Miliband's perfect positioning

By way of elaboration on my assertion last week that Miliband can't remotely be discounted should Starmer topple in the near future, look at this telling chart from the loyalist LabourList platform and its Survation polling:

Survation / LabourList:     click link above for full-size

Every Cabinet member has seen their ratings fall after Reeve's efforts of last week: but L'il Ed's fell the least by far; and with Rayner heading west with all the rest, he's now miles out in front with Labour supporters.

He'll be making very careful decisions in the event his damn-fool energy policy dreams come under even more pressure from Reeves and her Growth-At-Any-Cost strategies.  Would yet another serious slap in the face be the ideal time to quit?  Or exactly the moment not to rise to the bait, and to hang on grimly instead, making the usual offstage noises and pointed absences that ensure everyone knows his true feelings?  The almost-iron rule of UK leadership elections is that Leaders of the two main parties only ever come from the ranks of the Cabinet / Shadow Cab.  And whilst in government, when the Chosen One becomes PM immediately?  That really is an iron rule.**

ND

__________________

** The Corbyn Exception relates, of course, to a period of opposition - and even that needs qualifying for special circumstances, because there was only a 'shadow-shadow' cabinet in being during the short inter regnum of Harriet Harman, following the resignation of, errrr, one Ed Miliband.

Drax: long-overdue turning-point

The Drax farce has dragged on for a very long time (several threads here), but there are signs that it might be reaching a crisis point.  Not before time.

Last week, the FT put out a rather tame story that internal Drax emails exist proving Drax knew it was at fault in essentially the ways alleged (some would say 'proved') by the Beeb's Panorama back in 2022.  You can bet that's only the tip of the scandalous iceberg, that has only remained hidden, more or less, because successive governments have become hooked on the (purely notional) boost Drax gives to the "renewables" and "net zero" numbers.  Their addiction is an expensive one, measured in billions of subsidies.  It causes them to parrot the Drax lies in official pronouncements.

Following Panorama, Ofgem was set on to check where Drax was getting its fuel.  They did a crap job, ending with a derisory £25m fine for Drax not having proper records.  The NAO have also found that HMG itself can do no better in justifying the Drax claims of sustainability (on which their entitlement to all those billions rests).  Until now, this seemed to be water off the two ducks' backs.

The FT was Wednesday.  On Friday the Times joined the bandwagon, hosting a belated confession by Claire Coutinho (the last Tory energy secretary) that time should have been called on the whole farce ages ago.  Is a bandwagon about to hit the road?  I know for a fact there are several very strategic short positions in Drax: and you don't have to go very far in energy sector gatherings to meet lobbyists who've clearly been hired to badmouth the company (alongside all those with the exact opposite brief!)  OK, some of the 'anti' is from US environmental NGOs, appalled at the impact Drax's ravenous appetite for their forests is having; but some of it is from altogether more hard-nosed quarters.  Incidentally, we don't do investment advice here.

The timing of all this is critical because Drax has two big asks on Li'l Miliband's desk right now.  (1) It wants approval (and a heap of public money) for the ridiculous 'BECCS' scheme; and because it isn't ready to go ahead with this for a while yet, it wants (2) a heap more public money to keep it in luxury until BECCS money comes rolling in.  I won't bore you with how this all works in their warped minds, and how utterly ludicrous it all is on every rational score: suffice to say there are civil servants who support it, and also politicians.  

Miliband?  Actually, I detect no enthusiasm on his part - most people with half a brain-cell see through the Drax nonsense - but he has his own "notional net zero" agenda (see those earlier Drax threads), and Labour as a whole has its "growth / investment at any cost" agenda, too.

So let's see.  More popcorn, please, for this particular sideshow.  If we now see a serious anti-Drax bandwagon forming, it'll make his decision(s) quite awks.  As the young people say.

ND

The Old Gray Mare: weekend round-song

All together now: 

Oh, the old Gray mare, she ain't what she used to be,

Ain't what she used to be, ain't what she used to be,

The old Gray mare, she ain't what she used to be,

Many long years ago.

Many long years ago, many long years ago,

The old Gray mare, she ain't what she used to be,

Many long years ago.

Oh, the old mare's making Kier's life a misery,

Kier's life a misery, Kier's life a misery

The old mare's making Kier's life a misery,

Many long years to go ...

Continues for many happy weeks.

ND

What's that, officer?  Yes I can!  It's satire - it's art - it's vulgar abuse!  Where are you taking me..?

Revenge of the SPADS (2) - the morning after Sue Gray!

We told you so!

*  *  *  *  *

Scene:  a poncey coffee bar in a hotel off Northumberland Avenue.  Slumped in a chair, semi-comatose and with a silly grin on his face, is a disheveled SPAD.  An older SPAD enters, orders an evidently much-needed coffee, turns, and spots her colleague.

