subtitle

...a blog by Richard Flowers

Tuesday, November 12, 2013

Day 4699 BONUS2: Millennium’s Doctor Who 50th Anniversary Top Trunks #21: KASTON IAGO

Still More Tuesday:



Age: Ask the Fendahl
Stories: 6… and 51 episodes of Blake’s Seven to be taken into consideration, yer honour
Awesomeness: I'd tell you... but then I'd have to shoot you!
Cuddles: Strictly business.
AKA: a nameless fugitive from the Federation, absolutely definitely not Kerr Avon, oh no indeedy. If asked about Maylin Tekker, deny everything. The immortal Paul Darrow.

Day 4699 BONUS: Millennium’s Doctor Who 50th Anniversary Top Trunks #20: KALENDORF

More Tuesday:



Age: Blake’s 7
Stories: 15
Awesomeness: Knight of Valyshaa
Cuddles: Mental contact only
AKA: Lord Tamworth (Storm Warning), Ed Morgan (Torchwood), Owen Edwards (Knights of God), Workman (Quatermass and the Pit), some bloke in a space opera… tis the other grand hero of seventies sci-fi Gareth Thomas

Day 4699: Millennium’s Doctor Who 50th Anniversary Top Trunks #19: CHESSENE OF THE FRANZINE GRIG

Tuesday:



Age: Ageless
Stories: 1
Awesomeness: Defeated the Sontarans. In bacofoil.
Cuddles: Embraces gourmand experience. And Dastari when necessary.
AKA: Supreme Commander Servalan, President of the Terran Federation, Ruler of the High Council, Lord of the Inner and Outer Worlds, High Admiral of the Galactic Fleets, Lord General of the Six Armies, and Defender of the Earth. Every fanboy’s fantasy – and proud of it - Jacqueline Pearce

Monday, November 11, 2013

Sunday, November 10, 2013

Day 4697: Millennium’s Doctor Who 50th Anniversary Top Trunks #17: DAVROS

Sunday:



Age: Slept through all of Dalek history
Stories: 18 (plus something called “War of the Daleks”)
Awesomeness: Inventor of the Daleks. Also the spork.
Cuddles: Nyder (denied)
AKA: Roy Tromelly, naughty, naughty Terry Molloy

Saturday, November 09, 2013

Day 4696: Millennium’s Doctor Who 50th Anniversary Top Trunks #16: THE DOCTOR

Saturday:



Age: Over 900 years
Stories: 101
Awesomeness: Weather You Like It Or Not
Cuddles: Makes Auntie Jennie Swoon
AKA: Commander Maxil, Bayban the Butcher, Paul Merroney, of course it’s the unforgettable Colin Baker

Friday, November 08, 2013

Day 4695 BONUS2: Millennium’s Doctor Who 50th Anniversary Top Trunks #15: ZOE HERIOT

Friday keeps coming:



Age: 21st Century
Stories: 23
Awesomeness: Kroton Brain Machine
Cuddles: the TARDIS console during explosions. Much prettier than a computer (yuck barf).
AKA: brilliant Wendy Padbury

Day 4695 BONUS: Millennium’s Doctor Who 50th Anniversary Top Trunks #14: MISS VICTORIA WATERFIELD

Friday again:



Age: Very Late Victorian
Stories: 17
Awesomeness: Scream Queen Supreme
Cuddles: We Will Now Change the Subject.
AKA: ageless Debbie Watling

Day 4695: Millennium’s Doctor Who 50th Anniversary Top Trunks #13: JAMES ROBERT McCRIMMON

Friday:


Age: Messed with by the Time Lords
Stories: 58
Awesomeness: World Shaper. Yes, that is a big one! Creag an tuire!
Cuddles: Samantha Briggs, Victoria, Zoe, the Doctor mostly…
AKA: Joe Sugden, our hero Frazer Hines

Thursday, November 07, 2013

Wednesday, November 06, 2013

Day 4693 BONUS3: Millennium’s Doctor Who 50th Anniversary Top Trunks #11: JOHN DORNEY

Enough Wednesdays already:



Age: Pretty Fluffy
Stories: 28
Awesomeness: Alexander the Great
Cuddles: Light at the End
AKA: Bob Dovie (might be significant ;), Henry Noone, Chancellery Guard Captain Henzil; author of (amazing, moving) The Rocket Men, (amazing, violent) Wrath of the Iceni, (amazing, er, incendiary) The Burning Prince, (amazing, toytastic Charlie) Solitaire, and Jago&Litefoot Beautiful Things (which they are).

Day 4693 BONUS2: Millennium’s Doctor Who 50th Anniversary Top Trunks #10: JOE LIDSTER

Still Wednesday:



Age: Disgustingly young
Stories: 14
Awesomeness: Wizard vs Aliens
Cuddles: Rapture
AKA: writer of TORCHWOOD: A Day In The Death (aka the good one); THE SARAH JANE ADVENTURES: Mark of the Berserker, The Mad Woman in the Attic, The Nightmare Man (aka the AMAZINGLY good one); The Rapture, Master, Terra Firma (aka the good one with DALEKS in it) and far, far too much more.

Day 4693 BONUS: Millennium’s Doctor Who 50th Anniversary Top Trunks #09: SIMON GUERRIER

Wednesday again:



Age: Recently Daddied
Stories: 19
Awesomeness: His Wizard is David Warner. Yes THAT David Warner.
Cuddles: Badgers
AKA: friend of Benny; author of The Time Travellers, and of best ever Dr Woo book (that has badgers in it) The Pirate Loop, and of outstanding Companion Chronicles Sara Kingdom Trilogy and Oliver Harper Trilogy (love those Cold Equations), and lots of other stuff. Makes short films, you know.

Day 4693: Millennium’s Doctor Who 50th Anniversary Top Trunks #08: GARY RUSSELL

Wednesday:



Age: Gold Star
Stories: 20 as author 135 as director
Awesomeness: In A James Bond Film. IN... a JAMES BOND... FILM
Cuddles: THE Big Finish
AKA: Editor of Doctor Who Magazine, Script Editor for BBC Death Zone, Producer of Doctor Who for Big Finish. Oh and he writes and acts too. Could probably do Strictly one day, as well.

Tuesday, November 05, 2013

Day 4692: Millennium’s Doctor Who 50th Anniversary Top Trunks #07: REDVERS FENN-COOPER

Tuesday:



Age: Well preserved
Stories: 1
Awesomeness: Finest Explorer in the Empire Galaxy
Cuddles: Would Accompany Control to the Crowned Saxe-Coburg's Garden Party
AKA: Lord Cranleigh, Lieutenant-Colonel Brook, Colonel Spindleton, the splendid Michael Dundonald Cochrane

Monday, November 04, 2013

Day 4691: Millennium’s Doctor Who 50th Anniversary Top Trunks #06: QUEEN ANGVIA

Monday:



Age: A Lady Doesn’t Tell
Stories: 1
Awesomeness: Beware the Pits!
Cuddles: Massive Weapons of Seduction
AKA: Belazs, Magenta, Livilla, Silvia Daisy Pouncer, Dame Patricia Quinn

Sunday, November 03, 2013

Day 4690 BONUS2: Millennium’s Doctor Who 50th Anniversary Top Trunks #05: BEN AARONOVITCH

Still Sunday:



Age: Younger than that Dr Woo
Stories: 6
Awesomeness: Unlimited Rice-Pudding
Cuddles: So Vast a Pile (sorry!)
AKA: Author of Remembrance of the Daleks. And The Also People. And, er, Battlefield. And PC Peter Grant. And we are still not worthy…

Day 4690 BONUS: Millennium’s Doctor Who 50th Anniversary Top Trunks #04: MARC PLATT

Sunday (again):



Age: Diamond (Geezer)
Stories: 28
Awesomeness: House of Lung
Cuddles: Going Spare
AKA: Author of Ghostlight. And Time’s Crucible. And Spare Parts. And Lungbarrow. And we are not worthy…

Day 4690: Millennium’s Doctor Who 50th Anniversary Top Trunks #03: ANDREW CARTMEL

Sunday:



Age: Golden (Emperor)
Stories: 21
Awesomeness: Masterplan
Cuddles: Scripted
AKA: The Script Doctor

Saturday, November 02, 2013

Monday, October 21, 2013

Day 4677: Ed Davey Throws Himself off Hinkley Point (metaphorically!)

