An exchange from the House of Commons that won't be reported by the institutionally anti Israel BBC

Eric Pickles with a great question/point

OPINION - Sir Eric Pickles: ‘We deserve better reporting of these evil attacks’ per Jewish News

'... On Sunday, 11 October, correspondent Orla Guerin produced an extraordinary report on the recent wave of attacks that claimed "there's no sign of involvement by militant groups", before immediately showing footage of Palestinian Islamic Jihad banners at the home of a 19-year-old terrorist who carried out a deadly knife attack at Lions Gate in Jerusalem on 3 October.'

More good sense here at the Jewish News

More anti Israel bile here at the anti_Israel BBC.

 

Release the #BalenReport

The one hundred and sixty sixth weekly "No shit, Sherlock" award

This week's winner is Eric Pickles for this insight:
'I recognise that my own party would probably be, its election prospects would be, better off if Scotland left'

"No shit, Sherlock"

I for one am fed-up with the way that England, no let's be honest, the way that mostly London and the South East of England support the Scots via the Barnett Formula. In return what do we get? Scots voting on English legislation when the same does not apply in reverse - the West Lothian Question, Scots taking English money whilst moaning about being 'ruled by the English' - since the last three Prime Ministers have been either Scottish, Scottish educated or have Scottish roots I'll take that claim with more than a pinch of salt.

"if we let the system take over...the cigar-chomping Commies take over again. The cigar-chomping Commies are not going to take over on my watch."

A quotation from Iain Dale's Total Politics interview with Eric Pickles as reported on Iain Dale's blog. Do read the whole interview it's an interesting interview with an interesting politician. Here's an extract:

'The paintings... I've put my Che Guevara portrait up there.

I've noticed that. What is the point of that?

Che is there to remind me that if we let the system take over before we stop in any way, then the cigar-chomping Commies take over again. The cigar-chomping Commies are not going to take over on my watch.'

Too much news, not enough time

Here are some links to articles that I wanted to discuss yesterday but ran out of time:

Max Hastings explaining 'Why I fear the lights will go out in Britain' - He's right and I have blogged about this before.

The Mail with more on Peter Mandelson, Oleg Deripaska, Nat Rothschild, Aluminium, Alcoa, the loss of British jobs and questions about Peter Mandelson's role - It's a potentially explosive story but I doubt it will be allowed to gain traction.

The new government have killed the unnecessary and unloved HIPS (Home Information Packs), well done Eric Pickles - I did want to explain how HIPS were the bastard child of the EU, John Prescott and Yvette Cooper and just how bad an idea they were. Instead take a read of Samizdata's piece.

The BBC's Stephanie Flanders explains how Germany is really to blame gor Greece's economic woes:

'Whenever Germany tells you how much the Greeks are costing them, remember this: German exports to Greece have risen by 133% since the single currency started. Greek exports to Germany have risen by 13%. The resulting trade gap between the two countries is one reason why German banks are now sitting on so much Greek debt.'

If only I had time to fisk that article.

Can we believe a word that Gordon Brown says?

From Wednesday's PMQs per Hansard:

"Mr. Evennett: ... All our constituents are rightly concerned about transparency, expenses and cleaning up politics. With that in mind, now that it is clear that there was a £50,000 fund solely for the Prime Minister's use at his headquarters, will he explain why he did not declare this in the Register of Members' Financial Interests?

The Prime Minister: I know nothing about what the hon. Gentleman is talking about."

Is Gordon Brown saying he knows nothing of the allegations made by Peter Watt that there was a secret fund, worth a reported £50,000, which was held by the Labour Party for Gordon Brown's benefit? Or is he saying that there was no such secret fund? Is either explanation plausible?

"Mr. Cameron: What the Prime Minister has just said is completely at odds with what witness after witness has said to the Chilcot inquiry. Let us listen to what they have said. The former Defence Secretary said that we now have fewer helicopters because of the decisions that the Prime Minister took as Chancellor. The former Chief of the Defence Staff, General Walker, said that

"money ...was taken out of the helicopter budget".

Soldier after soldier has complained about the lack of body armour, vehicles and equipment, and we now know that the service chiefs threatened to resign en masse. Is it not time that the Prime Minister admitted to the mistakes that he made when he was Chancellor?

