Thursday:
What do you WANT in London?
A single policy of an unaffordable fare-cut bribe OR a shiny new million-pound bus?
Wouldn't you rather have a DELIVERABLE low fares policy AND a plan to turn all of London's buses and taxis ELECTRIC for greener, cleaner air!
Do you want a BRAGGING war over who can put more police on the street?
Wouldn't you rather have an EXPERIENCED leader who PIONEERED techniques rebuilding TRUST between public and police AND who pledges to CUT OUT the HARASSMENT of stop-and-search and END the scandal of the POLICE being WASTED on trivial cannabis arrests!
Do you more of the same old failure to invest in affordable housing (while granting planning permission for huge skyscrapers) OR more of the same old failure to invest in affordable housing (while granting planning permission for huge skyscrapers)?
Wouldn't you rather have a REAL commitment to working London-wide to restart PROPER council house building to replace the lost housing stock coupled with IMAGINATIVE plans to bring empty houses back into use AND finding new living space above shops and businesses.
Wouldn't you rather have a PLAN to make London not just an AFFORDABLE place to live but a BETTER place to live, with pedestrianized zones between Oxford Street and Trafalgar Square, with more spent on the PARKS across London and more SPORTS and more ARTS and MORE TREES everywhere!
Wouldn't you rather have someone who'll give young people have SOMEWHERE OF THEIR OWN to go so they don't have to hang about on the streets so they don't risk falling victim to GANG culture AND who'll invest in education and apprenticeships and advice to see that young people have a FUTURE.
Some people are thinking of voting for Bojo the Clown because they think he is HARMLESS. Or, as the Hitchhiker's Guide might have it, MOSTLY HARMLESS. Well, we can do a LOT BETTER than "harmless".
Some people are thinking of voting for Ken because... er... well, even Hard Labour admit that they're reduced to the old CLOTHES PEG strategy – you've got to vote Ken or else Mr Balloon won't understand that he's got to be punished for not having fixed the economic devastation that Labour wrought yet. Er, or something. Well, we can do a lot better than THAT too!
Some people are even thinking of voting for Jenny Jones because even though they think her policies are WOO they would rather feel WARM and FLUFFY than actually vote for what they want. People with an ACTUAL commitment to green policies (or even Green PARTY policies, which are not ALWAYS the same or as effective), good for you; but people protest-voting Green to spite Cap'n Clegg over tuition fees earn my fluffy contempt. (Pod Delusion, it is YOU I am looking at!)
If you think that the Liberal Democrats don't deliver for you – when the UNFAIR electoral system meant we got FEWER seats in Parliament, we STILL delivered ALL FOUR promises on the front of our manifesto.
If you think that we break our promises – we managed to turn Hard Labour's Student Loans into a Graduate Tax that was FAIRER and MORE GENEROUS than EITHER the Conservatories OR Hard Labour wanted or would have delivered. New graduates now pay LESS each month than they would have done under Hard Labour.
And if you think that we're "traitors" just because we backed the other Party that had the larger number of votes and the larger number of seats and the larger DEMOCRATIC MANDATE rather than support a Party that had just spent thirteen years trampling over EVERYTHING we believe in about CIVIL LIBERTIES and INTERNATIONAL LAW – then you should probably ADMIT you we're going to vote for the AUTHORITARIAN, ECONOMICALLY-ILLITERATE, WARMONGERING CRIMINALS anyway, weren't you.
Who's REALLY on your side these days? Let's look at the EVIDENCE.
Times are tough for everyone, but LOCALLY it's only Liberal Democrat councils that have kept open SURE START schemes and LIBRARIES.: unlike those Conservatory vandals' and Hard Labour hypocrites' councils, not one Lib Dem-run council has closed a library. And NATIONALLY it's the Liberal Democrats who have CUT TAXES for the lowest earners and focussed the PUPIL PREMIUM on a better start for the least well off.
I don't care how much tax Ken's been avoiding; I don't care how much Bojo earns moonlighting for the Tell-lies-o-graph. But THEY care or they wouldn't have tried to keep it HIDDEN from you.
There's a BETTER WAY than that.
Hard Labour and the Conservatories are JUST LIKE EACH OTHER, telling you you must vote for them so that the other feller doesn't get in. Well you know what, you don't have to vote for EITHER of them – vote for the REAL alternative and then NEITHER of the other fellers will get in!
I don't want to vote for a clown OR a caricature.
And I don't have to.
I can vote for Brian Paddick and the Liberal Democrats. And I can be PROUD of it.
.
Showing posts with label Mr Brian. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Mr Brian. Show all posts
Wednesday, May 02, 2012
Thursday, April 10, 2008
Day 2654: Brian Begins
Monday:
Mr Brian has launched his campaign to be London's next Mayor, pledging a Contract with Londoners and springing into action with CSI Liberal Democrat.
He then clashed with the other candidates, the Labour's Mr Mayor Ken and Mr Balloon's bumbling bounder, Suicide Boris, on Newsnight.
