Tapestry Talks

Why Does Everyone Want To Meet Maggie?

Last night David Cameron,previously cautious of being too closely associated with Mrs Thatcher, met her and had pictures taken for the media. What's going on?

The going of Blair has permitted not the coming to power of Brown as expected, but curiously it now seems, the resurrection of Thatcher or rather her -ism.

A generation has grown up hearing her vilified on the BBC from dawn til dusk, while Brown's been praised to the rafters. They now know that the stuff about Brown being a genius was total bowlooks all along, and people are all of a sudden ready to re-examine Thatcher.

Propaganda has a shelf life, it seems - a long one it is true - but eventually the public, with a little help, start to see through the media's 'bias'.

The BBC are now in a quandary. They've spent 10 years eulogising Brown, and longer than that slating Thatcher. They allowed themselves to voice their own opinions as fact for a decade, licking Blair's boots (apart from Andrew Gilligan, of course), and have damaged their reputation in the process - probably permanently. It was during the John Redwood Policy Review week that the BBC really started to look off the mark, and somehow it was clear then for the first time that the old game, without Blair to front it, wasn't working any more.

The spin that says that people like paying high rates of tax was exposed by Redwood, and in that week, Brown's lead, pre the Labour conference, slumped. Interestingly, it was the same emphasis on cutting tax by Osborne a month later which finally buried Brown, and swung the game heavily Conservative way.

With Brown going down the pan, the John The Baptist of spin who couldn't actually do it in practice,, honesty and conviction become the inevitable future for politics. For the politician who grasps the new possibilities, not to act like Blair, who was in reality the servant of the media, only acting as if its master, there is now a vast opening, left in the void of Brown's collapse.

Brown's problem is that he didn't realise Blair was an act. Blair acted the leader, but in fact gave everyone powerful, exactly what they asked him for - Clinton, Bush, the EU, the BBC, Chirac - even Gordon Brown! Brown got the power relationships all wrong - and tried saying no to Bush. He lost Murdoch and the Americans in five minutes. Without wall to wall media protection, untruths or bias become exposed very quickly.

Blair's system for holding power began to fall to pieces over Iraq. He had to decide which one of two powerful entities to displease - the Americans or the BBC. He chose to dump on the BBC, and join the war. If the blogosphere had been active in 2003, I wonder if Blair/Campbell would have got away with crippling the BBC so easily. As it was, the Iraq episode allowed Gordon Brown back into the political game, as Blair lost the BBC from then on. For his role in helping get rid of Blair, dismantling Blair's highly effective political game of power and keeping Britain out of the Euro, Brown had his uses.

But Brown while able to dismantle Blair and Campbell, clearly did not understand the way the system worked well enough to be able to benefit from it himself.

In the context of international power, the Americans have probably decided they've had enough of the EU, Gordon Brown and all - and they want to see a strong independent Britain as a longterm ally. It's taken the Americans a long time to see through it all, as Blair mesmerised them too.

The pennies are finally dropping. The end of New labour could, as a result, well in time be the end of Britain in Europe, and the start of a new confident independent phase. Whichever political leader sees that and prepares to go with the tide, will win power and hold it.

Labour should be in a good position to dump on Europe and dump Brown, but they are too caught up in the corruption. The Blairites are finished, and like all those who recently lost power, cannot see how the game has changed. Cameron seems close to pulling the Conservative Party into place, and should win the race. With the media influence of America, and public opinion swinging together against the EU and high tax, Thatcherism phase two could be about to break out.

No wonder everyone wants to shake the old lady's hand. Who knows? Maybe the BBC will recant next?!
_________________________________________________________________

British Government Gets Behind Portugal's Desperate Attempt to Frame the McCanns

Is the following likely six months after the event? Just ask yourself?