Monday:

In a deal that’s literally radioactive, Her Majesty’s government in the form of Master Gideon and Bojo the Clown and, of course, Liberal Democrat point man Mr Ed Davey, have announced that there will be a new atomic power station (or two) at Hinkley Point in Somerset, built and run by the French, paid for by the Chinese and presumably using South African or Canadian uranium.

So, nice energy security there.

The price for their electricity has been set at £92.50 per kilowatt hour, which is about double the current wholesale price.

Not quite “too cheap to meter” either.

Okay, to be fair, if you bear in mind that the new nuke won’t start generating for at least ten years, that’s a (compound) rate of “only” about 7.5% increases every year.

On the one fluffy foot that almost seems moderate compared to the 8.2%, 9.2% and 10.4% price hikes announced this last week; on the other fluffy foot, it means the government are guessing that energy costs will continue to rise at two to three times the rate of inflation for the next decade.

Brrr!

It says a lot about the immediacy of the threat of global warming that a lot of very decent people who would previously have looked askance at the toxic legacy of the nuclear industry (where we’re still not quite sure where to put all the waste) have been convinced that the power of the atom is a clean green alternative to burning lots of carbon when it comes to facing up to keeping the lights on. Not that Gideon or Bojo believe in climate change, so what’s their excuse?

Personally, I still believe that this is a distraction from serious investment in our own renewable resources.

Having worried for ages about the ability of President Vlad the Bad Putin of Russia turning off the gas taps and freezing us (like he did to Ukraine), we seem remarkably blasé about letting Great Britain’s off switch fall into the hands of the Central Committee of the People’s Republic. Better hope that those notoriously unforgiving Mandarins have forgotten all about the opium wars, eh.

I think we should be making more of our own power and not buying in heavy elements to burn up. I should prefer to see at least one, and preferably three, tidal bores being tapped and a whole lot more offshore wind. And to counter those blowhards who protest that “the wind doesn't blow all the time”, time to dust off the plans for that Exmore pumped-storage hydroelectric scheme, and a few more, so we can store power from when the wind when it’s there and release it when the wind drops.

Because, frankly, I’d rather rely on when the wind blows than risk, er, “When The Wind Blows”.



Having talked about energy prices, though, there was for once a very good point in the weekend’s Grauniad (although heavily disguised as a bizarre attack on Morrisey’s autobiography).

The obsession among media and political types – archbishops and Mr Milipede included – with these 9% hikes in the price of energy is the obsession of people who already own houses and is blotting out the much more serious 9% average rise in the cost of rents for people who do not.
British Gas customers – that is eight million households – face an average increase of £123 a year. Bad, but nothing compared with the £835 increase a year for the 8.3 million households in rented accommodation – £835!
In this context, the second phase of Master Gideon’s Help-to-Buy scheme might as well be called Help-to-Buy-to-Let and is likely to drive up house prices and therefore rents even more, trapping millions of people even further below the first rung of the housing ladder.

The prospect of a meltdown at a nuclear power station might be the stuff of nightmares, but it’s the meltdown in the housing market that is truly terrifying.

Tuesday, October 08, 2013

Day 4663: Cap’n Clegg Replacing Diplomats with Warriors

Monday:


It’s reshuffle day, and there’s been much surprise over the departure of widely-admired smooth operator Michael Moore from the Cabinet role of Secretary for Scotland to what we laughingly describe as the “lower guest suite” of Castle Carmichael (hot and cold running water… down the walls of your cell), and the equally unexpected defenestration of ultra-orange* Jeremy Browne, perceived as close to the Cap’n but also blamed for not stopping those pesky Tories’ “Go Home” vans.

But what they have in common is both being conducive to smooth relationships with the Conservatories; while their replacements are a touch more… abrasive.

Norman Baker, the battling biker, taking over at the Home Office will, hopefully, be a shock to the system of anyone planning abolishing the Human Rights Act. The news that Theresa May is “spitting tacks” at his appointment can only be greeted with smiles in Liberal camps. And having Susan Kramer take up the mantle at Transport might well be the Lib Dems setting a marker against any Conservatory about-face on Heathrow runways.

And the laird of Carmichael, as a former Chief Whip, is used to – as the saying goes – putting a bit of stick about. Bless Alistair: he greeted the news of my daddies’ engagement with a rumbled: “I hope ye’ll be every bit as happi as we ave bin.” Which we’re sure wasn’t a threat. As MP for Orkney and Shetland he’s well placed – geographically as well as figuratively – to say to Alex Salmond: “we don’t want ruling by a distant elite… in Edinburgh either!”


Alistair at an informal session in the Whips' office


Caron is right that it’s a loss to see Mr Moore go – but perhaps a role in preparing for any future Coalition negotiations could be placed in his capable hands. Alas, poor Jeremy, the party may well be more cheering the drafting of your replacement.

What does it mean? Well you hardly need to cast the runes: there’s a General Election coming in less than eighteen months, simples.

Featured on Liberal Democrat Voice

*Some might say turned out to be more of a Lemon others that he went native and became a Mandarin.

Friday, October 04, 2013

Day 4658: Is Mr Cameron Laying A Trap for the Liberal Democrats?

Wednesday:

Firstly, congratulations to the Daily Heil for granting Mr Milipede free publicity to totally overshadow the guff our pie-faced Prime Monster came out with at the climax to the Conservatories conference.

But to be honest, David Cameron – Mr Balloon – was probably grateful for anything overshadowing the uninspiring, reheated, frankly tired Thatcherite rhetoric he was coming out with. He looks like he’s decided the next election is a lost cause and he’s gone back to shoring up the base against UKIP

I mean “Land of Hope is Tory”? Are you really going to say that, Prime Minister? Really?

It’s like a line out of “House of Cards” (BBC version): Do you remember the bit where Urquhart (and we the audience) look on and mock at Conservatory conference as an Apprentice-line of Leadership wannabes troop onto the platform to deliver what they think will be the rhetoric to stir the troops to their cause. Like the Britain’s Got Talent without… no, actually, like Britain’s Got Talent. “It’s the right way… the right… way!”. Sad.

The whole conference has been conducted under a banner of “For Hardfaced Badwords”… sorry that should read “For Hardworking Families”.

(I remember the meeting with Cap’n Clegg where we were among Lib Dem members who had words with him about adopting that language – and to be fair, even then his idea of “family” was a broad and inclusive one, not the nasty narrow Conservatory prescription, but he accepted that it could trap him in the same frame and he’s worked hard to avoid it since. Liberal Democrats really can do better than this. Er.)

And there was Master Gideon, pumping up the housing market to the refrain of “I’m Forever Blowing Bubbles”, saying it was time to end the “something for nothing” culture. I look forward to his announcement that Inheritance Tax will be going up to 100%.

But it’s all such a long, looooong way from “Hug a Huskie” or “Let the Sunshine In”, isn’t it.

And of course we have to oppose this monstrous idea that people under twenty-five need to be “motivated” into jobs that don’t exist with the threat of homelessness and starvation.

But here’s the “trap” – can we really pledge to block that without reminding every young person in the country of the last pledge that we made?

Is Mr Balloon’s gambit that as soon as Cap’n Clegg raises this horrible policy, he will fling the tuition fees debacle back in his face and say: “well, you can’t trust the Lib Dems can you”?

In fact the policy is so obviously absurd that it almost look like it’s there as a pre-prepared sacrificial lamb for the next round of Coalition negotiations. We are going to have to make it very clear that dropping that policy is a prerequisite for walking in the door, or we’re going to be in the position of trading away something that’s actually important just to kill it.

