“Re-Tweet”, or whatever the kids are saying these days, from the blog of Tom Palmer:
Click here for Tom’s explanation of the case.
Click here to sign the petition.
Tags: Abdul Hamid Bin Hussain Bin Moustafa al-Fakki, Saudi arabia, tom palmer
Last weekend I ambled somewhat indifferently to the Wengerdome to see the Arsenal v Fulham. While the last game of the season is a nice one to attend – one can bid one’s side’s young players farewell for the summer – on this occasional it was essentially a nothing-game. Arsenal needed only a draw to guarantee a top 3 finish, and Fulham needed nothing. All a bit boring.
Not so it seems for Labour MP Stephen Pound who (unlike yours truly, owner of the cheapest variety of season ticket) was located amid the prawn sandwich section in a £35,000 a year executive box.
How the other half live, what what?
So animated was Mr Pound that he was reprimanded by a steward for using loud, abusive language and making obscene gestures. But worse, if to be believed, are allegations that he was shouting homophobic abuse at Arsenal defender Sol Campbell.
Not good, not good.
The website PinkPaper.com has more.
Tags: Fulham FC, Labour, Stephen Pound, the ArsenalAnd so it seems like the Lib-Lab talks have broken down, as even a Labour minister signals the end, and Sky (reassuringly, in my opinion) say that differences of opinion over the deficit caused the breakdown.
Mike Smithson at pb.com cites a “top source” from the Lib Dems informing him that Lib-Con talks are back on, and the LD cabinet is said to be meeting later this afternoon.
Could we soon see the climax of the most chaotic and fun 5 days in modern British politics?
One of the most ubiquitous faces on television over the past week has been Alastair Campbell, and during Labour’s election campaign the hilariously sinister smirk of Mandelson was never far away. Could this afternoon’s high political action be a reminder of the media-driven dirty politics that these two became famed for?
At the time of writing, there’s been little (or no) word from the Lib Dems all afternoon. Rather, there were initial rumours communicated to the BBC. Gordo then stormed out, with little notice, and declared that he was stepping down (at some or other point in the future) and is followed up by Labour MPs briefing the press that the Lib Dems have approached them to resume (or begin talks).
And still no word from the Lib Dems. Or, for that matter, the Conservatives.
Is it therefore possible that the Lib Dems began talking to Labour, behind closed doors, as a means of playing the two sides off each other – a perfectly common tactic to secure the last final concessions from the Tories. And that Labour, pouncing on this, and perhaps some strife among Tory and / or LD MPs with regards to the coalition, decided to go public – in a (possibly successful) attempt to force Clegg’s hand?
They may also be gambling that this, in itself, is enough to break up the LD/Tory flirtation for good. The interweb is currently hosting thousands of bitter Tories, riling against the Lib Dems – and if anything like this is happening in the Westminster village, it may be too much for Clegg and Cameron to resolve (even if they want to).
Just a thought.
Overall, I don’t see how a Lib-Lab rainbow coalition could possibly work. Yes, I’ve seen the maths – it could, feasibly, be enough. But its majority would be so tight, especially among such disparate parties with no uniting party loyalty, that maintaining control would be extremely difficult.
Such a coalition, I think, would fall within 6 months to a year. As for the (alleged) referendum on PR, this would be tainted by its sponsors: a Lib-Lab coalition that would be heavily resented among a huge chunk of the electorate (certainly in England). We would take a share of the blame for all ensuing disasters, and the Tories would likely clean up at the next (FPTP) election.
While the petulent Tory attitude to this situation – that simply giving them power is “the right thing to do”, driven by their arrogant assumption of being the natural party of government – is extremely unattractive, the result of the election does mean that they hold a stronger hand than us or Labour.
PR is important, but this is a very dangerous situation. Tread carefully, Nick.
UPDATE: ARRGHHH! Nick’s now on the meeeja, saying that no deal with the Tories was done, so he’s talking to Labour. The Tories, similarly, now have a chance to fo to the press and say they’re cutting us off. Extremely tough situation. Have we lost the media tactics, or does all this genuinely reflect what’s happened behind closed doors?
From media reports and anecdotal experiences, it seems as if turn-out is going to be notably high today. Voting at around 8am this morning, I had to queue for 20 minutes. Upon leaving, the queue was three times longer than when I’d arrived.
Disorganisation seemed partly to blame, but there seems little doubt that people are skipping along to the polling stations in higher numbers than in recent GEs.
Typically this is said to favour Labour, whose voters are often less committed to the old ballot-crossing than their Tory counterparts. As West Hampstead now turns from chilly grey to a bright elucidation of colour, the prospect of a sunny May day could, as it’s also argued, increase turn-out further.
So what does this mean for the Lib Dems? It probably depends on the kind of seat up for grabs. In the genuinely three-way Hampstead & Kilburn, there seems a sufficient amount of Lib Dem support in the less salubrious areas, and among young people, to suggest that it could aid our cause.
Many (tired) eyes will be on my little corner of the world come 4am tomorrow morning, when we’ll discover if Ed Fordham has successfully outed the acerbic south Londoner and ex-thespian Glenda Jackson.
Don’t forget to track us to see how things are going.
Touch wood for NOM, folks…
Tags: general election 2010, turn-out