!

Lies over Iraq seem to leave only the libdems with any sort of credibility. Well them and George Galloway who said yesterday

"When I first called the prime minister a liar on air over his repeatedly denied plans to invade Iraq - in the wake of the Texas meeting with George Bush in spring 2002 - the BBC presenter was aghast at my presumption. Today there can scarcely be a sentient being in the land who would disagree."

One hates to agree with George (as you can see here), but on this occasion he's called it right.

All the parties this time around have had a strong focus on marginal seats but somehow the national media have not really reflected this. They've followed the leaders around, photographed the latest national posters, reported the latest speaches, but very little else.

Despite all this Martin Baxter is still forecasting a 140 majority. Martin is a Cambridge mathematician who has co-authored a number of books on financial mathematics and the mathematics of derivatives. Complex stuff but he should know how to analyse the numbers.

The political betting 'Balance of money' predictions have consistently shown little volatility, and little indication of a landslide majority. I suspect that people putting their money up have taken more account of the real situation on the ground than the national press, and are probably about right.

I withdraw the prediction of a landslide.

Political Betting's Balance of money Predicted ZNL majority 82 seats

Yasmin and Sarah (and Charles)

Now there are often anomalies at by-elections, so in the normal way of things you might expect the seat to revert to ZNL, but Yamin has powerful allies.

The Muslim Association of Britain released the following statement on 12th April: -

Following lengthy deliberations and extensive consultations with various groups and bodies, the Muslim Association of Britain has decided to lend its full support to Yasmin Qureshi the Labour candidate for Brent East seat. We urge our friends and supporters in the constituency to vote for her in next month’s parliamentary elections.

Ms. Qureshi’s record on Human Rights is admirable and her stand against the recently proposed anti-Terrorism Law is one that will surely secure support from the Muslim community and beyond in Brent East. She is a conscientious Muslim who understands and is fully capable of articulating the needs and concerns of the Muslim community.

Among the many factors that led MAB to make this decision was Yasmin Qureshi’s stand on the War in Iraq and her demand for the immediate withdrawal of British troops, as well as her unwavering support for the Palestinian people and her continuous demand for the end of the occupation and the full ‘right to return’ for all Palestinian refugees.

We also strongly welcome Ms Qureshi’s firm backing for proposals to outlaw incitement to religious hatred.

As a member of parliament, Yasmin Qureshi would be a great asset not only to her local constituency but to the wider British society. For these reasons the MAB gives her its unreserved backing and support and we believe she in a good position to win this seat at the coming election.

MAB campaigns on things you might expect such as

but also on things you might not expect such as

On top of that Yasmin has the support of Ken Livingstone (London's mad left leaning Mayor). Pearls of wisdom from Ken: -

Anybody who enjoys being in the House of Commons probably needs psychiatric help.

and

What a squalid and irresponsible little profession it is. Nothing prepares you for how bad Fleet Street really is until it craps on you from a great height.

and

World wide capitalism kills more people everyday then Hitler did. And he was crazy.

Yamin is a lawyer, and hence good at arguing that although a vote for her is a vote for Toni, that does NOT mean she supports the Iraq adventure.

Sarah is also a clever lady having studied Pharmacology at St. John's, Cambridge, and until recently was a member of the London Symphony Chorus.

All in all a most interesting contest, even if it has little to say about the overall state of the parties in the rest of the country.

Good luck to both of you!

Political Betting Balance of money prediction: ZNL majority of 80 seats.

What a guy!

In case any of you were on planet mars for the last 6 months Blunkett scewed around with a married woman, helped her nanny with a visa application, and used governement expenses to pay for a rail ticket for his lover. The Budd report investigated the 'fast track' visa and the Mawes report investigated the rail fare bit.

Everyone seems to think that the cuckolding activity is essentially blameless and no-one investigated that. But the man was in charge of law and order in the UK, and regularly pontificated on anti-social behaviour and standards. If you want to be a feckless rake, then DON'T take the job of Home Secretary.

So why do we care? After all he got sacked.

Well, a couple of reasons. Most people when they get sacked lose their salary. Tends to go with the territory. Not Blunkett. He lost a bit of it, true, but a bl**dy great house is still given to him rent free. You all pay for that. Not only that but a story in today's Sunday Telegraph says he will return to cabinet as THE ENFORCER.

Blunkett says "Thanks"

Back Door Tories?

Of course, that this story gets out at all tells you that despite her protestations Ms Toni Blair is sure of victory. Doesn't stop her publicly claiming that a vote for the lib-dems will let the TBCs in. An article in Saturday's Independent comprehensively debunked such amateur psephology. In it they quoted John Curtice, the respected psephologist and professor of politics at Strathclyde University, who said: -

"Labour's claim that switching from Labour to the Liberal Democrats could enable Mr Howard to win the election is highly misleading."

He went on to say: -

"It is even highly unlikely any swing could result in the Conservatives becoming the largest party. The most likely consequence of any large switch from Labour to the Liberal Democrats is simply nobody would have an overall majority."

As usual ZNL, and its lovely leader Ms Toni Blair, will say what sounds good, not what's true.