SSS:  Hey - how late did you stay?

JS (groaning):  3.  But it was worth it!  Sweet, or what?

SSS:  Oh, to be young again!  It was a good evening though.

JS:  It's a pity we had to move on from the Downing Street Spaddery - there was easily enough booze in there to last the night.  But then the Victoria Sponge came home unexpectedly and was mooching around a bit, wondering where the noise was coming from.  Awks! 

SSS:  Gotta hand it to you, Sparquin, you did say you were going to see off the Grey Lady.  Kudos!  But this was way ahead of schedule.

JS:  Well, the skids were under her, well and truly, the meejah were lapping it up.  And The Mac himself was joining in towards the end, he was royally pissed off with the way she was queening it in Washington.  Incidentally, so was Lammers.  Her last friend at court.  And he wouldn't let her have an Embassy when they were wondering what to do with her.  So: off she goes to her super new "nations and regions" job, eh?  Look out Andy Burnham!  And lucky Angela, haha, they''ll really enjoy working together closely - two big birds with one stone!  Sorry, no offence Molly.  By the way, who did you get to write that press release?  Genius - barely a trace of sarcasm.  Who was capable of that on a Friday night?

SSS:  RuRu wrote it, and we got Sophers to brief it - she can do that stuff with a straight face.  So you liked "I look forward to continuing to support the prime minister in my new role", then?

JS:  Tops!  Everyone knows what anemic crap like that means.  We were still taking turns reading it out loud at 2am.   Hahahaha-aargh!  Jeez, I'm ill.

SSS:  Well, sort yourself out and put on a straight face of your own.  Grey will be on the warpath, looking for leakers - you know she will.  She's still around, she still has her sources - and her methods!  And her revenge is like the Lord's - seventy times seven.  So watch out!

JS:  OK Mols, point taken - but give a bloke his moment of triumph.

                                                            *  *  *  *  *

As overheard by ND

Revenge of the SPADS: docs leaked to C@W

We've come by a transcript of the half-year performance review of a 30-something Labour Party SPAD.

*   *   *   *   *

Supervisor (Senior SPAD):  So, Sparquin - what do you feel are the highlights and the disappointments of your work over the past 6 months?

Junior SPAD:  Well, Molly - the Election, obvs!  I reckon I came up with some pretty good 'Lines To Take' when the awkward questions started coming in from the Beeb fact-checkers during the run-up.  Nothing as awkward as the last three weeks, natch!  But at least a couple of my 'Lines' made it onto the One O'Clock News.  One even got into the papers the next day.  Oh, and I managed to get that idiot - sorry, Secretary of State! - Pete to tone down his promises for how many units he was going to get built by 2028.  Pretty f-ing mental, he'd just made that number up, you know?  But I'm fairly sure we're off the hook now: his Department is really pleased.

SSS:   Yes, good catch, we all noticed, and Sir Humphrey loves what you did, the civil servants hate concrete targets - though you might want to tone down the crowing over it, you know?  Pete doesn't forget shit like that and he's a nasty bastard as well as a dumb twat.  Just a suggestion.  Anything else?

JS:  Well, in response to the diktat that we're all to come up with 'collaborative, self-directed, value-adding, no-cost workstream initiatives', me and three other J-SPADS have formed a little team - we call ourselves 'Spad-u-like', nice, huh? - and we've *self-directed* ourselves on a couple of little projects to improve departmental effectiveness around here, plus morale, too!  Oh, and before you ask, yes, we're totally diverse!   Though to be fair, we did all go to the same college ...

SSS:  Great!  And disappointments?

JS:  You need to ask??  FFS - it's getting a £5k reduction in salary!   And being on tenterhooks for three weeks before even that was confirmed.  I'm 34, fuckit - I've given the best part of six years to this Party!  And now we're not even allowed to take freebies off that hedgie wanker who used to bankroll our office when we were in Opposition.  Do you know what rents are like in Homerton?

SSS:  Tell me about it - and I'm in Shoreditch!

JS, under breath:  (You wish!  Half a mile north, more like it).  Out loud:  Oh well, Polly Toynbee says we can expect lots of money to be found down the back of the sofa before Xmas!  Hahah, silly cow.

SSS:  Anyhow, it's for the Cause, right.  Just hang in there, it'll all work out.  Now, how about looking forward - what personal goals are you setting for the next 6 months?

JS:   Finishing the Spad-u-like project to scupper the Gray woman, obvs.  We've made a great start over the past two weeks, made some good networking contacts, called in a few favours at the Beeb, all the good stuff.  Even forged some vibrant links with a couple of career civil servants that she's, errr, interacted with in the past.  Well, she's history, you just watch.  We're targeting end-November.  Finish laughing, clean underwear all round, then a big piss-up before Xmas at the Boom Battle Bar.  Hey, wanna nominate some faces for the axe-throwing targets ..? ...