Boris (Tessa Jowell isn't going to ban ME from calling him that!) had earlier been broadcasting in black and white todisguise his florid appearance emphasise his gravitas and seriousness. He was very serious. Very serious INDEED.
UNFORTUNATELY, Newsnight then proved that he DIDN'T KNOW the costings of his own centrepiece Bendy Bus policy.
(Hat tip: Dr Pax)
It is a shame that too few people watched this IMPLOSION for it to make a significant difference. Boris seems somehow able to ride out GAFFES like this, or like bragging that his house was worth SHEDLOADS to the SHELTER/CRISIS Hustings, or admitting to snorting cocaine to Janet Street-Pothead.
HOW are London's police supposed to reduce the drug crime (and associated knife and gun crime) that make people fear their own streets when the Conservatory candidate for Mayor thinks that Class A drugs are just something he "got away with"?
The fact that this CRIMINAL vacuum in rumpled suit and hair might end up being elected Mayor of London fills me with TERROR!
Equally, his inability to answer the question clearly filled Mr Paxo with fury, as Ms Featherweight reports.
Mr Ken was, understandably, trying to play up his SUCCESSES of the last eight years: like the way he has successfully slipped out of his promise only to stand twice, or succeeded in raising the Congestion Charge after promising not to. Er. He made another promise, to resign if he raised the C-Charge on smaller cars… you can decide for yourself what that's worth given his (stuck) record.
Of course, he was also keen to stress that anything that has gone wrong will be somebody else's problem. Problems on the tube… not him guv, don't you know he opposed PPP? Crime on the streets… can't blame Mr Ken, don't you know the Labour have solved all known crimes (so they've had to invent a load of new ones!)?
He's very good at his: "I'm a perfectly reasonable guy, honest as the day is long, no you can't ask me about the stolen money, that sort of thing happens all the time you can't expect ME to know how every penny is spent, can you?" shtick. He never answers the question, but he doesn't have to because Suicide Boris reliably goes into one of his "I yi yi yi yi've never been so, oh oh oh, goodness corks!" blusters and Mr Ken can just keep protesting innocence and no one hears that neither of them are saying ANYTHING.
A case in point was when Mr Brian as trying to press Mr Ken on the deadly bendy buses. One of Ken's minions had, apparently, threatened to cut off police funding if they investigated a death by bendy bus; Mr Ken whined on that the victim was three times over the legal limit. Yes, but he's still DEAD Mr Ken, and the police OUGHT to be able to investigate without your HEAVIES threatening them! Boris, though, just starts Oompah-pah-oompah-pah-ing about the buses and Mr Paxo let's Mr Ken get away with another non-answer.
If Mr Brian has a PROBLEM in this debate, in fact in this entire campaign, it is trying to get a word in edgeways. When he can get a chance to speak, it is clear that he KNOWS HIS STUFF, and is on top of his brief – on transport, for example, he had a clear message about trams as opposed to Boris's daydream of a new Routemaster, and a plan that would cost no more (over ten years) than the Labour's Mr Ken wants to spend on buses. Or on crime, where he's got the experience and the ideas and knows that what we need is to reconnect the local police with the people that they serve, to rebuild the trust so that we can cut crime TOGETHER.
Obviously he is TOO POLITE to use his police training to render Ken and Boris unconscious, but…
Mr Brian has launched his campaign to be London's next Mayor, pledging a Contract with Londoners and springing into action with CSI Liberal Democrat.
He then clashed with the other candidates, the Labour's Mr Mayor Ken and Mr Balloon's bumbling bounder, Suicide Boris, on Newsnight.
Boris (Tessa Jowell isn't going to ban ME from calling him that!) had earlier been broadcasting in black and white to
UNFORTUNATELY, Newsnight then proved that he DIDN'T KNOW the costings of his own centrepiece Bendy Bus policy.
(Hat tip: Dr Pax)
It is a shame that too few people watched this IMPLOSION for it to make a significant difference. Boris seems somehow able to ride out GAFFES like this, or like bragging that his house was worth SHEDLOADS to the SHELTER/CRISIS Hustings, or admitting to snorting cocaine to Janet Street-Pothead.
HOW are London's police supposed to reduce the drug crime (and associated knife and gun crime) that make people fear their own streets when the Conservatory candidate for Mayor thinks that Class A drugs are just something he "got away with"?
The fact that this CRIMINAL vacuum in rumpled suit and hair might end up being elected Mayor of London fills me with TERROR!
Equally, his inability to answer the question clearly filled Mr Paxo with fury, as Ms Featherweight reports.
Mr Ken was, understandably, trying to play up his SUCCESSES of the last eight years: like the way he has successfully slipped out of his promise only to stand twice, or succeeded in raising the Congestion Charge after promising not to. Er. He made another promise, to resign if he raised the C-Charge on smaller cars… you can decide for yourself what that's worth given his (stuck) record.
