The ThunderDragon

Just a few days ago I wrote about the rules under which donations are made to political parties, and now the amounts that parties received in donations in the last quarter has been revealed.

Between them they received £10.7m, split down as follows:

• Conservatives: £5.6m
• Labour: £3.8m
• Liberal Democrats: £945,192

This is up from £8.1m last quarter, with the Lib Dems having the largest percentage increase, doubling their previous income, and the Conservatives increasing their income by £1.4m.

However, all parties have huge debts:

• Conservatives: £12.1m
• Labour: £17.9m
• Liberal Democrats: £1.1m

The Lib Dems seem in by far the best financial health, but this is probably because they aren’t required to piss away money in the same way as the other parties as they aren’t considered serious contenders for forming a government.

But none of the parties are particularly financially secure, though Labour is by far the weakest with their massive debt and comparatively low incomings. So we as individuals must ensure that we donate to our political party of choice to keep democracy going.

This income, however, does not include Short money - which is provided from the State coffers primarily to allow opposition parties to examine and oppose government policy. Of Short money, the parties received:

• Conservatives: £1.3m
• Labour: £132,156
• Liberal Democrats: £637,625

Which, to be honest, is pennies in comparison with other governmental spending and waste.

We do get our politics on a shoestring in comparison with other countries, really. But we must ensure that it continues, through disallowing further State party funding and promoting voluntary donations.

Garfield minus Garfield

Just imagine: You are Gordon Brown. You have spent £167 million on advertising, £29 million on PR and sponsorship and £12 million on “strategic consultancy”, totalling nearly £400m on spin in the past year.

What would you expect to be getting for it?

A positive personal rating? A poll boost? A donations rise?

Instead you get terrible poll results, called an electoral liability by a senior member of your own party, and have 76% of the electorate thiking that your government is being run badly.

Wouldn’t you think that you had got more than slightly fleeced? And you’d be right.

At times like this, I almost feel sorry for Gorden Brown. But then I remember that it’s our money he’s throwing away on spin.

A 19th century electoral system for the 21st century. The damning statement of the Electoral Commission in their report (pdf). It also reveals that the “current fragmented arrangements for electoral administration” treats voters as an “afterthought”.

The Electoral Commission has identiified massive loopholds in the electoral system that could allow for fraud. Such as the ability for voters to rock up and vote just like that. They propose photo ID being required in order to vote. This I support. It is just common sense. At the moment, the electoral system is so open to fraud right at the point where we cast our votes, as nothing is required from us except to give a name - and in reality we could give anyones. And it’s not like we all don’t have at least one form of photo ID!

Alongside this is the way that we register our right to vote. Currently this is done by the head of the household for each address. The proposal made by the Electoral Commission is that we have a national electoral register, which each voter must sign up to on their own - providing a signature, date of birth and national insurance number. Like photo ID, This is a good proposal and makes common sense.

The current electoral system under which we run our democratic elections is under massive strain, and simply cannot continue as it is. It needs to be reformed. These reforms proposed by the Electroal Commission are absolutely correct. Unless they are made, the outcomes of our elections will soon be open to suspicion.

XKCD

Here we go again. Why do these people always think that they can shut down a debate on the internet by complaining to an ISP and getting a blog deleted?

It doesn’t work. And, instead, backfires.

Had she done nothing, the fact that Jenna Delich linked to the website of a known neo-Nazi figure and former Ku Klux Klan leader would not be circulating the internet in such a massive fashion as it is.

As Harry’s Place states:

This website was taken offline as a result of a complaint to Daily.co.uk, our former DNS provider, falsely stating that we had ’slandered’ Jenna Delich. We have not slandered her. Jenna Delich circulated a link from the website of an infamous neo Nazi, to nearly 600 academics. The page in question contains clearly racist material on ’Jewish supremacism’, ’heritage’ and links to articles such as ’Is Russia the key to white survival?’