As leaked to ND

Guardian Goings-on(2): Better news - and at Beeb too!

Having recently had a go at the Graun for its evident decision[1] to proselytise actively on behalf of a partisan position on contestable energy issues, this is by way of a follow-up suggesting that things might be looking up, both at the newspaper and also at the Beeb.

The paper first.  At the weekend, their rather good columnist[2] Sonia Sodha had this to say: 

Free speech is neither a “nice to have” nor a rightwing project: it is a fundamental tenet of democracy and when it is under threat, it is disempowered minorities who suffer most. Labour needs to stop seeing important free speech protections introduced by Tory ministers as expendable fuel for attacking their predecessors.

And on a quite different topic, Nils Bratley opined as follows: 

... before Drax is promised a penny extra from billpayers, Ed Miliband, the energy secretary, should commission a properly independent review of the business model of burning wood pellets to generate electricity. It should cover both the environmental impact ... and the stupendous subsidies.

I strongly applaud both sentiments.  And both are clearly opinion pieces, which is the honourable way to go for a proper newspaper.

Now for the Beeb.  I am delighted to note that they have genuinely got their teeth into two stories that essentially reflect a proper critique / criticism of Starmer's Labour Party.  The first is the Winter Fuel payments issue, which Reeves and Starmer have strongly signalled they intend to tough out - it's in that category we highlighted of Reasons Aplenty for Ruthless Whipping.  But, patently, they can't be taking any pleasure in the way it's rumbling on.  The awful Alastair Campbell used to say that if an awkward story runs for more than 3 days, you've got a problem.  Well, this one is several weeks and counting, and the Beeb has taken it to its heart in ways that make the problem worse for the government.  As well they might - it's an early unforced error and an acute political test for Labour: but personally I had felt there'd be a longer period where the uncritical pre-election fawning over Starmer would be continuing in that quarter.  Seemingly not[3].  This isn't any more than their charter requires of them, but given past performance it's moderately encouraging.  Credit where it's due.

The send is their gleeful playing-up of the outrageous story of "Parliament's biggest landlord", the reprehensible Jas Athwal MP.  One has to pick through issues like this with caution, but in the background there's the sordid prevalence of a certain type of landlord mercilessly exploiting tenants of the same ethnicity as themselves - "own-country landlord" is generally how the victims ruefully express their plight.  Maybe Mr Athwal's portfolio is not of this profile - but the Beeb evidently knows.  Their ability to report on renters' profiles has however been hampered by the fact that the people they got interviews from were subsequently intimidated into silence, as the Beeb reported, and withdrew permission for their statements to be used.  Reasonable people will doubtless draw their own conclusions.  The Beeb clearly has it in for Athwal - a man parachuted into his seat in Labour's nasty little pre-election deselection campaign - and, often with smiles on their faces when reporting his twisting and turning, seems determined to run him to ground.  Once again, credit where it's due, & plaudits to them for their journalism.  

ND

___________

[1]  By way of explicit ratification, here's their resident green wingnut George Monbiot: 

"For every pound or dollar spent on ['climate crisis'] persuasion by an environmental charity or newspaper ..."

[2]  Inter alia, she's broadly sound on the baleful 'trans' issue, too.  How much sh*t must she get from the fundies at the Graun?

[3]  Of course, anti Starmer animus can easily come from several angles: many lefties hate him cordially, as much as does anyone with the slightest regards for probity & intellectual integrity

Wonga on the edge - about bloody time

Now here is a tale of real disgrace for New Labour and then Tory ambivalence only late turning into action. I won't shirk when it has been so wrong for so long.


Wonga is about to go under, announcing another huge loss is coming and three years of huge losses on such a small lending book with the regulatory environment against it - it's curtains. Wonga will be a thing of history soon.


Way back in 2007, when Gordon Brown (who was much worse  than May, let's not forget this - she is inactively terrible, he was actively malign), surveyed all, Wonga was set-up. The premise was, in this time of ultra cheap credit, that some people could not get any. Not Wonga obviously, they got a nice cheap credit line, but there game was usurious lending to the desperately poor. To me, this is like betting on the increase in food prices - just morally wrong.


But in those heady days, anything went and the Regulator was happy to approve the business. Soon enough it grew large on the often over 1000% APR returns it managed to create. However, built on immorality from the start, the business soon festered. To chase clients, they pretended to send letters from law firms to chase for money back.


By 2012 Wonga had become a target for everyone. Even the new FCA could see it and finally steamed into action, capping its insane interest rates and allowing customers to claim back the usurious monies extracted from them. Quickly the business started to fall, unfortunately driven too by a rise in competition  - at least though this restricts interest to a mere 300% per year.