It's a shame to rake over old coals, but Iraq too refuses to go away. An article in today's Sunday Times claims to have proof of planning for the war, and the approach needed to 'sell' it, from long before Blair ever admitted having taken a decision. (Download a text copy of the article)

15 Minutes of Fame

And a final note. George Galloway's wife is filing for divorce. Seems he ain't shown no respect. Sad for Amineh Abu-Zayyad (his palastinian borne wife), but, as far as George is concerned, it couldn't happen to a nicer bloke...

Good luck Amineh!

Young Toni was totally flumoxed by a question about the 48 hour waiting list target for General Practitioner appointments. Apparently what happens is that you can't book an appointment MORE than 48 hours in advance as a result of this. This is because the days might get full up, and then, when someone calls they have to be put off, thus missing the target. So what they do is have a very narrow window for booking the appointment, and keep the diary as open as possible.

This is precisely the sort of thing that always happens. Philip Johnston wrote a most interesting article on the subject which you can read here. (You may find you need to sign up for membership; if that's a problem read a copy here.)

My take on this goes like this.

Around ten years ago, in one of the hubs served by United Airlines, it was common for the last short haul plane out to wait for the (frequently) delayed incoming connecting flights. Passengers didn't mind, most were business travellers who knew that the next week the plane could be waiting for them, and were just glad to get home in the evening rather than the next day. The day came when my then chairman, after sprinting to make his connection, found the gate closed and the departing aircraft pushed back about 20 yards. This was bad enough, but worse followed as the plane remained in that position for around 45 minutes before finally resuming the push back and taxiiing for takeoff.

He made enquiries.

United had set a target of improving push back times. Not take off, not landing, but push back. So the plane had met it's target and the employees concerned could bask in the warm glow of self satisfaction and management appreciation that comes when you hit a management target. The problem, it hardly needs stating, is that the target had absolutely no relevance to the airline's customers. They care about arriving safely and early enough to get to their hotels, homes, or appointments. When on an evening flight even arriving on time comes a poor third to those two requirements.

So it's not, as Toni thinks,about setting more detailed targets, it's about setting more sensible targets which relate to end users' experiences.

Here's a nice picture of an Anti-target.

Incidentally, and this is completely off topic, this picture came from a very heavyweight scientific paper. You'll get a feel for this just from the abstract: -

We study pattern formation arising from the interaction of the stationary Turing and wave ~oscillatory Turing! instabilities. Interaction and competition between these symmetry-breaking modes lead to the emergence of a large variety of spatiotemporal patterns, including modulated Turing structures, modulated standing waves, and combinations of Turing structures and spiral waves. Spatial resonances are obtained near codimension-two Turing-wave bifurcations. Far from bifurcation lines, we obtain inwardly propagating spiral waves with Turing spots at their tips. We demonstrate that the coexistence of Turing spots and traveling waves is a result of interaction between Turing and oscillatory modes, while the inwardly propagating waves ~antispirals! do not require this interaction; they can arise from the wave instability combined with a negative group velocity. © 2002 American Institute of Physics. @DOI: 10.1063/1.1507110#

If you're in a really masochistic frame of mind the full paper is available here.

Health

Apparently John Reid is going to do great things for the health service if ZNL get reelected.

Mr Reid said if Labour was re-elected next week,

"the party would ensure that all women would have the choice over where and how they had their babies by 2009."

double the investment going into palliative care, to help more people "die with dignity at home if that is what they choose".

It's hard to understand why some of these wonderful things couldn't have happened in the last 8 years.

Reid is a bruiser, visibly happy in debate when anyone else is getting uncomfortable. A most unpleasant man. It's hard to imagine him as some sort of friendly, concerned local GP.

15 Minutes of Fame

Gillian Ferguson is standing in North Tyneside. We should praise and support her to the utmost extent since she's standing against "Bozo" Byers, the man, you'll recall, who stole Railtrack from its shareholders and ensured that Rover died. Apparently he is lined up for high office again if ZNL win, so make sure you don't have anything he might want. And if you see him with shitty, run.

Anyway, this is what happened last time, so Gillian has a mountain to climb.

Good luck Gillian!

Incidentally, politics.co.uk should get their act together. I believe Gillian is female...

Political Betting's Predicted Labour majority 78 seat

I am indebted to Alice Thomson for advising me that

and when [children] started singing, "Mr Blair, we don't care, you're wearing Cherie's underwear," they were quickly whisked away.

Of course, if you google this phrase (we always try to get multiple sources, of course) then you'll find lots of sites about underwear (and lack of it), but not much else, so we'll have to take Alice's word for it.

The point is though, sad though it is to admit it, the children got to the question of Blair's gender before I did. How they knew beats me, but never underestimate kids.

If you're keen, and have Quicktime on your machine, you can play the bush'nblair endless love video here. (broadband recommended)

Toni has a lovely singing voice...

Railtrack

I guess we shouldn't be astonished, the financial press has been convinced that Bozo Byers was up to no good for a while now, but the release of e-mails originating in government departments which clearly show a long term plot to nationalise railtrack without compensation, still come as a shock. Even more shocking is that Toni and our ZNL chancellor were "personally involved" in this "eye catching initiative".