In fact I’m wondering whether we don’t need one or two policies in the “you’ve got to be kidding” category ourselves – free moon trips for teenagers, perhaps, and fish-fingers and custard on demand for all Eleventh Doctor fans – before we get serious about abolishing ATOS.

Mind you, at this rate it will be Mr Milipede we’ll be negotiating with anyway. And the message for Mr Balloon? Shut Your Trap.

Featured on Liberal Democrat Voice

Thursday, October 03, 2013

Day 4657: If Theresa May Was A Terrorist – a Thought Experiment

Tuesday:


This week Theresa May accused Cap’n Clegg of Hating Britain* for putting the Human Rights of terrorists and criminals above ordinary people.

That’s because Ms May does not understand that Human Rights are not to protect terrorists, they are to protect people who get called “terrorists”.

So, as an experiment, let us imagine that Theresa May is a terrorist.

It’s not that hard to imagine… she’s the head of an organisation that preaches messages of hate to frighten people, snatches people off planes for intimidation, targets certain people in the streets and, of course, occasionally shoots innocent people dead.

Er, okay, this is just a thought experiment, isn’t it?

Anyway, since Ms May doesn’t believe “terrorists” deserve Human Rights, then let’s see how well she does without them, shall we?

Let’s call her a “terrorist”.

Shouldn’t we have to prove that?

Well, a Fair Trial is one of her Human Rights, so I guess not.

So we’ll lock her up.

Oh, no we can’t do that because Liberty is one of her Human Rights… oh hang on.

But shouldn’t she be allowed to hire a lawyer at least?

Well, we’ll just seize all her money. No protection of Property without your Human Rights you see.

But we can’t just do that because of what she thinks… can we?

As it happens Freedom of Thought is another of those pesky Human Rights.

Isn’t she allowed to protest?

Aaaaactually, guess what, Free Speech is one of her Human Rights, so that’s gagged her too.

You can’t actually gag her though, that’s cruel and unusual!

But, since you mention it, Protection from Torture and Degrading Treatment is, guess what, a Human Right.

If you carry on like this you’ll end up killing her!

Funnily enough, I was just coming to that…



So Ms May, if you want to abolish the Human Rights Act, which rights don’t you want? It’s not hard; there’s only ten of them:

1. the Right to Life
2. the Right to Protection from Torture and Degrading Treatment
3. the Right to Protection from Slavery
4. the Right to Liberty and Freedom
5. the Right to a Fair Trial and No punishment without Law
6. the Right to respect for Private Life, including the right to Marry
7. the Right to Freedom of Thought, Religion and Belief
8. the Right to Free Speech and Free Assembly and Protest
9. the Right to Freedom from Discrimination
10. the Right to Protection of your Property


*Or was that was the Daily Heil.

Featured on Liberal Democrat Voice

Thursday, September 26, 2013

Day 4651: A Reminder Of Why Hard Labour Cannot Be Allowed to Change the Argument On the Economy

Wednesday:

This week I thought Ed Balls got something right.

It’s a good idea to get Labour’s budget plans audited by the Office for Budget Responsibility. The Liberal Democrats have long asked the IFS to check our figures; it would be very useful to voters to have an independent eye scrutinise the numbers of all the parties to have choice based on priorities not dogma. And it would make Mr Balls spell out Hard Labour’s policies well in advance of the election.

I just don’t think that makes him the fiscal paragon that Polly Toytown seems to think he is.

Iron Balls, Polly? Really?

Yes, I know I shouldn’t read the Grauniad. Especially not Pollyanna Toytown and her increasingly absurd hagiography of the Hard Labour hierarchy.

(Sunday’s Andrew Marrmite paper review where Polly’s partisan points are repeatedly punctured by Matthew Parris is moderately hilarious. It would have been funnier if she realised he was taking the proverbial.)

Ed Balls, Mr Frown’s representative on Earth and a very central part of the former Chancellor and Prime Monster’s extended campaign of attrition against anyone who looked at him funny, remains a hugely divisive figure and probably the Achilles heel of Mr Milipede’s operation. For all his undoubted political skills – as a prophet, he’s made so many claims about the economy that some of them were bound to come right – he’s played fast and loose at the Treasury (not to mention with his colleagues’ careers) too often for him to be trusted.

But this denialism about Labour’s responsibilities for what they did in government for thirteen years is all part of their plan to pin the blame on the Coalition and snatch back power in 2015. And we cannot let it stand.

The short form is “You can’t blame Labour for the Worldwide recession”, which sounds superficially reasonable, but it’s hiding some of the key facts.

It’s a bit like this:

“I went driving too fast in a snowstorm and crashed the car, but you can’t blame me for the snowstorm.”

Well, no, but you could see that it was snowing and you were driving too fast.

“But you can’t blame me for the snowstorm.”

It’s a strawman argument.

And it keeps being regurgitated like a form of self-hypnosis so that left-wing commentators, left-leaning voters and Hard Labour themselves can all permit themselves to forget that the biggest crash ever happened on their watch and excuse themselves of their culpability.

Here’s some of Polly’s take on it.

“Some primal political myths are now firmly lodged in the public mind.”
But that’s not going to stop them trying to use “big lie” techniques to try to dislodge them. Repeat this Labour-apologism often enough and maybe someone will start to believe it. What’s sinister is the way it starts out appealing to the conspiracy-theory freak tendency in the anti-establishment by accusing the accepted version of events of being “myth”.

“Labour's public spending didn't crash the economy.”
No, it was Labour’s failure to regulate the banks that crashed the economy, coupled with Labour actively encouraging a boom based on borrowing; Labour’s public spending just meant that we were in a far, far poorer position to recover afterwards. Also, who said “we’ve abolished boom and bust”?

“Labour was borrowing less than it inherited from the Tories.”
Well that’s just plain wrong because Polly’s forgotten to include the qualifier “in 2007 before the crash” from her crib card. Borrowing in 2008, ’09 and ’10 was astronomical.

But even if we give her a pass on the borrowing in 2007, what she’s saying is that at the height of the biggest boom in history when every Keynesian on the planet would tell you you should have been running a surplus, Labour were still borrowing. Yes, the Conservatives had badly lost control of the economy by 1997; that’s kind of why they lost, isn’t it. But since when did being a little less rubbish than John Major and Norman Lamont become the acme of economic prudence? It was actually by sticking to Ken Clarke’s plans in their first term – as they promised but no one, especially the Conservatories believed they’d do – that enabled Labour to pay down a reasonable sum off the national debt; but from 2001 onwards Gordon Brown did nothing but add to our borrowings.

“Osborne inherited a growing economy from Alistair Darling”
Darling borrowed 10% of GDP to generate 2% GDP growth. Any idiot could do that! But it’s not remotely sustainable is it, and of course the wheels came off again as soon as his artificial stimulus reversed. It was Darling, remember, who cancelled the capital investment program, Darling who promised “cuts deeper than Thatcher’s” and he was planning a post-election VAT rise to 20% to make the sums add up too. To the shame of both of them, Gideon being Chancellor made very little difference.

Those three points – “it was broken when we found it”, “we cut borrowing (if you squint at the figures)” and “Darling’s legacy of growth” – set on perpetual rinse and repeat are the clearest warning (if Damien McBride’s book was not enough) that Hard Labour have not rid themselves of the habit of spin.

Wednesday, September 25, 2013

Day 4650: Mr Ed is Mr Freeze (just don’t mention the VATman and Robbin’)

Tuesday:

Just when you thought Hard Labour conference was going along nicely, copycatting all our Liberal Democrat policies – tax cuts for low-income workers, check; paid for by a mansion tax, check; more apprentices, check; more affordable and social houses, check; garden cities, check; votes at sixteen, check; net nannying, check (no, hang on, we voted to refer that back!) – when along comes Mr Milipede’s leader’s speech with a totally unexpected policy to capture the headlines freeze (for twenty months) the prices that companies can charge for energy.

I don’t know whether it’s a work of genius or lunacy.

It’s clearly pitched as a “game-changer”, after the fashion of Master Gideon’s 2007 Conference announcement of a cut in Inheritance Tax for dead millionaires that so derailed Mr Frown’s plans for a snap general election. As such it’s much more political than practical.

