Lansbury's Lido

 When I was a member of the Labour Party the membership card (which was indeed made of card) had the text below, known as Clause IV emblazoned across it. To secure for the workers by hand or by brain the full fruits of their industry and the most equitable distribution thereof that may be possible upon the basis of the common ownership of the means of production, distribution and exchange, and the best obtainable system of popular administration and control of each industry or service. Sounded good in 1918, sounds good today. Unfortunately Blair came along and in 1995 managed to get it rewritten as the waffle below: The Labour Party is a democratic socialist party. It believes that by the strength of our common endeavour we achieve more than we achieve alone, so as to create for each of us the means to realise our true potential and for all of us a community in which power, wealth and opportunity are in the hands of the many, not the few, where the rights we enjoy reflect the ...

So says the headline from the BBC. BBC News - IMF backs coalition spending cuts It does beg the question though as to what would happen if the IMF didn't back the government's financial plans? Wikipedia describes the IMF thus: It is an organization formed with a stated objective of stabilizing international exchange rates and facilitating development through theenforcement of liberalising economic policies [1] [2] on other countries as a condition for loans, restructuring or aid. [3] It also offers highly leveraged loans , mainly to poorer countries Which really sums up what the IMF is about. It's not concerned with the well-being of people, of humanity but the well-being of the financial system it is part of. Capitalism. Especially the nasty neo-liberal type. So if the IMF didn't agree with an elected sovereign government's financial plans then we can assume it would take action to register it's unhappiness. And there are many and varied ways it can d...

I did a post a few months ago about how encouraging Dennis Skinner, the Beast of Bolsover was. You can read it here . Someone commented that Dennis had become all mouth and no trousers so to say. I was surprised by such a comment. Now over at Left Futures it's been highlighted that Dennis has put his weight behind David Milliband for the leader of the Labour Party. There's a report of Dennis justifying his position by saying “the big question is who are the Tories afraid of”. What a disappointment to discover that a hero from my youth now considers the future for the working man and woman and the left best decided by 'who the Tories are afraid of'. Not about fighting for a better way, not about fighting against injustice and a system that heaps misery after misery upon the worker and the poor. But about 'who the Tories are afraid of'. Methinks Dennis has become parliamentarialised if he thinks this is going to change anything. Time to pocket the fat pensio...

Tory MP weeps over discovery that his Brazilian wife is £70-a-time suburban prostitute The shame of finding out your husband is an MP. How will she live it down?

So 'Honest' Tone's cash cow book signing tour seems to be coming off the rails. Protests by those dastardly lefty types seem to be causing problems with his security so he may curtail any more book signings. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-11197376 However, a little snippet from the site caught my eye. But Mr Blair, prime minister from 1997 to 2007, said: "To be frank about it, I am concerned. I do not want to put everyone through a lot of cost and hassle on this Wednesday's signing so I am thinking about that." The Metropolitan Police were "fabulous and they will do whatever we ask them to do" but should not be asked to commit resources unnecessarily, he added. Given the moaning that certain sections have given to the state visit by the Pope, especially the costs, I've yet to see the same reaction given to Tone's security being provided by the boys in blue. Wonder who's paying? And if you've had the misfortune to part ...

It may be over 25 years since I tore up the yellow folded card with Clause IV printed boldly on it but it seems I still have a vote to influence the choosing of the next leader of the Labour Party. Got an envelope from the Electoral Reform Services today with details on how to vote together with some bumph from Unite. I had quite forgotten about my opting in to the union's political fund. So what rag-tag buch have put themselves up for 'the job'? Diane Abbot Pros: Seems to talk some sense. Cons: 'That' school issue. Ed Balls Pros: Not David Milliband Cons: Stinks of New Labour Andy Burnham Pros: Promises to refocus the Labour Party away from being London-centric. Cons: Previous govermental positions means he's got a whiff of New Labour about him. David Milliband Pros: Erm? Cons: Iraq, torture allegations, stinks of New Labour Ed Milliband Pros: backed by toss-pot Kinnock Cons: backed by toss-pot Kinnock So there we go, so who should I be voting...

More media misinformation from the Daily Mail about the poor old banks. Apparently the banks are writing off debt from struggling families to the tune of £40M a day. The paper goes on: Between April and June banks and building societies were forced to 'write off ' £3.5billion, around £40million every day, the largest amount since records began....... ........The largest chunk of write-offs - a record £2.1billion - was credit card debt, with many spending more on the High Street in a day than they earn in a month. A further £1.2billion came from overdrafts, personal loans and hire purchase agreements. Just £184million was from 'bad' mortgages. Before you reach for the hankies it might be a good idea to consider the Mail's steaming pile of misinformation and downright lies a bit further. Firstly, it's only in the case of bankruptcies that debts get 'written-off'. If it's just that you can't afford to pay then the debt will remain with you. Th...