One of the key architects is Ms Shriti Vadera. Shitty is a lovely piece of work.

A couple of Shitty quotes: -

"I was thinking we need a trigger to insolvency that we decisively pull"

and

"Can we engineer the solution through insolvency - finding the balance between not having triggered it and therefore avoid compensation of Human Rights Act but enough to be seen to have acted decisively rather than reacting to a failed privatisation that we refused to see and deal with earlier. Need detailed legal advice. How would we manage it?" (this under a heading 'Renationalisation'

A shitty prediction: -

Future Governor of the bank of England (by Evan Davies, BBC economic editor)

A shitty picture: -

Cardiff Central

Funny how the same constituencies keep coming up. You'll recall from here that this is where the Beany heartland is. Well it also turns out it's the best hope the libdems have for gaining a seat.

Last time looked like this: -

So as you can see there's not a lot of votes to pick up.

Jenny Willott is standing again and must have a very good chance of getting a lot more than 15 minutes of fame.

Good Luck Jenny!

Political Bettings Predicted ZNL majority 78 seat

However it really does lead to serious question marks over Lord Peter Goldsmith.

Peter is clearly a clever bloke, having gained a double first at Gonville and Caius college, Cambridge around 35 years ago, but when there is even a hint that a deputy high court judge has opinions malleable enough to be guided by a politician it's time to call a halt. Peter needs to step down after the election and tell all; he has no credibility left, or at least not enough for his current postion.

What is now clear is that Biar took the country to war for the wrong reasons. Bad intelligence, bad legal advice, and a false sense of his own importance. This last is excellently shown in this letter from the Telegraph today. Nevil Johnson, Emeritus Fellow, Nuffield College, Oxford, wrote, inter alia: -

While defending his decision on the Iraq war and protesting that he would never apologise for the action he took, he remarked in relation to Saddam Hussein: "I decided to remove him." But this is nonsense. Neither Mr Blair nor this country had the means of removing Saddam.
What Mr Blair actually decided to do was give support to a decision by President George W. Bush to bring about regime change by removing Saddam. There are grounds on which Mr Blair's stance might be justified, especially in terms of Realpolitik and the abiding geo-political interests of this country. But this is not a case that Mr Blair now chooses to deploy.
Instead, he indulges in posturing and fantasising about what he has done.

I couldn't have put it better myself, and indeed, didn't.

You may have been wondering "why the title of today's article?", but I think you can see it coming together now. If not, here's a question for you: -

What do you call someone who get's the right answers for the wrong reasons, who is excessively concerned about their own appearance, and in no way feels embarassed to have a homosexual man as a close friend?

Answer: - Female.

The bottom line here is we're going to have the first cross dressing prime minister in our history. Well, that's progress for you I guess.

Deep 'oles

Still indicating a landslide; majorities of up to 148 seats are being predicted. This might be true but there are a lot of caveats being expressed about the marginals. It seems to be believed that ZNL is 'leaking' these stories to the press to make sure their supporters are scared enough to vote. Why a leak? Well, it's the old forbidden fruit trick. If the fourth estate believes that they've been clever to get hold of the story they'll print it, if it's in a press release, and clearly propaganda, they won't, or if they do say they think it's propaganda.

And of course, all this might be double bluff, so what's the truth?

The table below was generated by Mori, in a poll comissioned by the GMB. The GMB doesn't now like to be called the General and Municipal Boilermakers, still less refer to its origin in 1889 as Gas Workers and General Union, but be that as it may, they are still firmly behind ZNL. So essentially ZNL is asking for this information.

Note the heavy concentration on what unhappy labour voters might do. The bottom line here is that there's real concern about complacency, and you can bet ZNL will try to do something about it. If they get it right expect the landslide predicted here, rather than the smaller victory predicted by political betting.

In the context of polls you'll recall I believe polls about expectations (who do you think will win?) are better predictors than those about voting intentions (who will you vote for?). I am greatful for a political betting commenter who pointed me here. There's a nice graph on the site reproduced below.

Pretty certain then, but it doesn't give a majority, just a certainty.

15 Minutes of Fame

Emily Thornberry, ZNL candidate for Islington South and Finsbury.

She considers herself principled. This from her website:-

A principled politician.

The House of Commons needs principled politicians. Chris Smith took a courageous decision to oppose the war in Iraq, and I am proud to have stood alongside him on this issue. If elected, I will continue his tradition of reflecting the principled concerns of this community in Parliament.

But she is perfectly happy to tell you to do one thing and do another herself. She sends her child to Dame Alice Owen's School in Potters Bar, a selective school some 13 miles away from the constituency she wishes to represent in such a principled way. The old socialist slogan "What's yours is mine, and what's mine's my own", springs to mind.

A smiling hypocrite

Little doubt she'll win unfortunately. The table below shows what happened to her predecessor. (Last election she herself lost Canterbury. You'll recall from this article that Rocky van de Benderskum is standing there this year on behalf of the Legalise Cannabis Alliance. Obviously she couldn't face the competition...)