In practice it’s a four-and-a-half billion pound windfall tax on the profits of the energy companies, distributed directly to energy users.

(Obviously that’s a hugely regressive tax giveaway as it will benefit rich people with large houses and big companies with large energy bills much more than the less well off, an “energy cut for millionaires” as Hard Labour might call it, if the Coalition had suggested it.)

There’s also a serious question of who pays this four-and-a-half billion pounds. Four-and-a-half billion pounds is quite a lot of money and it’s going to come from somewhere. And the answer isn’t just “the energy companies”, because companies are just people really, and money that companies make gets paid out, either in salaries or to the shareholders. It’s not just the money paid to shareholders that is affected by this profit hit – companies may choose to cut bonuses, curb salaries, or just plain axe jobs to claw back some of the cost of Mr Milipede’s largesse with other people’s cash. But let’s assume that it mainly hit’s the shareholders: that’s fat cats in the city right? Well again, not really.

Of the “big six”, Centrica and SSE plc (formerly Scottish and Southern Energy) are British-owned, quoted on the London Stock Exchange and are FTSE100 companies; npower, as a subsidiary of RWE, and E.ON are usually described as German-owned, but like their British equivalents they are public companies listed on the German stock exchange and are members of the blue chip DAX index; similarly Scottish Power are a subsidiary of Spanish company Iberdrola who are quoted on the Spanish IBEX 35. The one of those kids doing her own thing is EDF (Électricité de France), Europe’s largest energy supplier, providing power to more than a fifth of the continent, including us (Mr Farage, take note). Although theoretically privatised and quoted on the Euronext exchange, the French government remains the largest shareholder, owning 85% of the shares.

Crudely speaking our energy generating capacity is owned by: 23% British, 34% German, 9% Spanish, 17% French and 17% smaller companies (including the Irish EDS and France’s GDF-Suez).

But because they’re almost all publically quoted, anyone with a European portfolio – and that means most British pension funds and British Insurance companies – would ultimately be affected. Yes, a fair amount of that pain would be “exported” to our no doubt very grateful friends in the European Union, so that’s fine isn’t it – let’s shaft French and German pensioners instead of our own.

And don’t think the French government wouldn’t be narked. I mean it’s not like they’ve got a history of hauling Britain in front of the European Courts… oh…

But the practical considerations of setting your face against the worldwide trend in energy inflation or launching another raid on pension funds or pissing off Europe again, even without getting into the legal challenges from the six power companies that have sewn up the UK energy market, are almost neither here nor there.

It’s bound to be very popular, isn’t it. The energy companies, after all, are disliked almost as much as Mr Milipede (maybe not as much as Cap’n Clegg). More importantly, it’s going to be popular between now and the general election in May 2015, and never mind whether or not Hard Labour ever have to implement it. (Remember, Master Gideon’s “Tax Cut for Dead Millionaires” was merrily traded away in Coalition negotiations in 2010!).

And it helps to move the agenda onto the territory that Hard Labour want to play on: away from the wreckage of the economy that they left in 2010 (and whether or not the recovery is enough to mean the Coalition have fixed it) and onto their so-called “cost of living crisis” where people as individuals feel very small and disempowered against these large (and largely privatised) companies that seem only to put their prices up and up, and widening the gap between the end of the money and the end of the month.

(Hard Labour’s part in setting up these massive near-monopolies – the mergers that turned a “Big Ten” energy companies into a “Big Six”, say, taking place between 2006 and 2010… who was Energy and Climate Change Secretary at that time? – all quietly swept under the carpet. Just as with shifting their complicity with the Banks for the crash, “Big Business = Tories” sells too easily for any blame to stick.)

Clearly it’s better to be known as “Red Ed” than as “Mr Nobody”, and – like Master Osborne – with one bound Mr Milipede has re-established his reputation. He makes a very good story out of joining the dots, too, from his “squeezed middle” via “ predators v producers” to this. (Though I’m ever so reminded of the Dr Woo story “The Curse of Fenric”: not because of “something nasty rising up from the sea” in Brighton, but for taking disparate and unconnected plot points and post-facto justifying them as a “story arc in retrospect”.)

He’s certainly created “clear red water” between himself and the Conservatories (possibly making Cap’n Clegg’s positioning of the Liberal Democrats as the moderate middle look wise in the process). And ironically – after a summer spent trying to distance himself from the Unions that got him elected – he’s made the Unions very happy with this apparent rediscovery of Socialism. Or at least Statism.

Big, sweeping State interventions are the stuff of Old Hard Labour’s Sixties and Seventies heyday, when then Industry Secretary (and now darling of the Left) Tony Benn would impose massive mergers on British industrial sectors – computing, motor cars – and… well how did that work out? Or to put it another way, why don’t we have a British computing or motor car industrial base anymore?

(There’s got to be something wrong with the thinking of a man who diagnoses the problem as “the Civil Service stands in the way of progressive change” and the cure as “Nationalise all industry… into the hands of the Civil Service”. Maybe get back to us on that, Tony.)

There’s even an element of the Social Market in it that might appeal to Liberal Democrat hearts – note that even I’m not wholly ruling this out as an idea – with Milipede justifying his sweeping – and entirely arbitrary – market intervention as a “correction” when the market has “failed”. How exactly has the market “failed” though? Repeated MMC investigations have failed to turn up evidence that the power companies are collaborating. And Tesco makes a higher profit margin that several of the “Big Six”. Are we suggesting that the government should freeze Tesco’s prices too? I suppose, every little helps.

But it doesn’t just end there, does it. If Mr Milipede can wave his wand and, on a whim, freeze the price of one group of supposedly private companies, why not wave it again over the price of, say, houses? Everyone agrees that house prices are too high, so how would you feel if Prime Monster Milipede just declared that the value of your house was halved? (Not your mortgage, just the house. Can you say: whoops negative equity?) Not similar? Well, people will have paid money for shares in the power companies; arbitrarily freezing the income of those companies cuts the value of those shares just like that too. Pity if it was your pension pot that suddenly fell short.

This is where we get to the real problem – and the real danger - of Mr Milipede’s rabbit-from-the-hat policy announcement. In the Sixties and Seventies, the government thought it could “pick winners” and it did it very badly. Mr Milipede thinks that he can “pick villains”. What if he is just as wrong?

When that other Phoney Tony, Lord Blairimort (what is it with Tony B’s?) got into Downing St, New Hard Labour discovered that pulling the levers of government didn’t change things as quickly as they wanted, if at all. Their solution? More levers!

Mr Milipede appears to have discovered the Mother of all levers.

It is genius. But it is lunacy.

PS:


Edited to add:

Beaten to the punch by Alisdair at Lib Dem Voice with similar points: "terrible economics but excellent politics".

Factcheck response: "skeptical".

Sunday, September 15, 2013

Day 4641: A Doctor Woo Metaphor for Conference

Sunday:

If the Conservatories are the dastardly DALEKS… and Hard Labour are the soulless CYBERMEN… are the Liberal Democrats:

a) The SILURIANS – green-tinged former rulers of Earth; now caught in a suspended animation time-warp…

b) The SONTARANS – bit shouty; always keen for a fight; treated as a bit of a joke by everyone else…

or

c) The WEEPING ANGELS – kill you with kindness; change position suddenly when you’re not looking; can’t even look at each other…

Monday, September 02, 2013

Tuesday, August 27, 2013

Day 4622: Syrians versus Badgers

Tuesday:

One day, I would hope, people will stop thinking that the solution to a problem is to throw ordinance at it.

But apparently that’s not today. No, today we are talking about curing cows by shooting badgers and curing a civil war by lobbing bombs into Syria.

Since being dead means they don’t have TB any more this is supposed to be “better for the badgers too”; presumably Lord Blairimort – hmm, “TB” – will pop up shortly to make the same argument about Syrians.

In either case, we’re in danger of making the cure worse than the disease.

Can we please resist this drift into military action in Syria.