Of course, he was also keen to stress that anything that has gone wrong will be somebody else's problem. Problems on the tube… not him guv, don't you know he opposed PPP? Crime on the streets… can't blame Mr Ken, don't you know the Labour have solved all known crimes (so they've had to invent a load of new ones!)?
He's very good at his: "I'm a perfectly reasonable guy, honest as the day is long, no you can't ask me about the stolen money, that sort of thing happens all the time you can't expect ME to know how every penny is spent, can you?" shtick. He never answers the question, but he doesn't have to because Suicide Boris reliably goes into one of his "I yi yi yi yi've never been so, oh oh oh, goodness corks!" blusters and Mr Ken can just keep protesting innocence and no one hears that neither of them are saying ANYTHING.
A case in point was when Mr Brian as trying to press Mr Ken on the deadly bendy buses. One of Ken's minions had, apparently, threatened to cut off police funding if they investigated a death by bendy bus; Mr Ken whined on that the victim was three times over the legal limit. Yes, but he's still DEAD Mr Ken, and the police OUGHT to be able to investigate without your HEAVIES threatening them! Boris, though, just starts Oompah-pah-oompah-pah-ing about the buses and Mr Paxo let's Mr Ken get away with another non-answer.
If Mr Brian has a PROBLEM in this debate, in fact in this entire campaign, it is trying to get a word in edgeways. When he can get a chance to speak, it is clear that he KNOWS HIS STUFF, and is on top of his brief – on transport, for example, he had a clear message about trams as opposed to Boris's daydream of a new Routemaster, and a plan that would cost no more (over ten years) than the Labour's Mr Ken wants to spend on buses. Or on crime, where he's got the experience and the ideas and knows that what we need is to reconnect the local police with the people that they serve, to rebuild the trust so that we can cut crime TOGETHER.
Obviously he is TOO POLITE to use his police training to render Ken and Boris unconscious, but…
Monday, March 31, 2008
Day 2643: Terminated
Thursday:
Heathrow, and CHAOS descends on the opening day of shiny new Terminal Five, with "technical glitches" leaving passengers unable to get to planes and baggage unable to get anywhere!
It's a RELIEF that they'd been told NOT to use the BIG-BROTHER fingerprint taking system or things might have gone from UNMANAGEABLE to completely ANARCHIC!
If this is what happens when they open a new terminal, I dread to think what they could achieve if they opened a new runway!
Of course, all the candidates for London Mayor have united against the third runway…
…giving me a DAYTIME TV link to the Mayoral campaign!
The Labour (and by extension their allies in this campaign, the Greens) actually SUPPORT a third runway. Mr Balloon and the Conservatories are against it one day and for it the next depending on whether it's a sunshine and quality of life day or an economic competence and big business day.
This leaves Mr Brian and the Liberal Democrats as the one Party not sending out MIXED MESSAGES.
The INTERESTING thing about the London Mayor election is that you get to vote TWICE, once for the candidate you like and once as a back-up.
I am indebted to Mr Julian of Orange By Name for going to the trouble of asking the other three parties to send him articles explaining why THEY deserve our second preferences. I think that not only is this the LIBERAL thing to do, it is also a GOOD IDEA for us not to become so PARTISAN that we become ISOLATED and disappear up our own thinking.
But it is also interesting to compare the three different STYLES that they use for their appeal.
First up were the Greens who, having already shot their own credibility dead by saying that their own supporters should vote for Mr Mayor Ken, were trying the INTERESTING tactic of begging OUR supporters to vote for them.
Telling the Liberal Party that the VERY Liberal Mr Brian isn't a Liberal is a bit of a DUMB STUNT anyway, even if your arguments don't all get totally shot to pieces by Citizen Alix!
In contrast, the Labour actually seem to have understood what the second preference vote MEANS, and make a pitch based on "why Mr Ken is like you". Although their clear aim is to build a London-wide coalition on the grounds of "Keep Bonkers Boris Out", they also try to make a positive case.
On the other fluffy foot, bringing up Iraq and the Environment just emphasises what a HYPOCRITE Mr Ken was to put returning to the Labour above his so-called principles. And suggesting that the Mayor who has treated the London Assembly with such contempt is an advocate for London Democracy… is probably just bunged in at the end as a joke.
Still, marks for trying.
The Conservatories though, really DON'T get this idea of reaching out to other people AT ALL, with an article steeped in typical Conservatory arrogance:
"We're going to win, so you'd better join us in giving the Labour a real kicking 'cos then you might stand a chance at the General Election of winning some seats off them to make up for the seats we're going to take off you. So ner!"
Quite apart from alienating people their supposed to be appealing to, casually dismissing the huge policy gulf between Bonkers Boris and reality (never mind the Liberal Democrats) and making no attempt to make a positive case for their own candidate seems to accept that Bozza is basically un-sellable.
