Honeyball’s weekly round-up

Labour Party

Business Secretary, Vince Cable used the T word again today he was referring to a tax on bankers bonuses today when he was interviewed on Andrew Marr. The Coalition Government had promised it would be tough on banker’s bonuses, yet it looks as though this year we are going to see another round of very very hefty bonuses awarded to bankers. No doubt an icy chill will have fallen across the city, after the Business Secretary called for bankers to cool down the bonuses or else.

Or else what exactly? The Chancellor, George Osborne, doesn’t appear to have been anywhere near as vociferous in the banker’s bonus debate. If they don’t calm down they will be taxed, we’d rather they accepted that they must calm down their bonuses. The responsibility, he says, lies with the bosses of the banks, the coalition were clear that it would keep its eye on bank bonuses and they must not let this slip. You can watch his interview with Andrew Marr this morning here (approx 38:29 minutes into the programme.)

Cable will be appearing in an altogether scene than today’s when we see him appearing on the Christmas Special of Strictly Come Dancing, an accomplished ballroom dancer, this twinkle toes will undoubtedly impress us, but perhaps in a different way to Ms Widdecombe.

Vince Cable on Christmas Special of Strictly Come Dancing

What do Chairman Mao and David Cameron have in common? Rather a lot according to Andrew Rawnsley in today’s Observer. He says that one minister claims he will ‘unveil a cultural revolution in the public services.’ Rawnsley claims ‘I have actually heard more than one member of the cabinet explicitly refer to the government as ‘Maoist’. Needless to say Rawnsley’s conclusion is that we are governed by Maoists and his argument is set out here.

Women are to blam for the gender pay gap, says today’s Telegraph. A report ot be published by a leading accademic says it’s down to women’s life style choices. Oh and for good measure, and to stick the boot in,  Dr Hakim claims in a 12,000 word report described government policies to promote equality as ‘pointless’ and based on ‘feminist myths’. Dr Hakim the article said was the same person who claimed in a study called Erotic Capital earlier this year that the most successful people in modern society are those who are the most attractive in appearance and manner. It is incredibly disappointing, and that’s putting it mildly, that people still feel this way and that there is an attitude that ‘women want it all but must make sacrifices somewhere.’ 

Earlier in the year Equalities Minister, Lynne Featherstone, said she would tackle the view that women should appear a certain way, that image is everything and will get you on in life. Women have enough things to contend with – why do we also have to be worried about being the most attractive in appearance and manner? It’s absurd.

2 thoughts on “Honeyball’s weekly round-up

  1. On hearing of the Con-Dem régime being described as Maoist, I am reminded of my time at college, where I suggested setting up a Conservative Society, dedicated to solidarity with Comrade Ligachëv and his ‘conservative’ communist comrades in fighting Gorbachëv revisionism!

    However I adhered strictly to the more social (and liquid) functions of the Junior Common Room.

  2. That the Prime Minister might be a Maoist is in my view less significant than the certainty that the Leader of the EU Commissioners is a Maoist. Although he has not been elected by the public in the UK or anywhere else, Mr. Barrosu has far more control over GB than Cast Iron Dave whose government only concerns itself with about 15% of our legislation.

    Many people find it difficult to accept that UK politicians have so little control over things. They do have a point when they cite examples of the mayhem and misery they visit on us but they forget the capacity of some people to screw up very badly in all situations. The political classes in the UK could be compared to a terrible waiter. Our imaginary terrible waiter has very little authority at his place of work. He is not the head waiter, he is not the manager and he is not a partner in the firm. This lack of clout does not mean however that he cannot have a devastating effect on the restaurant’s prosperity. He can still be rude to the customers, he can serve the wrong food to the wrong people, he can spill wine over people and he can let the diners escape without paying.

    Cast Iron Dave and his deputy should be thought of as Basil Fawlty and Manuel failing to serve up a meal properly. Comparing Mr. Barrosu to the person really in charge at Fawlty Towers is not so easy. Sybil was far more efficient and benign.

    Another good point about Sybil was that she did not blame others for everything. Our politicians could learn something from this. They go on and on and on about the bankers and their shortcomings presumably in the hope that it will divert attention from their own self-serving greed and incompetence.

    I don’t know how effective their strategy is with the voters but this voter is not impressed. I used to have neutral feelings about bankers but now I am warming to them. Whenever I hear politicians pouring scorn over them my reflection is always that at least the bankers don’t keep boring us about their social consciences or their commitment to the British public, etc.

    My other reflection is that the politicians used to be such good pals with these bankers who they now blame for everything except the weather. The banker held up for the most criticism is Fred Goodwin but he used to be flavour of the month. Gordon Brown recommended him for his knighthood and gave him a job advising the government. Didn’t the former PM know what was going on?

    Presumably, he didn’t have a clue. He was ideally placed for 13 years (as Chancellor then PM) to reform banks and banking but he did not.

Comments are closed.