It seems that a successful intervention in Libya has cleansed military minds of the cataclysm that we brought about by wading into Iraq.

This accelerating drum beat to war is being driven by some pretty horrific stories in our newspapers and on the television.

Why do our media seem to care more about massacres in Syria when we barely hear a report on the ongoing conflicts in Africa, the more distant parts of Asia and Latin America? Partly, I suspect, it’s immediacy, novelty even; partly it’s because of the effect on our so-called “national interests”, our allies in Turkey and Israel being closely affected by the conflict, and then there are all those nearby oilfields (although of course the war in the African Congo is paid for by the mining rights for those rare metals that we need for our smart-phones and sadPads); partly even it may be that after years of reporting on “Middle Eastern Crises” (from Cyprus to Yom Kippur War, from Lebanon to Intifada; from Iraq to Arab Spring) there’s just a core of embedded, committed journalists there with on-the-ground knowledge and stories to tell.

But are highly emotive stories of the horror of civil war entirely the best way to be deciding on whether we throw our armed forces into yet another conflict?

It would be nice to think that everyone agrees that gassing civilian populations is an act of evil. Although clearly not everyone agrees or it wouldn’t happen.

But do we really protect people from bullies by being the bigger bully?

We certainly don’t seem to be willing to take these people out of harm’s way by offering them safe haven thousands of miles from the conflict in the United Kingdom. No, it appears we’d much rather they stayed there in the firing line while we take some pot-shots at the Syrian army to “give them a taste of their own medicine”. (Not, obviously the poison gas kind of medicine.)

“There are no good outcomes in Syria,” we are warned, “but non-intervention is the worst.”

Really?

Because this civil war is the outcome of nothing but interventions, ever since the “great powers” decided to carve up the Ottoman Empire, and since perfidious Albion (that’s us, by the way) promised the same small acreage to about a dozen different mutually-antagonistic factions, we’ve kept on sticking our noses into the Middle East, picking sides for proxies in the Cold War, supporting dictators because they promised to keep the oil flowing, supplying billions of dollars (to Israel, to Egypt, we don’t discriminate) with which their military can buy weapons from us for “self-defence” in order to support jobs at home without thought as to where those weapons might one day be pointed (that means at us, by the way).

For decades, Presidents and Prime Monsters have talked about “draining the swamp” of the Middle East. Instead, we just keep pumping in more mud.

There are hard questions to ask: Can we do anything? Can we actually stop this sort of thing happening? Are we sure we will make things better? Regardless of what good we do, what harm will we also cause? What will be the consequences?

If we say we will intervene, will this provoke the Assad regime to greater atrocities in an attempt to “win” before our forces can reach the battlegrounds? Or will our tacit support of the rebels drive them to recklessly assault government-held positions in the assumption that we will arrive to back them up? How will Vladimir Putin’s Russia – already feeling isolated, ignored, insulted and impotent – react? Does the West’s reputation for selfishly hoarding the World’s resources and randomly blowing up any bits of the planet that get “uppity” about it really need any more sullying?

Civil war is very rarely the best route from dictatorship to democracy; replacing one regime with another does not a liberal democracy create. What you need is time, rule of law, stability, broader education and even a dollop of affluence. But imposing a democracy from outside is even worse. You cannot, after all, impose self-determination.

John Stuart Mill, writing in 1859, had a Few Words to say on Non-Intervention [pdf]. At a time when the British Empire saw itself as a “civilising influence” he may have rather gone along with that attitude towards “barbarians”, but when it came to civil war, his answer was this:
“When the contest is only with native rulers, and with such native strength as those rulers can enlist in their defence, the answer I should give to the question of the legitimacy of intervention is, as a general rule, No.”
And he explains:
“The reason is, that there can seldom be anything approaching to assurance that intervention, even if successful, would be for the good of the people themselves.”


As for the badgers: I am constitutionally against the assassination of fluffy animals!

But even if I wasn’t, would it not be better to await the outcome of the vaccination trials currently being conducted in Wales? As I recall the evidence from the last time a cull was tried was that the cases of bovine TB actually went up, (presumably because badgers are territorial and wiping them out allows for greater movement of badgers and hence greater chance of infection and cross-infection) and even DEFRA’s own scientists only estimate a reduction in new TB cases of 12% to 16%.

Killing things hardly seems to be a solution.

Who’d have thought!


PS:

There is an E-petition to stop the badger cull (care of Dr Brian May!).

Having already gained more than double the 100,000 signatures threshold this ought to be debated in Parliament, were they not all off on recess, but please continue to sign to increase the pressure on them to do so.

Thursday, August 22, 2013

Day 4616: No Shit Sherlock

Wednesday:


Cool as a Cumberpatch

I have to confess that I am disappointed that Cap'n Clegg's response to the detention of David Miranda and the destruction of data at the Graniad has been measured rather than robust. I can understand it - and Nick Thornton makes a good case for considering the two cases separately - but I'm still less than happy that the case for Civil Liberties has to be made by a silent protest from a famous actor when there are Liberal Democrats in government who should be doing so.

A bit less measured and an bit more Mark Pack and Julian Huppert please. And where exactly IS Jeremy Browne?

PS:

Well done old friend to Mr Nigel Booth for letter in the Graun.

Monday, August 19, 2013

Day 4614: Miranda (Not the Funny One)

Monday:

Mr David Miranda, a passenger en route from Berlin to Brazil and not entering the UK, has been detained at Heathrow Airport under the Terrorism Act 2000, and held for the full nine hours allowed under that Act before being released. His telephone, laptop, games console, DVDs and other electronica have been confiscated.

Mr Miranda is not a terrorist suspect.

This is an abuse of power. This is why Labour were wrong.

We need to be abolishing these laws and Labour’s Yvette Cooper needs to be apologising for her part in enacting them, not demanding answers like a victim.

Hard Labour’s terrorism laws and security theatre are wide open to this kind of abuse and this proves it. Their excuse at the time – “we would never abuse these laws” – we already shown to be hollow, if not downright mendacious, when Walter Wolfgang was arrested at their own Party Conference. But they are shown to be absurd in their cries “oh the Evil Coalition” – and who left the “Evil Coalition” with all these power to abuse, eh? And who warned you not to do anything so bloody stupid?

Nevertheless, as members of the Coalition, this certainly happened on “our watch” and for that we are to blame.

The first question has to be whether we are directly to blame: we urgently need to discover who ordered this and why.

“Who?” is either a minister who needs to be made accountable, or someone in the police or security services possibly acting ultra vires.

The Grauniad is quick to conflate the police/borders authority/security services who detained Mr Miranda with “the UK government”. (Irrelevantly to the illegality of his detention but possibly not unconnectedly Mr Miranda is the partner of one of the Grauniad journalists reporting on the whistle-blower Edward Snowdon and the American NSA, and “intimidation” has quickly – but plausibly – been suggested as a motive.)

I suspect that that is slack reporting rather than bias, but as a first step we need to establish (in decreasing order of culpability) if anyone in government – presumably the Home Office – ordered this, or were aware of this before the fact, or during the fact.

“Why?” then leads to questions of greater UK involvement in the whole Prism/email hacking scandal, or perhaps someone being too eager to do a favour for our American cousins. The possibility of the “phone call from the State Department” being at the root of this reminds us of the dangerously subservient Blair-era relationship between US and UK.

But even if we’re not guilty of direct abuse of power, we have still failed to do our part to prevent it by rolling back the police state that the last government was intent on putting into place.

Our Freedoms Bill was watered down and we have failed to move the Civil Liberties agenda on far enough. Theresa May’s Home Office in particular is rife with “little initiatives” to try and increase rather than decrease the powers that police and security services already have. Every success is treated as proof they need these powers; every failure is cited as evidence that they need more power.

Labour and Conservatives have both demonstrated that they cannot be trusted with our Rights and Liberties, except that you can trust them to take liberties with your rights while handing over more money and power to the security industry.

As Liberal Democrats even we cannot be trusted with this sort of power. That is why we must urgently press to repeal those powers to take the temptation away.