A bloody footprint found in Kate and Gerry McCann's holiday apartment has a 'moderate chance' of matching a print found on the back door of their hire car, according to tests carried out by UK forensic scientists. The existence of the two marks is apparently at the heart of renewed suspicion that the couple were involved in their daughter's disappearance. (Mail on Sunday)

It's far more likely that a deal's being done on the quiet between the British and Portuguese governments to bury this case. It is doing so much damage to Portugal's reputation, and they desperately need a way to get themselves off the hook. As members of the Portuguese government have paedophile form, they have a long way to go to establish credibility and convince the world they are serious about dealing with paedophile abduction.

Last week the Portuguese arrested a large number of Portuguese internet paedophiles, but you can be sure that none of the paedophiles high up in government previously implicated, have been hauled in.

This case won't die. EU governments seem to think the only way to sort it is to get the McCanns safely behind bars. And it seems like the British government is getting to the point of assisting with this plan - however unlikely the evidence which they are 'discovering', nearly six months after the abduction took place.

New Labour Fightback Will Sink EU Constitution

The article in The Times by Anatole Kaletsky on Thursday 11th October raised a few eyebrows, saying that the rudderless nature of Gordon Brown's leadership, and his willingness to copy almost any Conservative policy (if it looks like winning votes), was likely to bring the New Labour coalition to an end, and thereby potentially allow the Conservatives to rule the country again for a long time to come.

He is right of course if Labour MPs allow Brown to sink the Labour Party in this way. But will they?

There are growing signs that they will not.

Each day brings another famous New Labour name such as David Blunkett -

and Gwynedd Dunwoody too - http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/main.jhtml?xml=/news/2007/08/25/neu125.xml&DCMP=OTC-Autonolnk - out into the open, stating that they will not accept the EU Constitution in its current form.

The fact is that all Labour MPs (as do Conservative MPs) know that as long as Britain stays inside the EU, we are unlikely to get any part of the EU Constitution changed. These anti-EU Constitution statements must therefore mean one of two things -

1. either that many New Labour MPs want to go into reverse on the EU, and revert to Labour's pre-Blair traditional euroscepticism, even going as far as withdrawal.

2. or they see the Constitution issue as a way to bring down Gordon Brown, and replace him with a leader who can cope, and put Cameron back a few steps.

or 3 - both.

The Conservatives have adopted a position of token resistance to the EU Constitution, stating not that Britain must come out of the EU, (which is in truth the only way to stop the Constitution), and they are claiming that the issue of the referendum is one of trust. A referendum was promised by Labour and so a referendum there should be.

Brown by sticking to the no referendum strategy is offering Cameron an open goal, making it inevitable that Brown will be successfully portrayed yet again as a 'phoney'. The surprising but now obvious fact that Gordon Brown, as leader cannot put one political foot in front of the other, is making this whole issue more urgent - in that it could vitally affect the personal interests of Labour MPs. They don't want to lose their seats to Conservatives, going down the pan with Gordon Brown whenever he finally calls the election. And so they are making moves now.

They could well vote down the EU Constitution insisting on the referendum, hoping to push out Gordon Brown in the process. That would give the British people their chance to influence events, and it seems likely at the moment that they will vote against the Constitution, given the opportunity.

It wouldn't take much of a step from there for Labour Mps to go one further and become the only genuinely eurosceptic party. The Conservatives are still hopelessly divided on Europe in spite of them papering over the cracks recently with thoughts of the cancelled GE in mind. This is probably now the only issue that will enable Labour to retain power, and keep the Conservatives at bay.

UPDATE - Sunday - UPDATE - Attempts by other old New Labour cabinet ministers like Byers, Clarke and Johnson to try to provide unofficial leadership to the Party is bound to fracture the Party further and undermine support. The only way to rescue the situation is to dump Brown as quickly as possible and make a fresh start, responding to and not spinning at public opinion. The only easy opportunity for Labour to show that they have changed into a Party that is listening and not dictating, is the vote on The EU Constitution.

Brown Is Vulnerable

GORDON BROWN WITH A BLOKE HE USED TO WORK WITH

Labour stomachs feel sick. Despite any bravado, they know deep down in their hearts that their party is in trouble. They allowed Gordon Brown his coronation, believing he would be the safe choice to succeed Blair, believing he was going to be less pro-European, less pro-American and less of a merchant of spin. On all counts they were wrong. It is now abundantly clear.

