Thursday, December 9, 2010

Who to condemn?

It's been a while since Maria (Gold Taps) Eagle featured on these pages. So thanks to the reader who brought to our attention this recent story in the Daily Post about 190 job losses in her constituency, as Novartis transfers them to Italy.

Normally we might expect any MP let alone a Labour MP to condemn the move and be demanding meetings with the management to reverse the decision. But instead of condemnation she blames the ConDems, and praises the company.

By coincidence, Maria's constituency Labour party got a £3000 shot in the arm from the Swiss owned pharmaceuticals company, who have also made larger donations to the Labour party.

Labour have a long standing relationship with the firm. Before selling out for £542Million and netting a cool £70million for himself and family, Paul Drayson regularly hit the headlines for his controversial Labour donations which exceed £1Million.

As reported here in the Guardian "Mr Drayson's firm, Powderject, received a £32m contract for smallpox vaccine without normal competitive tendering, shortly after donating £100,000 to Labour."
This resulted in a parliamentary inquiry, which failed to identify any improper activity. But Labour ministers were servilely criticised by the Parliamentary Ombudsman for refusing to comply with freedom of information requests, describing it as "a matter of great concern."

Mr Drayson was then made Lord Drayson by Labour, and he promptly gave another £1/2Million to the party. He was also appointed a Minister in the Blair and Brown Governments.

Strangely Novartis's donation doesn't appear to be listed on Maria's parliamentary register of interests. Neither do donations from Peel Ports or housing association South Liverpool Housing.

Tuesday, December 7, 2010

Fight amongst yourselves

Almost every day I receive comments on this site that are very obviously from Labour councillors or activists using this blog to wage war against their own enemies within the Labour party.

Most of them are rejected as potentially libellous or just far too offensive to appear here. I mention this because yet again I'm in the dog house with one reader for allowing a comment that on reflection just crosses the acceptability line.

I wish I could let you see the venom that exists within a party that has already descended into civil war 6 months after taking power. But I can only allow a handful of the milder comments.

So you won't see any of the disgusting homophobic comments directed against a female Labour councillor in South Liverpool. Nor will you see the allegations that another stole money from a residents association - unless we see some evidence to back up the claim. Or the repeated accusations of another Labour councillor being a wife beater... or the accusation that a candidate standing in north Liverpool will sleep with anyone but his wife.

Why don't you all just hire a boxing ring for a night and get it all off your chests?

Comments littered with F, C and T words are always rejected, as are racist, sexist, ageist or homophobic posts, or abuse directed at someone's physical appearance or impairments. Before pressing "publish" this site asks the question "if the politicians involved were MPs, would Private Eye publish this?" If not, don't bother to send it in.

love and licks to all of you,

Monday, December 6, 2010

Loosing another job

Former MP Jane (all you can eat for £400 a month) Kennedy understandably hit the roof when David (boost my pension) Henshaw was appointed to Chair Alder Hey Hospital trust.

Having been sacked previously as a Health Minister after being thwarted in her attempt to stop him becoming Chair of NHS North West, she described him as "A man in whom I have no confidence and for whom I have no respect".

Yet she had another reason to vent her wrath at her opponent.

Those of us paying any attention when she announced she was quitting as an MP, before her expense account could catch up with her, will recall she planned a career "working with the health service".

As one gravy train was pulling into it's final station, she hoped her connections could be timed to jump on board another train. So it's not too surprising that JFK also applied for the cushy number of Alder Hey Chair. After all, this is a "job" paying £42K per year for 2/3 days a week of work (no doubt with also the opportunity for expenses) so you would expect two of the city's greediest to be following the money.

But sadly for her it was not to be, and while Henshaw won the race, Jane didn't make the shortlist.
To lose one job to such a vile little man is unfortunate. To lose two seems more like people are trying to tell you something. Still, I have found a job vacancy you might be interested in, and you will be employed by another of you old mates, Joe Anderson. It will allow you to share your vast knowledge of catering on a budget. Details here.

Thursday, December 2, 2010

'To Infinity And Beyond'

Labour's Leader Ed Rubberband bounced back into the spotlight following he paternity leave with a brand new slogan borrowed from Toy Story's Buzz Lightyear, promising to go beyond new Labour.

This prompted the press to label him "Buzz Lightweight" after his disastrous performance at PMQs and on the Today Programme last Friday, attempting the define the "stretched middle" that Labour are now pledged to fight on behalf of - having decided the poor are already in the bag, so stuff 'em!

So one of my regular readers started to wonder, just for a bit of fun, if Ed is Buzz Lightweight then which character is his even more lightweight pet Luciana.

Well there were only two serious contenders.

Jessie The Yodeling Cow Girl shares the cold staring eyes and fake smile. She hyperventilates just at the thought of being left on her own to do things and requires a minder at all times.

The other contender had to be Slinky. Standing out for speaking with a Southern accent and possessing a lightweight plastic head, the resemblance is striking.

Feel free to send in other members of Labour's Toy Story.

Wednesday, December 1, 2010

Legal dog house

I have been passed an interesting e-mail from a solicitor employed by Dr Ansari, who takes issue with the recent article about his donation to Luciana's campaign.

In the interest of fairness I will list his complaints, as this blog has always allowed a right of reply to humans named here.

1. Dr Ansari claims he made no donation specifically to fund Luciana. (Although Luciana lists his donation in her declaration of interests - so is her declaration a lie? If so I apologize to Doctor Ansari and suggest he takes action against Luciana for defaming him.)

2. Dr Anwar maintains that there was no major scandal associated with him. The proxy donor in question just happened to rent a flat from him. (Well I make no argument either way, however two Labour supporting newspapers linked him to the scandal, therefor it is fair for this blog to report that he was linked to it.)

3. There is no evidence to suggest that the Labour NEC considered Dr Ansari unfit for office. (I make no such suggestion, merely quote the example given in the Daily Mirror by a Labour insider as to why someone might be vetoed by the NEC.)

4. Dr Ansari has not submitted "controversial planning applications" in Liverpool. (Depends on how you define controversial? However the majority of planning applications he has made in Liverpool have either been refused or presumably would have been refused if he hadn't withdrawn them. And as a private landlord making a profit by housing asylum seekers in hostels, he can hardly claim to be in an uncontroversial business)

5. Dr Ansari has very little in the way of property interests in Greater Manchester. (So by "very little" is it accepted that he does indeed have property interests in Greater Manchester?)

So I am glad we could clarify all that for Dr Ansari.