So here we are in 2018, struggling under the weight of its past, Wonga will die.


But really, how on earth was this business ever allowed to exist. Desperate people need money and it can be very hard to get. Yes, there are back street lenders and criminals who purvey this sort of thing - but they are no legal, they have no claim other than threatening physical violence. To allow to pass into law and common practice such usury is a terrible stain on the Labour Government - THE LABOUR GOVERNMENT! Not helped by the incoming Tory administration who at least have overseen a regulation of this business - but, to me crazily, still allowed it to exist.


It is a sorry story and one which really shows how distant politicians are from both the people they serve and the basic principles of economics that they would ever allow this carry on.

Ed, please stay with us and not HH

As much fund as it is watching Ed Miliband twist in the wind with his abject career already on the line, the sad truth is if Labour got rid of Ed the deputy leader is Harriet Harman.

Harriet Harman.

Once she is in charge and realises there is no real mechanism to get rid of her I can quite see Harriet having a go at a General Election and relishing taking on the Bullingdon and Public School set (her own identical upbringing being of no relevance as she is a woman, natch).

Can we imagine the horrors of a Harriet Harman led majority or minority Government. Even on a Friday this is too much to contemplate.

Clearly, there would be some properly lunatic anti-men policies and positions. So for the comments, what could they be.....

France and UK future united?

France is today battling against the Eurozone. Being part of the Euro means that the Government has to justify its debts to a third party in a way that does not happen in the UK. Depending on your view this could be a good thing, like mega-OBR or a bad thing in that is undermines the sovereignty of a nation.

Either way, France is making excuses about its budget deficit and its inability to hit the 3% or lower target demanded by Euro membership. France is due to miss by 1% every year until 2017. Oh for the UK to be in this position, our budget deficit is 6.5% and none of the UK politicians are making any real noises about how to reduce this beyond saying cuts are coming after the election!

That France has higher public net debt to start with makes things more difficult. But the truth is that France has tax rates that overall are not too dis-similar to the UK, only about 2% points higher on balance. However, with its vast public sector, powerful unions and left-wing Government, no one is in a position to force real change; or even to want it.

This same situation will likely appear in the UK after the next election. A Labour government led by Ed Milliband will have no appetite for real austerity. Taxes can only be raised a little given their historically high point has already been reached - there are severe diminishing returns for pumping up taxes from here.

Reforming or cutting services will not be on the ideological agenda so instead they will hope that economic growth outstrips the debt growth. However, this is unlikely to happen as the high point for growth in the current cycle is around now in all likelihood, not in 2015/16 when instead you would expect a slight slowdown or, if unlucky, recession.

Also in France, President Hollande is very unpopular, with the right wing Marie Le Pen seen as the main challenger - this surely gives hope to UKIP too in the UK that given the above set of circumstances it can replace the Tories as the party of opposition in time for 2020 when a sad Labour Government will be beaten out of sight in the election - having delivered a dog's dinner of hollow promises for its 5 year term.

The Brown Delusion

The UK under Gordon Brown

Hmmm....I don't think we should let go unchallanged these assertions made about Gordon Brown in the new damian McBride book. If only becuase they show the usual one-eyed perspective expected of an apparatchik. Apprently Brown as amazing during the 2008 crisis because he managed to discuss getting troops on the street. Not only that but he was allegedly very clam with other world leaders and showed good leadership during the time of crisis.

Seriously?

How exactly did this crisis come about? As my colleague Nick Drew described eloquently last week, the banking crisis started in early 2007 and really kicked off when Northern Rock went under in the middle of 2007. Its peak was in October 2008. What did Brown and everyone else do for a year whilst the banks went under. Where were the stress tests and emergency capital calls that could have saved RBS or HBOS or indeed any of the other mutuals that went under. Or where was the preparation to allow the banks to fail whilst preserving the banking system and the deposits of small retail customers? No this was the time for great rhetoric from Mr Darling in hte 2008 Budget; he spoke of 'this other Eden' and about the opportunities that awaited the UK. Even in the teeth of the Financial Crisis there was to be a budget surplus in 201 and growth prediced at 2.25%.

It is hard now, just 5 years later but with so much having happened, to remember just how absolutely delusional the Government was at the time, not even realising there was a crisis until September 2008 and then being left with no alternative but to take over the bust banks which it had encouraged through the noughties to lend money and not worry about that pesky regulator or commercial reality. Tax income was too important for that.

Even in the crisis to say that Brown of Darling were statesmanlike is laughable. They knew nothing until the crisis was upon them and then had to make obvious decisions in the space of a few hours. Where was Brown counselling Bush against letting Lehmans fail or stopping the Wall Street domino crash of investment banks?
Nowhere to be seen, that's where.