Mr Brian himself, on Any Questionables, was pitched the "who would you vote for second" question and did VERY well explaining that people who tell him they WANT to vote Liberal Democrat but feel it will be a wasted vote CAN vote for the candidate that they want first because they have a second vote to fall back on for their arty loyalty. Top marks for an answer that could have been scripted by My Daddy Alex… in fact, it WAS!
Ah, countered the junior Mr Dimbledonkey thinking he sensed an ELEPHANT TRAP, but why won't YOU be using YOUR second vote?
Mr Brian recovered brilliantly: because for me, my conscience and my party loyalty coincide, he said smartly, and I'm not allowed to vote for myself twice.
Huge applause covered the sound of Dimbledonkey slinking away tail between legs.
I should also add that Mr Brian had a very good answer to the last question (bringing me back to where I started): if you were trapped at Terminal Five, how would you drown your sorrows?
Mr B said he couldn't drown his sorrows because he is in TRAINING for the London Marathon, though jogging around the Terminal might be good exercise. And he got in QUALITY name-checks for the three charities causes that he is supporting in his run: Downs Syndrome, Strokes and Mr Elton John's AIDS foundation.
Londoners, clearly if you want to fly, you want to fly Liberal Democrat!
Heathrow, and CHAOS descends on the opening day of shiny new Terminal Five, with "technical glitches" leaving passengers unable to get to planes and baggage unable to get anywhere!
It's a RELIEF that they'd been told NOT to use the BIG-BROTHER fingerprint taking system or things might have gone from UNMANAGEABLE to completely ANARCHIC!
If this is what happens when they open a new terminal, I dread to think what they could achieve if they opened a new runway!
Of course, all the candidates for London Mayor have united against the third runway…
…giving me a DAYTIME TV link to the Mayoral campaign!
The Labour (and by extension their allies in this campaign, the Greens) actually SUPPORT a third runway. Mr Balloon and the Conservatories are against it one day and for it the next depending on whether it's a sunshine and quality of life day or an economic competence and big business day.
This leaves Mr Brian and the Liberal Democrats as the one Party not sending out MIXED MESSAGES.
The INTERESTING thing about the London Mayor election is that you get to vote TWICE, once for the candidate you like and once as a back-up.
I am indebted to Mr Julian of Orange By Name for going to the trouble of asking the other three parties to send him articles explaining why THEY deserve our second preferences. I think that not only is this the LIBERAL thing to do, it is also a GOOD IDEA for us not to become so PARTISAN that we become ISOLATED and disappear up our own thinking.
But it is also interesting to compare the three different STYLES that they use for their appeal.
First up were the Greens who, having already shot their own credibility dead by saying that their own supporters should vote for Mr Mayor Ken, were trying the INTERESTING tactic of begging OUR supporters to vote for them.
Telling the Liberal Party that the VERY Liberal Mr Brian isn't a Liberal is a bit of a DUMB STUNT anyway, even if your arguments don't all get totally shot to pieces by Citizen Alix!
In contrast, the Labour actually seem to have understood what the second preference vote MEANS, and make a pitch based on "why Mr Ken is like you". Although their clear aim is to build a London-wide coalition on the grounds of "Keep Bonkers Boris Out", they also try to make a positive case.
On the other fluffy foot, bringing up Iraq and the Environment just emphasises what a HYPOCRITE Mr Ken was to put returning to the Labour above his so-called principles. And suggesting that the Mayor who has treated the London Assembly with such contempt is an advocate for London Democracy… is probably just bunged in at the end as a joke.
Still, marks for trying.
The Conservatories though, really DON'T get this idea of reaching out to other people AT ALL, with an article steeped in typical Conservatory arrogance:
"We're going to win, so you'd better join us in giving the Labour a real kicking 'cos then you might stand a chance at the General Election of winning some seats off them to make up for the seats we're going to take off you. So ner!"
Quite apart from alienating people their supposed to be appealing to, casually dismissing the huge policy gulf between Bonkers Boris and reality (never mind the Liberal Democrats) and making no attempt to make a positive case for their own candidate seems to accept that Bozza is basically un-sellable.
Mr Brian himself, on Any Questionables, was pitched the "who would you vote for second" question and did VERY well explaining that people who tell him they WANT to vote Liberal Democrat but feel it will be a wasted vote CAN vote for the candidate that they want first because they have a second vote to fall back on for their arty loyalty. Top marks for an answer that could have been scripted by My Daddy Alex… in fact, it WAS!
Ah, countered the junior Mr Dimbledonkey thinking he sensed an ELEPHANT TRAP, but why won't YOU be using YOUR second vote?
Mr Brian recovered brilliantly: because for me, my conscience and my party loyalty coincide, he said smartly, and I'm not allowed to vote for myself twice.
Huge applause covered the sound of Dimbledonkey slinking away tail between legs.
I should also add that Mr Brian had a very good answer to the last question (bringing me back to where I started): if you were trapped at Terminal Five, how would you drown your sorrows?
Mr B said he couldn't drown his sorrows because he is in TRAINING for the London Marathon, though jogging around the Terminal might be good exercise. And he got in QUALITY name-checks for the three charities causes that he is supporting in his run: Downs Syndrome, Strokes and Mr Elton John's AIDS foundation.