I certainly don’t agree with most stuff published on that blog, but when it comes to freedom of speech, the blogosphere must stick together. As the Voltaire quote goes: “I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.”

Without freedom of speech, we have nothing. On the blogosphere or in real life.

Blog Button: Matt Wardman

First they brought in the “plastic plod”, with little training and even fewer powers to put “a police presence” on the streets and save money at the same time.

Yet that failed. And yet they wonder why.

So they decided to go even cheaper, with civilian police. No, not special constables, who plenty of training and powers, but people whose only qualification is the fact that they have a little red, white and black badge which reads “Community Safety Scheme Accredited” in tiny letters.

They have no training, and their powers are limited to being able to:

• issue fines for truancy, rowdiness, graffiti, dog-fouling and riding a bike on a pavement
• take cigarettes and alcohol from teenagers
• direct traffic, and
• ensure abandoned vehicles are removed.

This is just asking for trouble and for confrontations. If one of these 1,406 “accredited persons” with their ickle badge tried to issue me with a fine, they’d get told in no uncertain terms where they could shove it.

What we need is actual police on the streets. Policemen and women on the streets promote a feeling of safety. Policing on the cheap does nothing except alienate people from the law.

This post at Liberal Conspiracy about the cock is required reading.

I’m talking, of course, about the booming industry of surgical penis ‘enlargement’, the nearest male equivalent to labiaplasty. We’ve all had versions of those relentless spam emails, offering in poor English to furnish us with a magnificent schlong for the price of a university education.

Yes, it’s fucking political. Male sexual neurosis is massively damaging, to feminism, to society, and to men themselves. This is not male apologism, or backsliding, it’s one feminist’s request for more discussion of a damaging socio-sexual taboo, in the context of a blog post in which I get to shout ‘COCK!’ a lot.

This is a massively important subject. And it’s a brilliant excuse for me to post the Penis Song.

But after watching it, go and read the whole post.

More like not.

Even though a fifth man has now been arrested under terrorism laws as part of an investigation into threats to kill Gordon Brown. However:

It is understood no actual plot was in place.

Yes, so that justifies arresting them and holding them for 13 days so far? As Steve Green asks, “at what point does a threat become a plot? If you say “I’m going to kill Gordon Brown” have you already started plotting his demise?”

Nobody can be bothered to kill Gordon Brown. He’s just not important enough, even though he holds the Premiership. He’s a dead duck, as the polls consistently state.

But in America, even a candidate is worthy of an apparent actual death plot.

Of course, Brown’s Foreign Secretary and most of his Cabinet and parliamentary party want him out - but they haven’t got the balls to actually make a plot.

UPDATE: Three have been charged. But not with plotting to kill the PM. Just with the ambiguous charge of “terror offences”.

No, it has nothing to do with the dead rising from the grave and eating brains convening a parliament. Rather, I presume that it is supposed to be a damning indictment of Cameron and the Conservative Party:

This zombie politics offers rich pickings to a clever opposition. While the party in power gets on with the hugely complex, difficult business of government, the opposition party can get to play therapist to the nation: “Of course you’re worried, I understand how you feel. We feel it too. I know it’s not fair. It shouldn’t be like this.” The text message instructions emanating from Cameron on holiday on his luxury yacht has got to be: “Keep simpl. No detil. EMOTE.” (The Guardian)

Except it’s not really very damning, is it? The government is there to “get on with the hugely complex, difficult business of government”, and the opposition to try and “play therapist to the nation”. It is exactly what happens no matter which party is in power. The difference is how well they play their parts.

Labour is failing to deal with the business of government, and the Conservatives are doing very well as the nation’s therapist. But by the time the general election comes round in 2010, as seems likely, the Conservatives will have developed a detailed set of policy proposals written as a prescription.

But here’s the crunch point: whilst the Conservatives are playing “zombie politics”, Labour are playing vampire politics. Emerging from the dark and drinking your blood taking all your money.