We need to take a stand on this.

Wednesday, August 07, 2013

Day 4602: Are UKIP Racist or Is It just Everything They Say?

Wednesday:

After Eight on this morning’s Today Programme on Radio 4, there was a discussion of Trolling on the Ask.fm website that has been linked to the suicide of a young person.

“How,” asked the incredulous Justin, “can people use such language?”

Well, you don’t even need directing to the BEAR PIT of the Grauniad’s “Comment is Free (of conscience)” or the BBC’s own “Have Your S(l)ay” comments, when fewer than twenty minutes earlier, they’d had their own Jim Naughty egging on racist language from UKIP MEP Godfrey “Bongo Bongo” Bloom, who denies we have a duty to other people if they're in other countries.

When challenged that his language was “a wee bit offensive”, the unrepentant xenophobe said:

"If I've offended anybody in Bongo Bongo Land I will write to their ambassador at the Court of St James."

To which I answer: Well, in that case I challenge you to prove that even ONE pound has been spent on the citizens of “Bongo Bongo Land” or admit that you are a TOTAL FRAUD AND LIAR.

Obviously, this UKIP nut has been encouraged to play this ever-more unpleasant populist charade by the STUPID AND OFFENSIVE “Go Home Vans” that some MORON at the Home Office has had driving round London. And the Border Agency’s “stop-and-search checkpoints” that were even TOO RACIST FOR UKIP!

(And actually, Hard Labour have contributed to this as well with Mr Milipede’s “apology” for “getting it wrong on immigration”.)

Liberal Democrats were TOO SLOW to condemn those things, and we must stop them ever happening again!

When Mr "Something of the Night" Howard hissed “It’s not racist to talk about immigration”, the country responded with a resounding: “It IS the way YOU talk about immigration!”

How FAR we have FALLEN!

Liberal Democrats, we NEED to be the INTERNATIONALISM Party – we need to be the PRO-Immigration, PRO-Europe, and PRO-International Development Party!

We need to stand up and say (as Mr Vince DOES say) Immigration is GOOD for Great Britain!

We need to stand up for EUROPE and say that it is GOOD for JOBS and TRADE and TRAVEL and PEACE.

And we need to stand up and say International Aid is NOT “just” charity – it is our FIRST LINE OF DEFENCE. If we can help the poorest in the World live in even SLIGHTLY healthier conditions, get clean water and vaccinations, then we PROTECT OURSELVES against PANDEMICS. If we intervene with education and development to make impoverished countries even SLIGHTLY better off, we REDUCE the PRESSURE on people to become ECONOMIC MIGRANTS and REFUGEES. If we ACT to reduce TENSIONS in the most difficult regions in the World, we PREVENT international FLASHPOINTS and CONFLICT from becoming WAR and TERRORISM.

And of course, DECENT people would recognise that as one of the RICHEST countries ON EARTH, even if that WASN’T as a result of PILLAGING the PLANET during our IMPERIAL past, we would still, of course, have DUTY to offer help to the less well off.

It’s what we call OLD-FASHIONED BRITISH DECENCY!

So Godfrey Bloom is not JUST saying things that are EVIL and OFFENSIVELY RACIST, they are DEEPLY STUPID and ANTI-BRITISH too!

If Britain’s Favourite Banker, Mr Nigel Farrago, is SERIOUS about his claim that he will “purge” UKIP of racists, then I hope Mr Bloom will get more than just a "slap on the wrist" and should soon be seeking new employment. Not that I’m VERY impressed by the way UKIP keep on getting RACISTS and FRAUDSTERS and “hilarious characters” elected and then firing them and then claiming “ooh, no, it’s not US, we got rid of the bad apples!”

Clue: STOP picking BAD APPLES in the FIRST PLACE!

Meanwhile, the PROPER political Parties – and the MEDIA – need a KICK UP THE BACKSIDE about the kind of LANGUAGE that is acceptable.

Trolling on the Internet does NOT happen in isolation; it’s merely more EXTREME, but its origins lie in the way we are willing to talk to each other in public. Never mind “political correctness gone mad”, this is political correctness just GONE!

UKIP deserves NO RESPECT because they treat PEOPLE with NO RESPECT.

But the same goes for the rest of us too. We need to be BETTER to each other, people. We need to be better.

Featured on Liberal Democrat Voice

Monday, August 05, 2013

Day 4599: EX-EFFING-TERMINATE or The Many Many Curses of Fatal Death

Sunday:

Peter Capaldi is the new Doctor Woo!



After all the rumours and speculation, we can hardly believe our luck. It can’t be him, can it? But it is!

We’re absolutely delighted. He’s a brilliant actor with a hugely exciting body of work to show it. Yes, he’s hilarious, terrifying and even occasionally worthy of pathos as Malcolm Tucker the monstrous face of modern politics’ spin machine, but go watch “The Hour”, “The Crow Road”, “Torchwood: Children of Earth”, “Prime Suspect*” or (as we did last night) “Neverwhere” for many different faces that’ll convince you of his range and versatility.

He’s been greeted such almost-Universal acclaim that I can’t help but feel for Matt Smith all over again, whose announcement was followed by a wholly undeserved backlash. Of course, Matt went on to reply to that in the best way possible: by being a brilliant, brilliant Doctor. I’m reminded of dear Carry John who suffered for a long time from no one having told her just how very, very good she was as Dr Liz Shaw. Thank goodness Peter told Matt he was brilliant straight after “The Eleventh Hour”. And Matt’s message to his successor was really sweet in turn.

It’s true that “older” is the least dangerous of the choices that the production team could have made. When David Tennant was leaving, we’d hoped that his successor would be the first black Doctor* – the name on everyone’s lips being Peter’s “Neverwhere” co-star Paterson Joseph. (Did I mention you should check out “Neverwhere”; it’s frightfully good, and Paterson Joseph’s Marquis de Carabas is frightfully Doctorish.) This time around, I did just slightly wonder if it wasn’t going to be the right time for a woman to get the role – what with the Doctor having nearly died in “Let’s Kill Hitler” and been revived with all of River Song’s regeneration energy, I wondered if that wasn’t a set-up for him to become a her.

But let us not let might-have-beens overshadow what a wonderful actor they have chosen to play the white, male twelfth Doctor.

That is, he’s the twelfth Doctor but the Time Lord’s thirteenth life. (Subject to someone explaining whatever the hell’s going on with John Hurt.) Which, according to the series’ lore, is his last life. And that lore is engrained enough in the public consciousness that the BBC news website feels the need to ask the question: “How many more times can the Doctor regenerate?”, even if they then go on to say that it’s the sort of question only “hardcore” fans worry about.

Moffat’s been there before, of course, when he wrote “Curse of the Fatal Death” for Comic Relief, and “used up” all the Doctor’s remaining incarnations in one slightly careless effort to effect repairs to the Daleks’ Zectronic device. His solution then was to – impossibly – have the Doctor regenerate one more time… into a woman. And not just any woman, either! Lummy!

Now, far be it for me to suggest that the writer of “What I Did in My Holidays by Sally Sparrow” (or “Blink” as you might know it) would repeat himself… Ahem.

I will say this of Moffat – as I said on Facebook last night – he does know how to cast a Doctor. Matt proved that already, blowing away the doubters, and now Peter will do the same again. It’s also pretty brave to hire an actor (who is also a writer and director) with the stature to stand up to the production team and say “no, we’re going to do it this way”. Tom Baker was notorious for tearing up scripts and tearing down directors if he felt they were not up to the standards he thought the show deserved. And we all know that something happened with Eccleston, even if we’ll never find out exactly what. Hopefully, though, this will be a positive challenge to Moffat and the other writers to raise their game.

The move to “movie of the week” stories has improved the focus, and the Clara story arc was much more tautly conceived and executed than the convoluted Amy/River/Silence mess, but they still need to really work on making the episodes not fall over at the end (I’m looking at “A Town Called Mercy”, “Rings of Akhaten” and particularly “The Power of Three” as examples, and perhaps “Cold War” could have been stronger, and “Hide”s off-the-wall handbrake turn would have worked better if it weren’t in a run of clumsy endings).