All of these tendencies might be forgiven if Brown could offer Labour one crucial element - being a winner, and keeping labour on top. The image of strength Brown had manufactured while Chancllor was based on avoiding any difficulty, and hiding from view while Tony sorted out. Brown strength was and is a mirage - a media creation. When he faces risk decisions, critical moments and has to pick his choices, there is already, even after only three months at the helm, no doubt in any reasonable observer's mind. Brown, the mighty Chancellor, the man supposedly cheated by Blair of the Labour leadership, and then made to wait 13 years for his turn at the helm, is a loser.

Had he called an election, he would probably have lost his majority. By not calling it after teasing the media with the prospect of an election, and then running scared at the Conservative fightback, he's been humiliated and has lost credibility.

Now it's bravado time, take it on the chin and fighting talk, trying to repair the damage.

The great manipulator can no longer use his usual tactic of disappearing when trouble shows its face, and muscling people into backing him. His humiliation is visible to all...to friends in his own party who now realise that Brown's team are not up to the mark, and are mostly in place because they pose no threat to Brown, to Britain's enemies who now see we have a weak leader, and that might make us worth attacking here and there, and to political opponents.

The threat from the Conservatives has been deferred, by not calling the election.

The next area of vulnerability that will soon come to exercise Brown's worry beads will be whether he can count on the support of his own party. He has already set himself up to fight the EU Constitution through Parliament, and there are known to be at least 120 Labour MPs willing to challenge him and possibly openly rebel.

If those MPs had it in mind merely to stop the Constitution, then the rebellion would be negotiable in all probability. But many Labour MPs will have seen the appalling mess Brown is making of the tactical political game against David Cameron, and they might very well feel that the same vote on the Constitution, would be an opportunity to review Brown's leadership at the same time. After all, MPs don't like losing their seats, and with Gordon Brown at the helm of the Party and Britain, many labour MPs must now be feeling decidedly insecure. Politics is a game of popularity, and Brown is not popular.

UPDATE - MARK MARDELL AS REPORTED BY SEAN T ON PB

Talking of news (ta-da!) surely the big news of the day is the report on the European Constitution by the Commons Committee. This is incredibly negative about the Treaty, especially when you consider it was largely written by Labour MPs.

Mark Mardell does a good summation in his blog:

http://tinyurl.com/3xdt23

For those that can’t be bothered to link, he starts his essay with this comment:

“Heaven knows what the whips are coming to. In my days in Westminster there would have been trips to St Lucia here, a murmured word about a knighthood there, and perhaps the odd broken arm. At any rate, it’s rare for a Labour-dominated committee (nine out of 16 members) to produce a report quite so unhelpful to the government.”

Then he goes on to list the points made by the committee:

The new Constitution is virtually identical to the old one, whatever the government says

Only about 2% of the clauses have been changed

Britain does have a special situation with her opt-outs and red-lines but these might not be worth anything

It says the government’s approach to the Constitution could be “misleading”

It stresses concern over the ratchet clause which allows the EU to take more power without any more Treaties

It is concerned about European courts overruling British courts, despite our red lines etc

They are angry about the way the Constitution was rushed through

They demand that Brown changes the Treaty to prevent further erosion of transparency and accountability

They finally are very concerned that the Treaty, as a whole, infringes the sovereign rights of the British parliament

Nice.

I know you guys are bored by Europe. But please, listen up. This is Labour MPs who have concluded this. Not Bill Cash and Rupert Murdoch over a pizza.

This Constitution is a serious threat to the way we conduct our affairs as a democracy. Brown wants to ram it through parliament without even granting the referendum he solemnly promised in a manifesto on which he was elected.

This isn’t just bad politics. It is simply wrong.