Londoners, clearly if you want to fly, you want to fly Liberal Democrat!
Tuesday, January 15, 2008
Day 2566: The Mayoral Debate: Soap and Flannel
Friday:
Oh dear, a DREADFUL confession: we have been watching ITVnone, Britain's Tackiest TV channel.
It would be nice to say that it was ONLY to watch the debate between Mr Brian, our top quality candidate for Mayor of London, and that pair of ASBO-monkeys from the other parties.
But NO, we have been having a bit of a Ben Millar-fest too, with the return of schlocky Doctor Who wannabe "Primeval" and of course ITV's new Fourth Wall Bulldozer: "Moving Wallpaper/Echo Beach", hilarious in the way that Mr Sorkin's "Studio 60 on Sunset Strip" was meant to be (but wasn't).
"Studio 60" took most of the first episode to TEARFULLY remove the old producer of the show and woo in the series' real stars, Josh from The West Wing and the one from Friends who can act. "Moving Wallpaper" does this in ten seconds flat, and features the defenestrated ex-producer head butting a photograph of Mr Michael Grade and calling him abas bad word! This wins hands down. Instantly every Dr Who fan in the land loves it (and that's even before the two Doctor Who references in the second episode).
And, of course, unlike "Studio 60", "Moving Wallpaper" actually has the BOTTLE to show us what all the fuss has been about. And wisely rather than the show-within-the-show being the bestest bestest wittiest wisest comedy in the whole of cuddle town, it's a ghastly soap who plot and characters have all been entirely derailed by the producer's megalomania. Wise, and also brave!
The TRULY terrible thing – among MANY terrible things – about the 9.30 soap "Echo Beach" was the nagging worry that Mr Grade had succeeded in commissioning ANOTHER turkey of similar magnitude to the last time anyone tried to mix SUNSHINE into a British soap opera – I mean of course "Eldorado", anagrammatically if unkindly remembered as a "Real Dodo" – and the only way to save the channel from going onto the rocks was to apply heavy IRONY.
British people, famously, do not like their soaps to be "happy". EastEnders and Consternation Street vie to bring gales of misery down upon their inhabitants in between the reigns of terror of the local murderers. (At one point, I tell you, there were more SERIAL KILLERS than GAY DADDIES living in Consternation Street!) Sunshine is UNNATURAL in this context. Usually, the only way around this is by application of wall-to-wall Australian accents. And obviously – even if Jason of Jason'n'kylie wasn't in it – this is why the model for "Echo Beach" is meant to be "Neighbours" (although so far the production standards are managing to make "Home and Away" look CLASSY and "Hollyoaks in the City" look like DRAMA). With the exception of Mr Hugo Speer and (perhaps astonishingly) Mr Jason himself, no one up to and including Tiffany can actually act (though she can tremble a lower lip with the best of them). What you are left with is a load of what my disgusting daddies insist on calling "totty" in not very many clothes.
It ought to be TOTALLY UNWATCHABLE.
But you cannot escape from the awfully impressive cleverness of placing GIGANTIC AIR-QUOTES around the whole edifice through the addition of "behind the scenes" show "Echo Beach Confidential". Er, "Moving Wallpaper".
With more laugh-out-loud moments in the first ten minutes than in "Studio 60's" first ten EPISODES (literally: three!) it centres around Mr Ben as "Jonathan Pope" the "producer" of ITV's new "hit" soap. In the first episode he crushes a little girl under a stack of lobster pots, spends the design budget on his own office so announces that the surf shack will have to be derelict, and puts Tiffany in the pink dress to avoid "diva tendencies". I thought he was VERY funny. But having seen the second episode – when he beats up a CUDDLY PANDA – I now realise that he is the UTTERESTBAST BAD WORD on television! (I am sorry, Mr Charlie Brooker, your crown has been taken.)
The "clever clever" part, of course, is to spot which bits of "Moving Wallpaper" will appear in the subsequent episode of "Echo Beach". Little girl, derelict surf shack, pink dress and panda all do.
Although pitched as a "comedy drama", "Moving Wallpaper" is a SATIRE – satirising television production itself, and just as mercilessly as, for example, "The Thick of It" skewers the government. That is why it appeals to "smart alecs" like my Daddies. Then they watch "Echo Beach" to play "spot the jokes" and feel quite clever about this. People who do not like that sort of too-clever-by-halfness can skip it and watch "Echo Beach" IRONY-FREE.
This, I believe, is called a "double whammy"!
For genuinely BAD television, then, you had to wait for later in the evening.
The Mayoral "debate" on ITV's "London Talking" (presumably they couldn't afford the more iconic "London Calling") was BAD in all the ways you EXPECT ITV to be bad: cheap set, dreadful format, Blue Peter presenter being patronising to the viewers in exactly the way that she wouldn't be when playing with terrapins.