They were worrying instead about how to reverse the 10p tax gimmick that had gone wrong. Worrying about whether the current budget was Green enough for Polly Toynbee.
That's where there were busy.

Could any Government have avoided the terrible crisis we have endured, probably not, could it have been handled much better than it was? Certainly. Idiotic scorched earth policies like 50% tax rates show how important political points scoring was over economic reality and also how they were happy to predict a future of easy growth to justify their vast over-spend ahead of what was obviously going to become a huge recession.

Leadership? Bravery? Do me favour. It's a horrific episode in our history that will scar the Country for the rest of my lifetime. Brown and Darling should be arrested for treason.
Finally, let's nto forget that at the heart of this Government, giving advice and inside the small cabal, were Edi Milliband and Ed Balls, the men who will likley be in charge to create the next economic crisis.

The real dividing line between the Conservatives and Labour

I recently thought that right leaning bloggers, such as Dale + even more independent minded ones were wrong to demand that the conservatives should be honest about tax cuts.

I knew Brown's boys would never admit to a penny off any department and would be proclaiming ever higher spending, financed out of exaggerated, badly rounded, misrepresented and just plain untrue tractor stats.

Labour have been proclaiming Tory cuts mean an end to hospitals, schools and even food for pensioners.

My argument was never give your opponent the argument they crave. Brown desperately wanted the Tories to say they would make cuts of any size, to let him make his social concious, spending is just investment arguments, against the heartless Tories of the 80's.Labour are the party of investment, the Tories are the party of cuts. Today the shadow chancellor decided to do just that in a piece in The Times.

Having seen Question Time last week when Peter Hain tried just such a tactic, he was eventually reduced to pleading that if the audience didn't vote labour then they would only have themselves to blame when the cuts came. The audience , by around 2/3 , did not agree. People do appear to have understood that there is no money. No money today and no money tomorrow. Even more astounding was the media. The bloggers pointed out the holes in the Labour arguments immediately, but the newspapers, the networks and even the BBC were not fooled either. Instead of reading the press release , they actually analysed it. Just yesterday John Pienaar again contradicted the studio anchor and his 'Tory are milk snatchers' guest, making the point that what the Tories propose and what Labour propose are within a hair of each other.


The new strategy of telling a version of the truth, that I thought very risky, does seem to being received quite well.. the people do appear to understand. Whether this will continue when they are told the details, like schools must merge, class sizes must rise, train tickets must go up 15%, parking charges will triple etc remains to be seen. For now it appears that Gordon Brown is making a mistake. He is fighting a previous war, with old, obsolete tactics. He does not seem to have learnt, post Expensegate, that saying "I will be more open and honest"is not enough. He needs to be seen to be open and honest and with Malik and Iraq he is off to a very bad start.

The Conservatives can manage to simplify their message to chime with all the workers being asked to take zero or minus pay rises, or who have had to cut out holidays or luxuries. If you spend £4 when you get in £3 you will eventually have maxed out your credit card, and will be paying a hell of a lot of interest on what you have spent. This message does have power. It points out the previous overspending of Labour and highlights that further continuous overspending is impossible. It can highlight the astronomical black hole in government spending and income, and allows the Tories to say at least they are being honest, unlike ponzi Brown who promises what he knows he can't deliver. There is the rich vein of broken manifesto promises, from student fees to the top rate of tax, for Mr Osborne and the shadow cabinet to mine.

If the media continue to probe and expose the economics of the situation, George Osborne's new found honesty may just be letting Gordon Brown dig himself into a verbal hole increasingly difficult to spin his way out of. It allows the Tories to steal the PMs 'prudent'cloak, his trans-pear-en-sea rhetoric, his honesty helm and move Gordon's favourite 'public investment' ground onto the less certain 'debt crisis' territory.

I was wrong to worry. Rather than be the argument trap that Brown has laid for Cameron, it appears to be the argument that Cameron wants, and Brown may fall for.

What a disaster. Live !

Poor Gordon, trying to conduct a reshuffle, being undermined by his new appointments quitting as he speaks. Gordon has denied that he ever wanted to move the chancellor from his post. Brown is using his ability to tell and retell a lie over and over while making it sound like the truth to great effect. He even managed to make the appointments of Dawn Primalo and Glynis Kinnock sound like the bringing in of positive assets to his government, instead of the scrapings at the bottom of a very empty barrel.

Here we have had a sweepstake on future cabinet appointments this week. I thought I was on a loser with my poor picks, but now I'm not so sure.