The Prime Minister: First, the Conservatives do not even know what their policy is for 2010 on spending on anything. Secondly, I have always taken seriously the need properly to fund our defence forces. In the 2002 spending review, which is the subject of discussion here, the defence estimate was the best for 20 years. The Defence Secretary at the time said it was an excellent settlement that allowed us to modernise the forces. In 2004, the defence management board made its own decisions. Let me remind the right hon. Gentleman that he stood on a platform at the last election to cut defence spending by £1.5 billion."

Really did the Conservatives propose £1.5 billion of defence cuts in their 2005 election campaign. Oddly The BBC reported in October 2004 that

"Frontline defence spending would increase by £2.7bn over three years under the Tories, they say. "

Eric Pickles has written to Gordon Brown urging him

"to admit to this fund’s existence, apologise for misleading the House and co-operate with any inquiries that John Lyon may wish to make."

I wonder if the Conservatives will query Gordon Brown's claims about their 2005 manifesto.

Countering Labour polling tricks

The concept of possible/probable election malpractice by certain Labour supporters has been something that I have discussed previously on this blog, so it was with some relief that I see that at least Eric Pickles has started a legal fightback with Don't Leave Your Vote at Home. Pass the news on to any ex pat Brits you know who want to ensure that the land of their hearts, if not their homes, has a chance to recover from the years of mismanagement by Tony Blair, Gordon Brown and their cabal.

"Labour government breaks rules"

Hardly earth-shattering news as they have form in this area. In this instance it seems that the Conservatives are reporting Jacqui Smith, the Home Secretary, of breaching Whitehall election rules and have reported her to the cabinet secretary. The reporting follows Jacqui Smith's announcement of 300 "new" police jobs to counter the threat of terrorism. (Off subject but having listened to Jacqui Smith's bad tempered interview on the not quite as Toady as she hoped programme this morning, I am not 100% convinced that this is new money) There is meant to be a three week purdah before the local elections and the Conservatives have complained that the police announcement "breaks both the convention and official rules that official Civil Service resources should not be used to attempt to influence elections in the three weeks up to elections".

The ever impressive Eric Pickles has written to the less impressive Gus O'Donnell

"It is clear that Labour ministers have intentionally broken Cabinet Office rules in an attempt to create a political smokescreen.

"They are trying to hide the fact that police authorities across the country are now axing the number of police officers, whilst hiking the police levy on council tax bills."

He added: "I fear that this is growing evidence of the politicisation of the civil service under Labour, as ministers desperately try to salvage a sinking election campaign."

Of course the Labour government believe that normal rules do not apply to them, after all they are "the political wing of the British people".

Eric Pickles states "the bleedin' obvious"

Take a read of this from 24dash:

"The Conservatives say new answers to Parliamentary Questions have revealed today that the price of buying a first home has tripled over the last ten years.

Stamp duty thresholds have not kept pace, which the Tories claim means that Gordon Brown’s tax take has soared, and more and more first time buyers are liable for this housing tax.

Eric Pickles MP, Shadow Secretary of State for Communities & Local Government, said: "One of the most damning indictments of Gordon Brown’s record is that the number of first time buyers has plummeted to its lowest level for decades.

"His stealth tax of stamp duty is pushing more and more buyers into over-extending themselves on their mortgages, meaning higher interest rates as well as the risk of negative equity if house prices stumble.

"If Ministers really wanted to help people onto the housing ladder, they would adopt the Conservatives' proposals to abolish stamp duty for first time buyers up to £250,000.

"Affordable homes are the bedrock of stable and safe communities. We need to make it easier to get on, and move up, the housing ladder.” "


Two thoughts come to mind: first - well obviously Eric, what did you expect from the master of stealth taxes? Gordon Brown is a complete ****, an absolute **** and you and the rest of the Conservative party let him get away with his multiple thefts from the taxpayer and pensioner far too easily, second - any news organisation that can't be bothered to spell check their headings or even proof read them deserves my derision - the title of 24post's piece is entitled "Tories cliam soaring house prices show need for tax cuts" CLIAM, good grief... Their home page includes this proud boast "This website is currently at Beta stage, but we're so excited about the way it looks we wanted to let people start using it as soon as possible." They ask for comments, I really can't be bothered...