Each candidate gets to make a little speech, then they get cross-examined by the other candidates, then they take questions from the floor (where everyone wears a handy badge so you know they are all party supporters and you only get questions from the OTHER two parties).
But rather than taking turns at each stage, what they did was have Mr Brian do all three stages and then Mr Mayor Ken do all three and then Bonkers Boris do all three. It meant that it was more like watching three JOB INTERVIEWS rather than generating any sense of DEBATE between the candidates. MY suspicion is that this is because they could only afford one LECTERN!
Mr Brian was jolly good, in spite of this format not playing to his strengths. To see how good he REALLY is, you want to see him CHAIRING a meeting and fielding questions, often with a dryly WITTY response and always with the facts and policies at his fingertips. It is JOLLY IMPRESSIVE.
In the studio, he was not able to set the audience ALIGHT in the way that the two seasoned hacks were. That is his strength and his weakness – he is an ordinary person, with extraordinary talents. And not a huge gob with legs attached. (Also hair, if Boris.)
His best moments were when facing the audience, as he was able to make a real connection with them, even if they were supporters of his rivals. Possibly a note to the other parties: if you want to try and trip Mr Brian up, maybe best not to try to "surprise" him with details of his police career – he really was really, really good at that job, you know, and he WILL have answers.
The other candidates, though, were bad, and in quite different ways. The Mr Mayor started with a very GOOD pitch – no, really – "if you think I've not improved London then don't vote for me". The problem was he was REALLY cross-patchy if anyone actually referred to his record – promises that haven't been met, opinions that have been switched. At one stage he was asked why he had said a mayor should only serve two terms and was now running for a third: "this will be the last job I do in politics," he said – well yes, Mr Ken… unless you change you mind AGAIN and do another one! Also, it SERIOUSLY isn't on to say that youth crime in the city is because those kids' PARENTS grew up under the Queen Maggie government. I mean, obviously, the answer is because they have grown up under a Thatcherite government TOO: the Thatcherite governments of Lord Blairimort. But since he's broken ANOTHER promise and rejoined the Labour, Mr Ken can't seem to say THAT any more.
Boris is all FOR blaming Lord Blairimort, but doesn't really have any ANSWERS as to what to do. Bus conductors… no, maybe not bus conductors, that was Mr Ken believing his own press releases… well maybe SOME bus conductors. He didn't half old school tie himself in knots. And while it seems the Labour's record is fair game, he didn't have a lot of defence of his OWN, particularly on the subject of race ("let's just move on," hmmm) and then Mr Ken fair bludgeoned him with his voting record: number of speeches in the House about London – none; number of debates about London attended – none; number of votes cast on motions about London – none; number of MENTIONS of London – n… oh, one actually, but in passing and about something else. Oops.
More subtle were Mr Brian's quick puncturing of Boris's ego: "Boris, you need to pay attention, I've already said all that!" was one; and another was replying to the assertion that if you needed experience then no one would ever stand: "But Boris, we ARE standing and we're trying to choose the BEST candidate." Terrifyingly, though, Mr Boris still thinks that he can run London the same way that he ran the Spectator.
The only "news" coverage to come out of the debate was the somewhat unedifying SPAT between Boris and Ken over teenage murders. "What are you going to do about these 27 murders in the last year?" thundered Boris. "I'll try to get more of the buggers next year," Mr Ken IN NO WAY REPLIED!
And it is a SHAME, because the Mayoral race needs people to be serious about London.
This election is an important one, one that concerns the lives of six or more million people and the governance of the world's TOP city. It deserves better coverage than some rubbish late-night slot on ITV.
What it needs is a big advertising campaign to get people watching and a prime-time slot for a huge audience and, and, and… and a "behind-the-scenes" show to show the drama and the comedy of the teams producing the mayoral run… now, hang on: there's an IDEA there!
Oh dear, a DREADFUL confession: we have been watching ITVnone, Britain's Tackiest TV channel.
It would be nice to say that it was ONLY to watch the debate between Mr Brian, our top quality candidate for Mayor of London, and that pair of ASBO-monkeys from the other parties.
But NO, we have been having a bit of a Ben Millar-fest too, with the return of schlocky Doctor Who wannabe "Primeval" and of course ITV's new Fourth Wall Bulldozer: "Moving Wallpaper/Echo Beach", hilarious in the way that Mr Sorkin's "Studio 60 on Sunset Strip" was meant to be (but wasn't).
"Studio 60" took most of the first episode to TEARFULLY remove the old producer of the show and woo in the series' real stars, Josh from The West Wing and the one from Friends who can act. "Moving Wallpaper" does this in ten seconds flat, and features the defenestrated ex-producer head butting a photograph of Mr Michael Grade and calling him a
And, of course, unlike "Studio 60", "Moving Wallpaper" actually has the BOTTLE to show us what all the fuss has been about. And wisely rather than the show-within-the-show being the bestest bestest wittiest wisest comedy in the whole of cuddle town, it's a ghastly soap who plot and characters have all been entirely derailed by the producer's megalomania. Wise, and also brave!
