It is now an archive for my newspaper and magazine pieces. My blog can now be read at: www.spectator.co.uk/stephenpollard
Politics, economics and culture from the master. Unmissable.
Melanie Phillips home page
Melanie Phillips' peerless blog. Read, and learn.
Daniel Finkelstein's Times Comment Central
A daily must-read.
Tim Worstall
Lots of interesting nibbles - and a ruthless swatter of economic gibberish.
Harry's Place
Must-read left of centre blog from writers who understand the threat to the West.
Clive Davis
Always interesting selection of culture and politics, from an Anglo-American bent.
Samizdata
Libertarian blog, packed every day.
Norm's blog
The thoroughly sensible thoughts of renowned left-wing academic Norman Geras, Professor of Government at Manchester. And cricket, too.
Public Interest
Peter Briffa's inimitable take on The Yazzmonster and other assorted demons.
Reform
The public sector reform group; their website is an invaluable source of data and ideas.
Centre for the New Europe
The leading European public policy think tank.
Developed by:
| July | 28 |
| 2006 |
My loathing of Sir Menzies Campbell gets greater by the day. His interview this morning on the Today programme was a classic of its kind.
His comments on the Middle East were bad enough. First, he praised the BBC for its “eloquent†coverage of the conflict. To a died in the wool Israel-hater that's no doubt true.
Next he argued that Israel couldn't win because all Hezbollah needs to do is “resist†to win Arab support. Ah yes, the voice of the liberal indeed. Kidnapping soldiers and bombing Israel is “resistance†in Sor Menzies' mind.
Then he argued that, in effect, Israel should be defenceless. He doesn't think America should be allowed to use Britiish airports to help it transport weapons to Israel.
Fine. At least he can't deny now where he really stands, given his objection to Israel having the wepons to defend itself from attack.
But what fair took my breath away was his reaction to the conviction of Michael Brown, the man who has given £2.4 million to the LibDems. Asked if he was embarrassed, Sir Menzies replied that "these are matters which are sub judice" and then huffed that they "are not matters which are anything to do with the LibDems".
No, of course not. It's nothing at all to do with the Lib Dems that one of their main donors is a crook, and they have no intention of returning the money.
As I have pointed out before, the LibDem's website says this:
Unlike the other main parties, the Liberal Democrats do not receive funding from big business or trade unions.
But fraudsters are just fine.
I don't understand why people say Sir Menzies isn't fit to be LibDem leader. He's a hypocrite in charge of a hypocritical party. Seems like a perfect fit to me.
MessageSpace
I commented thus to Paul Linford, who seemed to think the Lib Dems were some kind of an entity at one stage.
Ahhh Stephen, but did you witness how the presenter really grilled him on his party's relationship with the fraudster?
- "They are not matters which are anything to do with the LibDems."
- "Thank you Sir Ming Campbell."
I see it quite differently. I see Sir Ming as the last stage in the complete homogeneization of British politics. We already have a wholly undistinguishable set of majority and opposition parties, in which Blair's, Brown's and Cameron's policies are scarcely to be told apart by a hair. Now the last party that had something like a separate identity has had its leader destroyed; and Ming the Merciless, an obvious creature of the clubs and the bureaucracy, a Whitehall man to his fingertips in spite of his affected Scottish accent, comes to power; and the first thing he says is to reverse his party's opposition to privatizing the Post Office. Now all professional politicians are united in a gooey group hug; everyone agrees on the policies the country ought to follow; and the poor stupid elector may as well stay home, for all the difference that his or her vote is going to make. Democracy? Whussat?