- Gary Neville
- Adam West
- Katie Price
- Diversity
- Sir Ranulph Fiennes

{ if you want to play yourselves its easy. Pick a cabinet post, say minister for local government, and then go to google serchbox. close your eyes and bash the keyboard three times. The first coherent name out is your choice. Try it.Best entries into the comments for final adjudication
It seemed a far-fetched way to run a country last week, but today..its as good as any other method in use.}

A look back at Jacqui Smith's tenure.

A quick look at Jacqui Smith's time at the Home Office.
She hasn't suffered the same level of anger from her constituents as Julie Kirkbride did from hers. Both were popular MP's but somehow JS seems to have escaped the wrath that forced Kirkbride to quit. Quite how Jacqui manages it I have no idea. The "Timney" letters were enough to discredit her completely in my eyes a long while back. Since then she has soared ever lower.

Still she was the first UK female Home Secretary. A place in the history books assured. Even if only as a perfect example of the Peter Principle in action.

The Leadership Race

Just watched BBC's "Margaret." Not at all bad. Very good actors and script, and for once Mrs T {Lindsey Duncan} was portrayed as odd rather than mad. There isn't much new, but its a good piece of drama. Political Betting even have a piece on Could This Happen To Gordon?
What I had forgotten was how many big Tory beasts there were, and how the unlikeliest of them got the job.

Howe, Lawson, Heseltine, Ridley, Fowler, King, Baker, Tebbit, Hurd, Patten, Parkinson, Lilley, Portillo, Clarke, Redwood..

John Major was the unlikeliest in the public's mind anyway.At the time I hadn't even noticed that he had been chancellor. So to the weekend fun.

A} Who will run for the labour leadership in 2010. {or sooner}
B} Who will be the eventual winner.

Harriet Harman
Ed Balls
Alistair Darling
David Miliband
Jack Straw
Jacqui Smith
John Hutton
Hilary Benn
Alan Johnson
Douglas Alexander
James Purnell
Geoff Hoon
Hazel Blears
Andy Burnham
John Denham
Yvette Cooper
Jon Cruddas

Or any other hopefuls you care to nominate. Even for fun.. like John Prescott or Tom Harris or Mr Draper.

RBS and Lloyd's may sink Britannia

That can be the only conclusion upon reading this post at the superb naked Capitalism.
In effect, there has been to market for many of the 'toxic' assets that the banks around the world have held onto. yes they have been marked down, but with no market to sell into the assets have been marked down on 'book' values.

However, this research suggests that due to the highly leveraged nature of many of these loans, that somewhere between a 5% and 20% return on these assets. This is shocking stuff, as the study also looks at the long-term return, not just a distress sale.

To focus on the recent UK bank bailout. RBS has put £250 billion into the Government scheme. The bank will take 10% of the losses and the taxpayer 90%. Being generous and say that 20% is recoverable, then there could be an 80% loss. 70% to the taxpayer, this is £175 billion loss for the taxpayer. If we double this amount to include the prospective asset insurance for LLoyd's and Barclay's, then we get to £350 billion in UK government loss. That is a massive amount, nearly half of annual government spend.

This is what the Government is doing on our behalf and yet today the focus is on changing the law to prosecute/persecute one man.

UK Charities nationalised

This has been happening for sometime now. However, the credit crunch has moved the agenda even further forward.

As people donate less to charity to look after themselves, the 'shortfalls' are causing problems. Charities are struggling for money and the Government has put another £42 million aside to help them with projects.


But how can the Government choose which of thousands of charities deserves help? Moreover, are the ones that need help not already proving they are not good at managing the money?


Personally, I resent being approached in the street by Chuggers who when questioned soon admit that their organisation is majority government funded. To my mind, they are bleeding heart tax collectors.


I am not anti-charity at all and I want people to give as much as they feel they can afford. But why should Government be donating my taxes to charity - why not let me decide where the money goes?


The answer to me is clear, 'Third Sector' money spent by the government goes to 'local initiatives' (see the BBC link). These are mainly in Labour areas and so much of this money is simple vote buying, dosed up with some hand-wringing morality.

John Prescott's top fifty. {5} l

Continuing on. The last of John's fifty things Labour have achieved since 1997.

{ in the comments of I have been set straight on a number of issues, like waiting lists where I foolishly looked at NHS figures, but had no idea that there is a wait to be put on the list. D'Oh..imagine falling for that old fiddle BQ. There were more too, so maybe a post later on which will also include the Tories response to Labour's "What did the Millennium's do for us?"