And how about getting some new writers in too. Perhaps, dare I say it, women writers. Abi Morgan of “The Hour”, perhaps, or even Meera Syal (who was so delighted to appear in “The Hungry Earth”/“Cold Blood”). If we can’t have a woman Doctor (yet), at least get in a woman or two to write for him.

In a way, it’s a shame that the Clara stories seem to have worked better than the Amy and Rory stories, because I do applaud Moffat’s decision to move away from the Doctor plus one female companion model that became the norm for the television somewhere around “The Caves of Androzani”. And I wonder if some or all of those nice young men that Mr Moffster has been having round for auditions might not actually be up for the role of “dashing young male sidekick” in the Harry Sullivan mode, to appease the Generation Squee crowd on tumblr who are already missing their boy-candy.

I wonder if there’s a chance of persuading John Simm that the time is right to bring back the Master? There was always a – perhaps unwarranted – sense that Matt’s Doctor would have been slightly… odd taking on Simm’s Master; but Capaldi going toe to toe with Simm, now that would be a sparring match worth seeing.

(Although Alex’s suggestion is for Peter to play both roles, Doctor and Master, distinguished only by keeping his Cardinal Richelieu beard of evil. Of course, Clara would ask why they look like each other, which each would feverishly deny…)

Will be interesting to see if they bring back Kate Lethbridge-Stuart too, as that would be another good pairing.

And I know it’s wrong – what with her moving farewell in “The Name of the Doctor” meaning it would be fair to let River’s story now be over – but I do just slightly want to see how Alex Kingston and Peter might spark off one another too.


What I particularly hope for is – and perhaps he hinted at this when he entered clutching his lapels – a Doctor who takes William Hartnell as the model, rather than Pat Troughton. Don’t get me wrong, Pat’s performance is lovely, and it’s rightly said made regeneration work and so made it possible for the series to continue. But Matt, Sylv and Peter have all cited Pat as their inspiration before now; it would be nice to see someone bringing back some of the original Doctor’s performance: authoritative, a bit scary sometimes and very funny at others. A Doctor who was more often intellectual, but could be surprisingly physical when the need called. And who, at least half the time, is plainly bonkers. Pat’s anarchy is oddly safe; he’s a great one for taking down monsters. But Billy is truly dangerous.

Most of all, I hope that Moffat will write the twelfth differently to the eleventh (and tenth), and that Peter will deliver a different style of performance to the “I’m the cleverest lifeform in the room” babble that has characterised both the last two incarnations.

Anyway, it’s a great piece of news, a terrific choice, and I look forward to the next couple of years’ Doctor Who because they’re sure to be a hell of an interesting ride.

Or as Malcolm Tucker would say: hold on to any glands you’re particularly fond of ’cos this is going to be one effing hell of an effing interesting ride.

*PS:
It’s not my fault the ITV shop doesn’t list “Prime Suspect 3” to buy; so much for “commercial” telly!

Thursday, August 01, 2013

Day 4591: DOCTOR WHO: The Mind of Evil (in COLOR!)

Saturday:

What strikes me about “The Mind of Evil” is that otherwise perfectly sensible people – Lawrence and Tat in About Time 3, Jack Graham on Shabogan Graffiti, Sandifer on the TARDIS rude room – write long essays trying to explain or taking to task this idea that “evil” is some innate quality or substance in people that the Keller Machine extracts, when self-evidently it does nothing of the sort.

That’s what the Master says it does but... well... he’s the Master!

It’s quite clear that, spoilers, the “machine” is a Mind Parasite that simply, crudely and painfully lobotomises people!


“The Mind of Evil” is, to my mind, second among Jon Pertwee’s stories only to the homely “Dennis Wheatley for a fiver” charms of “The Dæmons”. The second story of Pertwee’s second year as the Doctor, and the second to feature his newly-created arch-enemy: Roger Delgado as The Master.

And this is the story that really cements the Master in the Doctor Who firmament as the classic villain. After a great opening in Robert Holmes’ “Terror of the Autons”, Delgado comes into his suave own here as the Ernst Stavro Blofeld of the series, with a performance better even than in his first story. The plot which links an evil brain-altering machine at Stangmoor Prison, the first World Peace Conference and a nuclear gas missile (sic) called Thunderbolt is, well, faintly ludicrous and couldn’t hold together without him, but he sells us this plot as actually just the sort of thing the Master does, causing havoc on a global or local scale as the whim takes him.

It’s also a transitional story, harking back to the more “hard” (well “hard-ish”) science fiction of Pertwee’s first season while placed within the context of Barry Letts moving the series towards more psychedelic fare such as the story that follows: “The Claws of Axos”, changes that involved dumbing down the Brigadier into a comedy Little Englander and replacing scientist Liz Shaw (lovely Carry John – see the tribute on the new “Spearhead from Space” blu-ray) with rather more dolly-bird “assistant” Jo Grant (played by the irrepressible Katy Manning, who succeeds in being wonderful in spite of the writing).

Don Houghton, writing his second and sadly last Who, follows up the hugely popular “Inferno” with another story that mixes clever ideas and commentary with exciting action sequences (particularly the UNIT raid on the prison) and some nice “Spy-Fi” stuff (thanks to a happy coincidence, Benton gets to play secret agent again, as he did back in “The Invasion”).

As a result, this is about as “gritty” and “realistic” as the Pertwee years ever get (while still having a lead dressed in a purple silk cape and driving a “sprightly yellow roadster”). It’s as near to a Euston films production for children as there will ever be – interestingly, as Alex pointed out to me, thanks to director Tim Coomb making a couple of changes from male to female at casting level and because it was “for children” – i.e. not treating women as “molls” or “victims” – it’s actually got stronger roles for women characters, with them doing “everyday” jobs in two armed forces without anyone passing comment (one gratingly silly remark from Richard Franklin’s gratingly silly Captain Yates aside).

It is often pointed out that the Master’s plan in this story is not entirely sensible: he is, after all, planning to blow up the planet on which he is standing, while stranded without a working TARDIS. Perhaps he’s trying to make himself a new dematerialisation circuit and needs the fusion of a nuclear explosion to create some crucial element (or Slitheen-like wants it for fuel). Mind you, the Doctor’s a bit casual about the working dematerialisation circuit that he took from the Master in “Terror of the Autons” if it can just be picked up by a despatch rider. You’re surprised that the Master hasn’t broken into UNIT HQ and to take it before now. Perhaps he has: defeating ever more complicated safes that the Doctor has prepared for him while failing to realise that the Doctor has outsmarted him by hiding the circuit in plain sight on Liz Shaw’s now-abandoned work bench.

That plot, then, involves trouble with the Chinese delegation when UNIT is tasked to protect the World Peace Conference (while, on the side, being asked to sweep an illegal missile under the proverbial carpet on behalf of the British Government).

The Doctor, however, has taken himself off to Stangmoor Prison because he is more concerned by reports of a new “treatment” for the hardened criminal: the Keller Process of a Professor Emil Keller, in truth – as we shall discover – the Master.

Which brings us back to that “machine”.

Just look at how it works: it stimulates what we might hand-wavily call the “fear centres” of the brain, triggering a terror response and hallucinations to the point where its victims’ higher functions burn out, or they suffer a fatal heart attack or stroke. Do we ever see anyone doing “ooh ooh my brain is being sucked out” acting? No. What we see is “arrgh arrgh it’s in my head!” every time.

Why assume that it “does what it says on the tin” when what it says on the tin was written by the Master?

I mean, he’s lying about his identity as “Professor Emil Keller”, but surely he wouldn’t fib about how his machine works. Aside from the fact that it’s not actually a machine. And it doesn’t work.

That big bank of controls clearly doesn’t “control” it at all, and is probably a big box of lights and dials.

And the Doctor, rude as ever talking over the explanation at the beginning, hears Professor Kettering say what the machine does and interrupts with: “It doesn’t”!