The TRULY terrible thing – among MANY terrible things – about the 9.30 soap "Echo Beach" was the nagging worry that Mr Grade had succeeded in commissioning ANOTHER turkey of similar magnitude to the last time anyone tried to mix SUNSHINE into a British soap opera – I mean of course "Eldorado", anagrammatically if unkindly remembered as a "Real Dodo" – and the only way to save the channel from going onto the rocks was to apply heavy IRONY.
British people, famously, do not like their soaps to be "happy". EastEnders and Consternation Street vie to bring gales of misery down upon their inhabitants in between the reigns of terror of the local murderers. (At one point, I tell you, there were more SERIAL KILLERS than GAY DADDIES living in Consternation Street!) Sunshine is UNNATURAL in this context. Usually, the only way around this is by application of wall-to-wall Australian accents. And obviously – even if Jason of Jason'n'kylie wasn't in it – this is why the model for "Echo Beach" is meant to be "Neighbours" (although so far the production standards are managing to make "Home and Away" look CLASSY and "Hollyoaks in the City" look like DRAMA). With the exception of Mr Hugo Speer and (perhaps astonishingly) Mr Jason himself, no one up to and including Tiffany can actually act (though she can tremble a lower lip with the best of them). What you are left with is a load of what my disgusting daddies insist on calling "totty" in not very many clothes.
It ought to be TOTALLY UNWATCHABLE.
But you cannot escape from the awfully impressive cleverness of placing GIGANTIC AIR-QUOTES around the whole edifice through the addition of "behind the scenes" show "Echo Beach Confidential". Er, "Moving Wallpaper".
With more laugh-out-loud moments in the first ten minutes than in "Studio 60's" first ten EPISODES (literally: three!) it centres around Mr Ben as "Jonathan Pope" the "producer" of ITV's new "hit" soap. In the first episode he crushes a little girl under a stack of lobster pots, spends the design budget on his own office so announces that the surf shack will have to be derelict, and puts Tiffany in the pink dress to avoid "diva tendencies". I thought he was VERY funny. But having seen the second episode – when he beats up a CUDDLY PANDA – I now realise that he is the UTTEREST
The "clever clever" part, of course, is to spot which bits of "Moving Wallpaper" will appear in the subsequent episode of "Echo Beach". Little girl, derelict surf shack, pink dress and panda all do.
Although pitched as a "comedy drama", "Moving Wallpaper" is a SATIRE – satirising television production itself, and just as mercilessly as, for example, "The Thick of It" skewers the government. That is why it appeals to "smart alecs" like my Daddies. Then they watch "Echo Beach" to play "spot the jokes" and feel quite clever about this. People who do not like that sort of too-clever-by-halfness can skip it and watch "Echo Beach" IRONY-FREE.
This, I believe, is called a "double whammy"!
For genuinely BAD television, then, you had to wait for later in the evening.
The Mayoral "debate" on ITV's "London Talking" (presumably they couldn't afford the more iconic "London Calling") was BAD in all the ways you EXPECT ITV to be bad: cheap set, dreadful format, Blue Peter presenter being patronising to the viewers in exactly the way that she wouldn't be when playing with terrapins.
Each candidate gets to make a little speech, then they get cross-examined by the other candidates, then they take questions from the floor (where everyone wears a handy badge so you know they are all party supporters and you only get questions from the OTHER two parties).
But rather than taking turns at each stage, what they did was have Mr Brian do all three stages and then Mr Mayor Ken do all three and then Bonkers Boris do all three. It meant that it was more like watching three JOB INTERVIEWS rather than generating any sense of DEBATE between the candidates. MY suspicion is that this is because they could only afford one LECTERN!
Mr Brian was jolly good, in spite of this format not playing to his strengths. To see how good he REALLY is, you want to see him CHAIRING a meeting and fielding questions, often with a dryly WITTY response and always with the facts and policies at his fingertips. It is JOLLY IMPRESSIVE.
In the studio, he was not able to set the audience ALIGHT in the way that the two seasoned hacks were. That is his strength and his weakness – he is an ordinary person, with extraordinary talents. And not a huge gob with legs attached. (Also hair, if Boris.)
His best moments were when facing the audience, as he was able to make a real connection with them, even if they were supporters of his rivals. Possibly a note to the other parties: if you want to try and trip Mr Brian up, maybe best not to try to "surprise" him with details of his police career – he really was really, really good at that job, you know, and he WILL have answers.
The other candidates, though, were bad, and in quite different ways. The Mr Mayor started with a very GOOD pitch – no, really – "if you think I've not improved London then don't vote for me". The problem was he was REALLY cross-patchy if anyone actually referred to his record – promises that haven't been met, opinions that have been switched. At one stage he was asked why he had said a mayor should only serve two terms and was now running for a third: "this will be the last job I do in politics," he said – well yes, Mr Ken… unless you change you mind AGAIN and do another one! Also, it SERIOUSLY isn't on to say that youth crime in the city is because those kids' PARENTS grew up under the Queen Maggie government. I mean, obviously, the answer is because they have grown up under a Thatcherite government TOO: the Thatcherite governments of Lord Blairimort. But since he's broken ANOTHER promise and rejoined the Labour, Mr Ken can't seem to say THAT any more.