Brown Smells Fear

CNN had it right this morning in Asia. They had a news-bar item – ‘UK PM Gordon Brown decides not to call an election’. In another bar just above that one on-screen simultaneously, referring to the heatwave affecting the Chicago marathon being discussed live, were the 100% apt words - 'Too Hot To Run.'

Any decent blogger (not me I’m afraid) would have the frame frozen in seconds and on the web. Sorry my technical skills and lack of equipment in current location, let alone intermittent access to web, prevent a visual being available. Guido should have a go.

All credit to The Sun too, hitting the spot with its headline this morning in the UK – with ‘In The Brown Stuff’ no messing there. I am sure The Sun don’t need anyone’s help finding their cracking headlines, but in our musings on Conservativehome, yesterday where Tim Montgomerie requested suggestions for how we are to remember Gordon Brown’s big climbdown, were one or two of my own street level suggestions, with appropriate graphics HERE.

Remember This Classic. I guess that's how Cameron's feeling right now.

Brown Stains Day Shows Lack Of Balls

  Ed Brown with Gordon Balls.

Labour MP John McDonnell says in his blog john4leader that the Labour non-election fiasco was caused by a 'testosterone-fuelled' surge by Brown's inexperienced team.   Is that a coded phrase for blaming the whole balls-up on the longterm eminence grise who has stood behind Gordon Brown all through the New Labour years - none other than Mr Ed Balls himself?

What evidence does John McDonnell MP have for passing all the blame onto Balls? 

Surely Brown is well capable of making a Balls of things all by himself, judging by the mess he's made of everything else since he was permitted to run Britain's Treasury by Blair in 1997.  I guess McDonnell being a Labour MP must have good information, and this Balls-up, like all previous attributed to The Clunking Fist ,could, in fact have been largely down to Balls. 

If the testosterone-fuelled pair had had enough spunk between them, they would have carried on with the election challenge and seen it through.  Was this an excess of Balls, as McDonnell suggests, or a failure of balls?   What a Balls-Up.  Whichever it was, when it came to the moment, Brown crapped himself.  The moment will as a result, forever more be known as Brown Stains Day.

Rawnsley In The Guardian Online and Observer sees the primary role of Gordon Brown's Balls in the build-up to the moment he crapped himself and bottled out

This was not got up by the media. It was a monster made in Downing Street. The original idea was to destabilise the Tories by worrying them with the thought of an early election. But as Mr Brown's poll ratings began to swell, and with it the heads of some of the people around him, what began life as a tactical wheeze grew into a much more serious proposition. When Labour met in Bournemouth, Mr Brown's people spread the fever in the conference corridors and hotel bars while members of the cabinet sat at dining tables with journalists assessing the pros and cons. Ed Balls, the Prime Minister's closest ally in the cabinet, even went on the radio to openly debate the balance of risk between waiting until later and going to the country early. The Schools Secretary made it evident that he was leading the case for an election this autumn.

This is a stain on Balls as well as Brown.

    -    Brown Stains Day could equally well have been called Brown Splatterday.

Where Will Labour Go Now?

The fact that Gordon is turning out to be a non-leader, as predicted by many, will not lost on the Labour Party.

Once talk of the non-election has died down, Labour will be staring at the gruesome prospect of a period of two years plus, with a freakish personality disorder running both Britain and their Party.

They didn't dare to challenge Brown while he insisted on his post-Blair coronation, which was now obviously a disasterous mistake. But who now will dare to start the ball rolling towards his removal as leader? Are Labour really going to force Brown on Britain for another two whole long years?

One way his early demise may come about could be in Parliament. When he attempts the ramming through of the Constitution, the Labour rebellion could have a double objective - getting rid of the Constitution, and at the same time, getting rid of Gordon Brown....two birds with one stone as it were.

If the government were to fall with the Constitution, labour would have a week maximum to select a new leader before facing an election. Who would they choose? Charles Clark? John Reid? or would they surprise us all and go eurosceptic? (HAT TIP - Wonkosworld for charles clark graphic)

Gordon Brown Must Go

It's just a joke.  How can anyone go on pretending any longer?  Gordon Brown cannot lead, and everyone knows it, including himself judging by the dreadful pained and exhausted look on his face.