41. New Deal - helped over a million people into work {At a cost of 3 billion pounds to 2007."Almost half of the young people who take part in the Government's flagship welfare-to-work programme return to claiming benefits within 12 months" Should have just given them the £300 each. Plus the figure is nearer 200,000 I believe. 800,000 people have been through the New Deal at least twice? Hardly a success. No credit}

42. Over 1.5 million child trust funds have been started { And a shocking waste they are. The idea that people would top them up has never materialised. Basically GB has given future 18 olds a deposit for a scooter. Why? }

43. Free eye test for over 60s {Free for all in Scotland. And free parking when you go to get them. + children, people on low income and people suffering from or predisposed to eye disease could always get them. anyway, partial credit, you should have just made them free for all.}

44. Five, six and seven year olds in class sizes of 30 or less {Really. My two are in classes of 31 and 33. Am I the exception? On the back of a fall in the number of children it was a pretty easy target. Shame that immigration damaged your numbers or you could have got a point.}

45. Free entry to national museums and galleries {Yep. should have shut the VAT dodge earlier than 2005, but it was a good cultural policy. Full credit}

46. Overseas aid budget more than doubled {So glad we can afford it! Money to India to help their cash starved space program. Money for China, to give them a lift because they aren't really a powerhouse. OK so its all about 'HELP' for our exports but really... zero credit except for excessive waste.}

47. Cancer death rates down by 12 per cent, saving 43,000 lives {lucky lucky.Health promotion though..so OK. Shame they haven't fallen equally on rich and poor though. Does that tell us something? And no it isn't BUPA.}

48. Cut long-term youth unemployment by 75 per cent {doubtful, very very doubtful. I see it on all the top 50 achievement lists, the Chancellor always bangs on about it, but haven't seen any evidence. Let's hold this one until you can provide the link, not the soundbite}

49. Free nursery places for three and four-year-olds in England, Scotland and Wales

{Great. A really good idea. Only slightly marred by the fact that its for 2.5 - 3 hours a day only. Just enough time to get the shopping,not really enough time to get a job. Still full credit}

50. Free fruit for all four to six-year-olds at school. {really? that's the clincher. An apple? well, if you say so.}

So there you have it. An unparalleled run of success and over achievement, all under budget and on time....or do you disagree ?

{for those who have taken issue with the few points that received a credit, think; Judge Advocate's wig and robes, horns and a forky tail plus a trident, smell of brimstone, cloven hoof footprints, fire,and eternal damnation.}

Would you like a mortgage with those stamps?

Business Secretary Peter Mandelson has said he is in favour of widening the financial services already offered at the Post Office. The continuing talk is of creating a post bank or, as it is predictably being touted in New Labour speak.. 'A People's Bank.'

Post Office currently provides a range of financial services from bill payments to insurance and savings accounts in a partnership with the Bank of Ireland, while also providing access to the governments own National Savings and Investment products. The new scheme is set to take things much further and create a state bank. A complete U-Turn from the huge closure program that ended only last month, but you can see why Mr Darling may be keen to push ahead with the scheme. The Banks are still not doing what the government wants them to do. John McFall MP has repeatedly said that the restriction of credit lines to business and bank lending risks dooming the economy to an even greater depression. The establishment of a State Bank will allow the government to deliver on its lending targets. It seems that the government has rather belatedly realised that it already owns the largest network of branches in the UK with 12,000 Post Office branches and all of Northern Rock's and Bradford and Bingley's. A new motion [EDM 412} has already been tabled to create a Post Bank.

The idea of a State Bank has been greeted with horror by all good capitalists. The dead hand of state interfering and undercutting and under performing and overmanning without regard to profits or shareholders or customers. However, much good can come from a State Bank. The new Savings Gateway account,to further the relentless end to child poverty, aimed at those on very low incomes,has been signed up to by ... zero banks. Only the Post Office is on board. That's not surprising. The Post Office already has the lowest income and high benefits families as its customers. The Bank's don't want them. They doesn't really want the smallest business customers or the smallest loan customers either.

La Poste's received almost a quarter of its turnover in 2007 from its 11 million bank accounts and it only became a post bank in 2006.. Italy's BanoPosta achieved its first profit in 50 years after it became a post bank. If you want a profitable mail service, then allow it to be a bank so it can generate profits and achieve all government's vote-worthy social agendas, that the banks would much rather avoid. What is unclear is if the government will provide provide any financial backing or guarantees to the move – or how they would set with European competition rules.

What is odd though is that at the same time HMG decides on a State Bank it is looking to privatise Royal Mail by flogging bits off to TNT, totally against the wishes of the unions, the workers, the public and loyal MP's.. Post Office to state and Royal Mail to private sector seems to be the plan.

Left hand, right hand?