Boris is all FOR blaming Lord Blairimort, but doesn't really have any ANSWERS as to what to do. Bus conductors… no, maybe not bus conductors, that was Mr Ken believing his own press releases… well maybe SOME bus conductors. He didn't half old school tie himself in knots. And while it seems the Labour's record is fair game, he didn't have a lot of defence of his OWN, particularly on the subject of race ("let's just move on," hmmm) and then Mr Ken fair bludgeoned him with his voting record: number of speeches in the House about London – none; number of debates about London attended – none; number of votes cast on motions about London – none; number of MENTIONS of London – n… oh, one actually, but in passing and about something else. Oops.
More subtle were Mr Brian's quick puncturing of Boris's ego: "Boris, you need to pay attention, I've already said all that!" was one; and another was replying to the assertion that if you needed experience then no one would ever stand: "But Boris, we ARE standing and we're trying to choose the BEST candidate." Terrifyingly, though, Mr Boris still thinks that he can run London the same way that he ran the Spectator.
The only "news" coverage to come out of the debate was the somewhat unedifying SPAT between Boris and Ken over teenage murders. "What are you going to do about these 27 murders in the last year?" thundered Boris. "I'll try to get more of the buggers next year," Mr Ken IN NO WAY REPLIED!
And it is a SHAME, because the Mayoral race needs people to be serious about London.
This election is an important one, one that concerns the lives of six or more million people and the governance of the world's TOP city. It deserves better coverage than some rubbish late-night slot on ITV.
What it needs is a big advertising campaign to get people watching and a prime-time slot for a huge audience and, and, and… and a "behind-the-scenes" show to show the drama and the comedy of the teams producing the mayoral run… now, hang on: there's an IDEA there!
Friday, November 16, 2007
Day 2508: Life of Brian!
Tuesday:
Hooray for Brilliant Mr Brian!
I have not been VERY good at keeping my OBJECTIVITY on this one, have I? So I doubt that anyone will be surprised to learn that I am JOLLY PLEASED to hear that Mr Brian won the contest to be the Liberal Democrat candidate for the Mayor of London.
It was a stunning victory, with Mr Brian gaining 73% of first preference votes (that is ALMOST a shame, because the other two candidates were also VERY GOOD, but it does show that we pretty much all recognised THE MOST QUALIFIED LIBERAL for the job.)
I think that it is excellent that a policeperson with such a HIGH PROFILE background in public service should WANT to represent the Liberal Democrats. People often complain that their politicians no longer have REAL LIVES outside of the "Westminster Bubble" – that is not the case with Mr Brian who has BAGS of EXPERIENCE in the real world, dealing with real people and solving real problems. And it should be obvious to anyone that his police policy has always been a LIBERAL approach of reaching out to people, to make a safer community through cooperation and engagement.
He reached the heights of Deputy Assistant Commissioner by working his way up from the ranks, and has seen frontline service – not least during the Brixton riots – as well as guiding the famous Brixton experiment that ACTUALLY saw crime FALL.
Let's USE some of that experience and enthusiasm to:
Not a TOUGHIE is it!
Hooray for Brilliant Mr Brian!
I have not been VERY good at keeping my OBJECTIVITY on this one, have I? So I doubt that anyone will be surprised to learn that I am JOLLY PLEASED to hear that Mr Brian won the contest to be the Liberal Democrat candidate for the Mayor of London.
It was a stunning victory, with Mr Brian gaining 73% of first preference votes (that is ALMOST a shame, because the other two candidates were also VERY GOOD, but it does show that we pretty much all recognised THE MOST QUALIFIED LIBERAL for the job.)
I think that it is excellent that a policeperson with such a HIGH PROFILE background in public service should WANT to represent the Liberal Democrats. People often complain that their politicians no longer have REAL LIVES outside of the "Westminster Bubble" – that is not the case with Mr Brian who has BAGS of EXPERIENCE in the real world, dealing with real people and solving real problems. And it should be obvious to anyone that his police policy has always been a LIBERAL approach of reaching out to people, to make a safer community through cooperation and engagement.
He reached the heights of Deputy Assistant Commissioner by working his way up from the ranks, and has seen frontline service – not least during the Brixton riots – as well as guiding the famous Brixton experiment that ACTUALLY saw crime FALL.
Let's USE some of that experience and enthusiasm to:
- Make London safer – with more properly trained policepeople sent where they're needed to cut crime
- Make London greener – starting with powering the tube with renewable power
- Make London united – with an All Zone Mayor, not a Zone One Mayor
Not a TOUGHIE is it!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)