Politics, The Final Frontier (Politics)

[Mick Harper]

[Mick Harper]

"Do go one, Mick, this is fascinating." Oh, all right then.

The bridge connects two parliamentary constituencies, Hull East and Grimsby. The reason it was so important to win the Hull North byelection was because a general election was in the offing and the Labour government was unpopular. This reached a nadir when the seaman's strike began and supermarkets (called 'corner shops' in those days) were rapidly emptying.

One of the moving lights of the strike was one, John Prescott, and the strike was settled just in time to win the 1966 General Election. Rumoured at the time to be because MI5 was tapping the phones of the leading lights, and later confirmed, I seem to remember, when Tony Benn's diaries came out, him being Postmaster-General at the time and in charge of the nation's phones. (If it wasn't John Stonehouse, the Russian spy.)

Any road, as they don't have to say nowadays anywhere near the Humber estuary, John Prescott became Labour MP for Hull East in 1970 and subsequently an egg-throwing deputy Leader of the Labour Party. Though the 1970 general election itself was lost because of Peter Bonetti but don't get me started on that.

On the other side of the bridge sat Anthony Crosland, MP for Grimsby. He became foreign secretary just in time to conduct the Cod Wars with Iceland that finished off both Hull and Grimsby as major fishing ports and a critical rationale for building the bridge in the first place. Should I go on? "No, Mick, that's enough conspiracy theory for one-to-two posts."

[Wile E. Coyote]

Humza Yousaf is now at an astonishing 1-4 for leader of SNP.

This is just feeding into the narrative that it is a stitch up.

Problem is that the SNP have passed the point of spin and gone straight for gross moral turpitude, within the public imagination.

I doubt the current Leadership contest will even be completed.

[Mick Harper]

You seem to speak Scotch, so am I right in assuming this Humza Yousuf (is there a Humza tartan by the way?) is quite a competent administrator, an unpopular (with his colleagues) minister, a fluent if unexciting communicator, and is only four to one on to win because he is running against a Moonie and a Loonie.

We down here in the Scottish colonies don't understand why the leadership contest won't be completed. (Irrespective of whether it is later challenged in court.) Please explain. In broad Inglis.

[Wile E. Coyote]

[Mick Harper]

All shall have prizes! Three leaders of the SNP. That's the way to go, tell 'em. Then nobody need go to court.

PS Plus the one that leads the party in the Commons, traditionally the person invited to the Palace to form a new government. We must never forget that an independent Scotland will still be a monarchy. It's called the Windsor Knot.

[Wile E. Coyote]

I think you have it, a Triumvirate is needed, then proscriptions. Sorted.

[Mick Harper]

The 2024 General Election is going to be decided by the May 2023 local elections. If they are a rout for the Tories, there's no way back, and all the feuding groups will set about carving out positions (and each other) to take over the rump party, ready for 2029 or more likely 2034. If the elections go well for the Tories -- and by that is meant anything short of a rout -- then there's hope and when Tories sniff power (in 2024), they coalesce into their usual formidable electoral machine.

And they will do very well in the May 2023 elections. Here's why.

It's the first election in which people have to bring along photo ID's in order to vote. At the moment about a third of the electorate don't know this. (I didn't.) That third is the poor, the dumb and the newly arrived a.k.a. Labour voters. Now, heaven and hell will be moved to change this but, this being Britain, about a quarter of the electorate will turn up in May 2023 without photo ID's, won't be able to vote (Labour) and the Tories will do spectacularly well (relatively).

[Mick Harper]

The AEL is offering photo ID's in a variety of names if you want your party to do well. Changes of clothes, wigs etc are not supplied. Even though AE principles say you shouldn't have a party, they also say it's a piece of piss knowing which party is best on each occasion. So get those postal orders rolling in.

Fun fact: nobody has ever been found to be not who they say they are at any election in Britain since open hustings were abolished in 1866.

[Mick Harper]

The government is changing the rules about children in care. Again. The deckchairs are being shifted around. Again. They can't do any more than this because nobody is interested in children in care (I'm certainly not) and when nobody is interested, nobody pays, and when nobody pays you can only shift deckchairs.

When is someone in authority -- or indeed not in authority -- going to realise that spending a lot of money on children in care is a terrific investment? Not for reasons of compassion -- AE doesn't do compassion -- but because these children grow up to form a disproportionate part of the criminal/ mental health/ claimant/ just plain nuisance classes that cost a lot of money dealing with.

It is true that being brought up without parents is a tough break anyway -- both for children and for society -- but if you refuse to be as open-handed as parents are when you are in loco parentis, they will disproportionately come back to haunt you.

[Mick Harper]

This reminds me of a political manifesto I once idly put together in my youth. "We, if elected to be your government," it began, "will not spend any money on the usual stuff (just keep the present stuff going as is). But new money? Nobody gets nuffink, no exceptions. So don't ask and don't kvetch. What we will do is use our five years spending money on all the things that everyone knows should have money spent on them but never do. We won't be standing for re-election -- our poll ratings will be close to zero by then anyway -- and normal service can be resumed at the next election without us."

They'd get my vote, if I ever voted.

[Wile E. Coyote]

[Mick Harper]

That is a different question. Enlighten us, please.

[Wile E. Coyote]

It's down to you.

You have a limited pot from Govt.

What do you spend it on?

Prevention, protection within the family, or taking into care.

Well chosen.

You now hve a death and serious case review, you feature in press and TV.

Hmm, we need to be more cautious and switch to the more expensive only really safe option. This is down to Govt for the fact that we now have to shut the Early Help as we have a limited pot, and we do now need to switch to more expensive care placements.

Cripes, this is getting even more expensive than we thought, the more kids we take in, the more expensive it gets. Bit ironic really, by the time they hit 16, most of these kids are now moving back in again with the parent we actually separated them from, tad risky, but heyho, it's now their choice. Well, we kept them safe, didn't we. Job well done.

You passed. You are a director of Social care.

[Mick Harper]

Yes, but all this only applies to a minority of children. The vast majority are orphans or with parents (normally parent) who cannot cope, usually for mental health reasons. Or other reasons but not because they were taken into care for the prevention of cruelty to children.

If one wanted to be cynical there is also the very large numbers of unaccompanied minors who are arriving in boats across the Channel or by other means. Except for some unfathomable reason, they all turn out to be more, shall we say, young adults. Quite able to fend for themselves and who would not at all take kindly to being asked to live in 'a home'.