John Prescott's top fifty. {4}

31. Introduced child tax credit giving more money to parents {Must we do this? It has been a job creating exercise with many, many flaws. Raising tax thresholds would have achieved the same at a fraction of the cost and muddle.Its a disaster}

32. Scrapped Section 28 and introduced Civil Partnerships {Couldn't really not do it. 28 was a daft bit of old right reactionary nonsense, and if you hadn't introduced the farcical racial hatred act, you would have got a credit.}

33. Brought over 1 million social homes up to standard

{ but the record on housebuilding is dire. Less than

30, 000 a year. What was immigration running at again? 200,000 pa? The equity loan scheme barely manages to help 4,000 people a year. And the military got zip for their housing stock. Partial credit, and that's generous.}

34. Free school milk for five, six and seven-year-olds in Wales {UK figures not available. No credit. + the lunchtime allowance that you jumped on with Jamie Oliver hasn't risen with food price inflation. The scheme will collapse unless action is taken}

35. Banned fox hunting {whoopee do! Few cared, few still care. Hunting with dogs goes on much as before. What a legacy. Why not add banned conkers too!}

36. Cleanest rivers, beaches, drinking water and air since the industrial revolution { I've no idea, but from today's Telegraph "river pollution causing male fertility problems" so no.}

37. Free TV licences for over-75s {why not 65's? that's retirement age {for public sector anyway} That's the point, isn't it? free TV for those who don't have an income? Partial credit.}

38. Banned fur farming and the testing of cosmetics on animals {except for products with medical AND cosmetic uses. Bit of a loophole, that has been exploited, so say AR. Anyway, Euro ban from 2002, hardly a Labour own policy. Partial credit for doing it first IF you hadn't introduced mail deregulation first so allowing competition a free piggyback into the UK, without our mail services going overseas..very very silly}

39. Waiting times for operations halved {Yep, good result. At the expense of deficit spending though. That on top of the 3 x Tory spending on the NHS. Partial credit only, because it can't possibly continue to remain so low as deficit spending is finite. Good work on long term waiting though.}

40. Free local bus travel for over-60s {free bus travel nationwide. Its a barmy, expensive scheme that causes hardship to tourist areas, but hey, its an initiative. No credit though, it wasn't necessary, just a vote prop.}

Last leg coming up soon.

John Prescott's top fifty. {3}

Not many readers have praised too many policies so far. But it looks like minimum wage is considered a success.
Any more from this lot?

21. Child benefit up 25 per cent since 1997

{shame the 10p tax botch took some away. Still, take it as a victory.}

22. Created Sure Start to help children from low income households

{ And what a waste it has been. 3billion pounds in 4 years. The Guardian, hardly a hostile, paper said in 2006,"Today's Guardian offers the bleak assessment that Sure Start 'harms children who need it most". It is a typical well intentioned, and reasonably good idea, badly implemented, unmonitored and unrefined. Not enough success to earn a full credit.}

23. Introduced the Disability Rights Commission

{Its closed now. Not sure what real help it gave. Its certainly a massive cost for business.No credit}

24. £200 winter fuel payment to pensioners & extra £100 for over-80s

{and an extra £60 for the cold winter payments to over 65's too. Come on Prezza. Update the list ,its been around a while now, blindly copied onto the web pages of the faithful. Pensioners have benefited under NL. Except for the devastation wreaked upon them by care home costs, council tax and fuel/food price increases etc. Half a credit, as a lot of it is just sleight of hand}

25. On course to exceed Kyoto target to reduce greenhouse gas emissions by 2010

{Not really. Rises in carbon emissions Year on Year reported rises for 5 years out of eight And making the future 80% cuts is just as unlikely}

26. Negotiated the historic Good Friday Agreement in Northern Ireland {Yes. John Major got it started and Prime Minister Blair finished it. Its not the best deal ever made, and strongly resented by some, but it was always going to be really hard to bring about. But .. yes, full credit. At last something to call a legacy}

27. Over 30,000 more teachers in England schools.

{ In fact 110,000 odd new teachers by 2006 according to Hansard. How many left the profession was not disclosed. Still, there was a teacher shortage problem, less so now, so full credit}

28. All workers now have a right to 4 weeks’ paid holiday

{ erm ..4.8 weeks John. I know you cribbed the list that appeared on Mr Dale's a while back by Hazel Blears but you could at least update it. 5.6 weeks annual leave from April. If you employ 9 workers you would need a tenth, just to cover the holidays. Cost to government.Zero. Cost to business..massive. No credit here. No one was asking for more than 4 weeks. Its a union sop, that falls squarely onto business. Suspect it was a Euro alignment rule anyway. No Credit}

29. A million pensioners lifted out of relative poverty. {How so? More money given back but pension raids, stealth taxes, energy and food costs can't have lifted 1million out. Now with near zero savings rates those happy pensioners may not be so happy. Just statistics JP. No credit.}

30. 800,000 children lifted out of relative poverty { another completely meaningless figure, from a completely meaningless euro measure.."In August 2005 as research showed that the income gap between rich and poor has widened significantly under Labour" Nope. No credit.}

As Sven may have said..Some good..some not so good.

2 to go