PICTURE LIFTED FROM GUIDO FAWKES

He's been out of his depth from the moment he gave that stumbling 'I'll do my best' speech' as he took over the reins outside Number 10, just a few eeks ago.  His first Parliamentary questions were dire, showing an almost total unawareness of what he had taken on - the requirement to provide leadership. 

Ever since the moment he arived in post, every decision has been taken with a 'how do I look?' consideration at the top of the list.  And the answer to that question always was, and is now simple and obvious to all - not the right bloke to be leading Britain.

It was ' Here, look at me as I deal with floods (eventually after ignoring the first ones in Hull that arrived during the coronation).  Then there was 'Hey look at me as I deal with foot and mouth outbreaks' from my Cobra committee, later ignoring the problem when it did not conform to the publicity requirements by halting.  The further spread was the result of not taking the right advice.

The 'How Do I Look' as I announce troop withdrawal from Iraq piece of last week was really the end of it.  The sycophantic media used to creating the backdrop for the brilliant acting of the previous PM, could barely stand it any longer, and they are starting to do the unthinkable - openly criticise a labour PM. 

No one believes any longer that Brown is the right guy to be leading Britain. Period.

The Labour Party can stagger on with the wrong man at the helm destroying all its remaining credibility, or it can act to remove Brown, and replace him with soemone with leadership qualities.  My money would be on Charles Clark.  Who it is to be is yet to become clear, but what is certain already is that the longer Brown stays in place as PM, the more the damage that will be done to the credibility of the Labour Party, and Britain's standing in the world.

The Useful Kind of Idiots.

If Brown decides to go for it this weekend, and take on the Tories ebullient after their conference, there will be a number of factors in his sums, one or two of which are rarely mentioned in the media, or for that matter on mainstream blogs.

(Nigel Farage on right)

As soon as an election is called, any discussions about Europe on the BBC will include a spokesman from the UKIP - Nigel Farage MEP, the UKIP Party leader in nearly every case.  That's not because the BBC agrees with even one word that Nigel Farage will be saying.  It is entriely because they know that every voter that Farage can pull away from Cameron, makes Gordon Brown's victory and the destruction of Britain's independence that one step closer.

(The BNP Ballerina)

Hague's speech at the Party conference advocated the amendment of the European Communities Act of 1972, making a referendum a requirement of any further European treaties.  This might not be all that eurosceptics would want in that if the Constitution is passed, there won't be any more treaties anyway, but it is a giant step towards a convincing eurosceptic policy stance from the old 'In Europe, Not Run By Europe' which has struggled on since John Major's days.  The referenda should be held on any transfer of 'powers', not only those derived from treaties.

The choice is between this and the position of Labour and Gordon Brown which is that the Constitution will be rammed through parliament, there will be no more treaties required as government will come from The European Council without the need for approval by the nations.  The British State will be no more.

UKIP will do nothing more than assist the victory of Labour by standing against Cameron.  If the same people fighting for UKIP, fought with equal determination within the Conservative party, they could push it the last part of the journey into full euroscepticism, and a determination to withdraw.  As they are now, they are merely useful material for the BBC to complete the destruction of Britain as a nation.

The BNP on the other hand, will receive almost nil media support.  They will pull away a few Tory votes, but far more from labour.  That fact that they get no media coverage or acknowledgement, even in opinion polls, provides assurance that they are not helping those who wish to end Britain's existence.  If UKIP are the Useful Kind of Idiots, the BNP are possibly Gord Brown's Bete Noire who might do just enough to upset Gordon Brown's plans to neutralise the country and the democratic system, that he has achieved power over.

AN EXAMPLE OF RECENT BNP PROGRESS -

Leicestershire County - Shepshed: Labour 1217, Conservative 1074, Lib Dem 933, BNP 807. Labour hold.  This was a good result for Labour, as they managed to keep the swing to the Conservatives down to 1.2%. The BNP’s best performance in a Leicestershire County Council seat in 2005 was 11%, so this result (like May’s district elections) implies that their support has grown considerably in the County since then.