Jack says that the story’s point of view is:
“Crime is something that people with Evil in their heads do, and people like that go to prison. If you're in prison, you're Bad. It's that simple. This is implicit. Also implicit is the assumption that humans are clockwork oranges. Use technology to remove the Evil from the brain and the brain will function properly again.”

While Sandifer has it that:
“...this script is firmly in favor of the Keller Machine... ...Bad people are inherently bad. Good people are justified in what it takes to stop bad people. And it's that simple.”
But this is clearly the point of view of the scientists and prison governors who are shown to be (a) deceived by the Master who has sold them this load of old honk and (b) totally wrong. And they pay for their error with their lives.

“The Mind of Evil” raises these points of view satirically; in order to rubbish them. It is astonishing to me that people seem not to see this.

The story repeatedly makes the point that this belief in whatever it is (bad blood, original sin, genes for criminality) is wrong, indeed is itself “evil”; I mean, the “machine” is literally the monster of this story, how blatantly obvious do they have to make it?

(Perhaps that’s the problem: when the Keller Machine turns out to be a bubbling brain in a jar, everyone starts to take everything very literally. If this was “Buffy” it would be completely obvious that the “monster” is a metaphor for Sixties-style psychiatric electro-chemical mind control being literally “monstrous”.)

The Doctor himself expresses that the process is “evil” even before he sees it in action, and his opinion is confirmed by what he sees it do to prisoner Barnham.

And the whole opening sequence is very deliberately presented to us as an execution.

The condemned man is read his sentence and solemnly taken to the place where it will be done, where witnesses, doctors and priests are in attendance.

Professor Kettering, who will be operating the “machine”, makes a speech about how “Science has abolished the death penalty” – well obviously “science” didn’t abolish the death penalty, though the allusion is clearly to the “scientific advance” of the guillotine. Remember that when this was shown in 1971, it was barely five years after the abolition of the death penalty in Great Britain, and two years before it would be abolished in Northern Ireland.

Everything about showing us this “treatment” as if we’re about to kill a man is saying to us that this “death of personality” is actually worse.


Nor does anyone – or at least anyone who cares; mainly Jo and Dr Summers (Michael Sheard), though the Doctor condescends to express concern when he remembers – think that Barnham has been “cured” or that his brain is functioning “properly” afterwards. Quite the reverse: he is hospitalised and treated as the victim of a serious accident.

Barnham is presented as childlike and innocent, which does not mean “good”. In fact it means “without knowledge of good or evil”. You might – at a pinch – say he’s been returned to the Garden of Eden. But the truth is, this serpent has taken away his free will which is pretty much the Acme of evil in ’Sixties/’Seventies Doctor Who.


Jack’s a good, old-fashioned communist and tries to make out that “this is a classic bit of reactionary Cold War ideology” where “good” Westerners are led by a proper patriarchal figure and women/Chinese/Chinese women represent the threatening “other” while the prisoners in Stangmoor are the “uppity working class” whose revolt needs putting down. Well, I suppose you can if you must, but it does seem to overlook the rather elegant way that the story has the riots in the prison parallel the threatened global conflict – as above so below, perhaps, or that the Master is in a sense goading the planet to violence at every level because he "can't resist pulling the wings off the flies", or perhaps that the threat of World War is as much a petty squabble as the one in the prison. Also, the best way to survive attack by the Keller Machine appears to be: be working class (i.e. Barnham survives but all those nice, middle-class scientists end up dying with improbable physical evidence of their phobias made manifest), while the true villain of the piece is the self-styled Lord and Master.

Sandifer, meanwhile, is keen to play up the racist aspects of the story, trying to tie it to a line between “The Celestial Toymaker” and “The Talons of Weng-Chiang”. That means having to ignore that the first Chinese Ambassador is actually the first victim of the Mind Parasite, and that his replacement, Fu Peng (Kristopher Kum), is only portrayed as sympathetic, courteous and wise – Nicholas Courtney gamely playing along in making the Brigadier look like a fool for his “Little Englander” attitude.

I’m not saying it’s completely un-dodgy (there’s only one black character and he’s a non-speaking extra as the Master’s chauffeur) but I think you are really overreaching to say that the Chinese are at all depicted as the baddies here. It’s even nice about Chairman Mao (neatly retconned in Big Finish’s “Sympathy for the Devil”).

Certainly, the story is more dubious in its treatment of women, even while giving them positive roles, because there are almost none in it. Blink and you’ll miss Corporal Bell, of course. And Captain Chin Lee (Pik Sen Lim) is the Master’s victim and tool, inexcusably disappearing in the second half of the story (when she should have been “earning redemption” – I use quotes because as a victim of the Master’s hypnosis she doesn’t really need to be redeemed – by participating in bringing the Master’s plan down. I’d suggest incorporating her into the Mike Yate role).

But I do have to disagree with the assertion that Jo is side-lined, which makes me wonder if Sandifer even watched the serial. Katy Manning is magnificent here: generous to Pertwee in their scenes together, and really seizing control when on her own. She single-handedly ends the first prison riot. And she’s the person who shows most resistance to the Mind Parasite, aside from Barnham whose “accident” has somehow rendered him immune.


The monster does get bigger over the story, so the implication is at least there that it does somehow “feed” off its victims. Somehow.

(Though it’s also possible it actually eats electricity – initially from its “control” box and later from the Doctor’s attempt to keep it contained – and just uses its mind powers to murder people.)

Equally, it grows most significantly after its encounters with the two Time Lords, so it may be that it is absorbing knowledge – certainly it doesn’t start teleporting until after rummaging about in the crania of the only two people who might know the secret of space/time travel, so it does appear to be learning something from the folks it messes with – so it may get either sustenance or the ability to sustain itself from the Doctor or the Master’s mind.

But whatever it’s eating it’s not “evil”. If anything, it’s fear.

The Doctor himself admits that he cannot resist the machine – that, in a neat foreshadowing of “Planet of Spiders”, he cannot face his fears. The insight into his greatest fear: the destruction of an alternate Earth that he witnessed in “Inferno” is also nice continuity (and one I’d have liked to see reflected again in “...Spiders” by having the Great One’s cave of crystal be a cave of fire). And in the colour-restored version, we can now see that there are more flames flickering over the infamous “monster parade” from the Part Three cliff-hanger.

So the message of the story – far from being one of original sin – is that the more fearful you are, the more you are likely to be killed by your fears: whether you’re an American Senator whose no-doubt guilty conscience means he goes down like nine-pins where Fu Peng stands up better to the psychic attack, or the vicious gang-leader Mailer (whose “fears” get him in the end by the poetic justice of being shot by the Brig just in the nick). William Marlowe (does that make Delgado Faust?) is terrific as Mailer, easily locking horns with the Master in order to achieve his own agenda, like a kind of anti-Brigadier to the Master’s anti-Doctor (something which makes his end all the more apt).

Barnham’s lobotomised condition renders him without fear (not without “evil”) and so he is immune. And Jo is shown as essentially braver than the Doctor here, as though she has learned and grown following her experience in “Terror of the Autons” – I like to think this is a first step on her path towards resisting the Master in “Frontier in Space” (and again, I should have liked to see Chin Lee leading the way by standing up to the Master here).

It is fear that makes good people think they are justified in doing bad things (like lobotomising prisoners to stop them being violent or anti-social); fear, as it were, is the mind killer, the real mind of evil here.



I have to say that the DVD release comes with my highest recommendation. The traditional fan reading that “Mind of Evil” is “better” in black and white almost certainly doesn’t stand up to seeing the beautifully restored colour – in particular Episode One, thanks to the enormous hard work of Stuart “Babelcolour” Humphryes in hand-colouring many, many key frames and Peter Crocker for computer-interpolating the rest to produce a genuinely astonishing result.

“The Mind of Evil” is not just a great story, but one where everyone involved – in the original production in 1970 and the restoration for the DVD in 2013 – have gone the extra mile to turn out a true classic.
A great way to complete the Pertwee Era’s DVD releases.