UPDATE ON USEFUL IDIOTS - Brown's chickened out of an election as I expected.  Here is ian dale's take on the Useful Kind of Idiots and what a waste of time they have become.

Is Europe Iain Dale's Blind Spot?

There's been a lot of fuss made about bloggers and blogging in and around the Conservative Party conference at Blackpool.  Iain Dale, for example has focused much of his attention on his friend and hero David Davis, and expressed much excitement, while being highly active as a participant in many fringe meetings.  He is a 'good sport' and will join in whenever he's offered the chance.

With Dale so busy, it has fallen to some of the 'less well known' blogs to witness significant events.  Dizzy, for example gave this good report on William Hague's speech and how, in a word he totally transformed Conservative Party Policy on Europe.  As I am in foreign parts I don't have much to go on in the MSM, but I haven't seen anything to confirm this story, for example on the BBC.

Hague's speech indicates that much has happened here.  Presumably Ken Clarke will have acceded to this policy change, as he has not made any outbursts of blind rage as he did over Cameron's early moves to quit the EPP, which effectively scuppered them.  Heseltine too who has in the past been critical of any Conservative moves to loosen ties with the EU, has been openly supportive of Cameron in recent weeks, and has offered some strangely eurosceptic sounding opinions such as in his article in the Sunday telegraph on 30.9.07 - as follows -

There is, however, one issue on which it is well known that David Cameron and I differ, and that is Europe. In every party, questions over Europe are controversial and the Conservative Party is no exception. But I believe there is a European agenda on which we can unite.

Take the fact that the EU's accounts are never signed off by their auditors; it is a disgrace. David Cameron should take a tough stance on this, even being willing to withhold our contribution to the EU until the accounts are sorted out.

It's not only happening in the Conservative Party.  The first moves away from the EU were visible in the Murdoch media.  While Blair was still in situ, Murdoch played for Blair.  But as soon as Blair went, The Sun's anti-EU campaign anti-Gordon Brown burst into life, demanding a referendum on the Constitution.  That too represents a transformation.  It cannot all be coincidental.

Behind Murdoch's changeover from supporting europhile Blair to opposing Brown and the EU Constitution, and the weakening of Heseltine and Ken Clarke's previously hardline pro-EU positions, could possibly be a change of heart in the USA about the EU.  For fifty years they have pushed Britain along and chivvied us to conform with the EU.  Could it be that they have recently seen the light and realised that the EU will predominantly operate in competition with and opposition to US power, not in cooperation?  Murdoch could hardly move so strongly against the EU without his main backers in the US in agreement.

It is also possible that confidential briefings about the new threat posed by Russian aggression and the pathetic nature of Europe's ability to defend itself, is persuading many previous pro-EU politician to rethink the longterm strategic picture.

So while the reports from blogs about Cameron using the word 'pissed' and other trivia fill the 'sphere, one wonders why Dizzy is the only one who saw the key event. 

Why indeed, does Iain Dale always avoid the topic of the EU in his blog?  Dale gives a clue in his piece on the Day 3 speeches. 'I haven't always seen eye to eye with IDS' he writes, and he has of course slated IDS' 2003 conference speech in the past. 

The question in my mind is whether Iain Dale is a europhile.  It seems unlikely that he holds no view as he holds one on mostly everything else, but surprisingly when you think about it, his views on the EU are not very clear.  David Davis is also a bit of an unknown in his views on the EU, other than he was the Chief Whip under John Major when he whipped the Maastricht Treaty through the Commons.  The most obdurate and determined of the Maastricht rebels was of course IDS. 

Past and present associations may of course not be significant, but there is definitely a pattern, which might explain why Iain Dale is not always on the money when he's trying to spot the trends, especially when it comes to EU Conservative Policy.  Maybe his loyalties blind his judgement.  It does seem to be blind spot.