Results tagged “Politics” from Birmingham Mail - Nathan Jolly

'How will people of the future look back at this time period?'

Yesterday, after the mention of the West Midlands being the region that has suffered the highest levels of unemployment in recent times, Peter Mandelson said that all will improve because 'what Midlands people do is help themselves'. This creates an image that suggests everyone will be able to get up as though they're in an American film from the 1950s and march out on the streets hunting down work. Perhaps by heading off to the local ranch in the Wild West of Birmingham to become a 'grafter' and make horseshoes while singing the blues.

Now, Peter Mandelson has contributed to a book called 'The City in Europe and the World' and he has also written his own book called 'The Blair Revolution' - soon to be followed by 'The Blair Revolution 2: The Brown Ultimatum' and then 'The Blair Revolution 3: I Know What You Did Last Decade...and I've Already Chosen The Curtains I Want When I Move Into Number 10, So Move Over Mr Brown'.

It's not uncommon to hear about people in government or those closely associated with politics to release books adding their own spin on the situation. Alistair Campbell published the book about his time with Tony Blair and Vince Cable, more recently, published a book called 'The Storm: The World Economic Crisis and What it Means'.

But if those publishing books about the state of our country are politically biased, what does that mean for the portrayal of our current society to those generations to come?

How will people of the future look back at this time period - especially if all the information and supposedly reliable sources become distorted over time?

There will probably be a future GCSE syllabus explaining that children should have to learn about how William Hague, George Osborne and Ann Widdecombe scored a hat trick each in the 2010 FIFA World Cup final.

Or how Davina McCall became the British Prime Minister and waged a civil war against Bristol.

History classes of the future would definitely be affected if our politicians are the ones writing the history.

'Today class, we're going to be learning about how Gordon Brown saved the British public from Swine Flu back in 2009. Please take out your copy of "How I Saved the British Public from Swine Flu in 2009" by Gordon Brown and turn to chapter 7.'

That's unless the sources the future students use in their classes are going to be more from the far left.

'In 2009, many MPs were criticised just for borrowing money from their constituents. The MPs only wanted to make their homes more comfortable as a reward for the hard work they do. How do you think the public's criticism made those poor MPs feel?'

And then there's the chance that information sources can get a little confusing over time. Like Chinese whispers.

'This afternoon, we're going to watch a documentary about the Queen of England, Queen Helen Mirren, in 1997.'

'Guy Fawkes broke the conditions of his ASBO when he attempted to destroy Parliament.'

'William Shakespeare's plays were a complete flop as he was refused funding from the Arts Council for not making his plays appeal to all generations and for not being modern and politically correct. (They did not feature a disabled, self-harming Lesbian from Thailand as the lead role.)'

Today's society is obviously a lot different from any other time in history and it's also totally different from what it will be like in 100 years in the future.

We're of the modern age. We're free trade, organic and smoke-free. We're bite size, wireless and in high definition. We're pre-packed, interactive and scientifically proven. We're uploaded, downloaded and prematurely post traumatic.

We worry about the onset of baldness and cellulite to the same extent that those in the 1700s worried about cholera.

How are we going to ensure that future generations know about us and all the things we did and liked?

How are we going to keep the stories going and let the future residents of the world know about all of the great British icons like Charles Dickens, Winston Churchill and Mr Bean?

How are we going to let people know about the Monarchy and how the Queen was head of state before the authentic power was handed over to Rupert Murdoch?

How are we going to let everyone know that people in England didn't really live in castles and spend all day drinking tea with Hugh Grant?

We need to ensure that creating the perception of society today for tomorrow's history books is not left to those who have a warped sense of reality. It's important that people of the future know about what it was truly like to be living in 2009 - surrounded by economic turmoil, the fuel crisis and repeats of Antiques Roadshow.

Even when the current generation are old and withered, their grandchildren will be asking, 'What was it like living in the old days with all those great minds such as Stephen Fry, David Attenborough and Katie Price? And tell me about Facebook and Twitter again.'

With politicians writing the books on social commentary, how is anyone in the future going to find out about all the things that are important to today's popular culture? Strictly Come Dancing, The X Factor, or the one where the entire house is filled with dim, self-important people who have nothing better to do than sit around all day talking about voting, moaning and arguing: The Houses of Parliament.

'There's something very different about local MPs'

Elections to the European Parliament and English county councils are coming up on 4 June. Ironically, it's about the worst time to be an MP at the moment, with their profession having probably fallen behind that of traffic wardens and serial killers in the list of the least respected people in society.

In a time when there's economic gloom and high crime rates, people are afraid to leave their houses in fear of being faced with a masked gunman, an axe-wielding maniac or a Member of Parliament.

On the one hand, people are voting for a representative of the local area and, on the other, people are voting for a representative in Europe - the place that really pulls all the strings.

Every day, 650 members of parliament in Westminster decide what new laws they are going to impose on the nation.

But it's not just them.

We have parish councils and borough councils and county councils and the House of Lords and the European Parliament - amassing to thousands of people who decide what you eat, what you say, where you go, how much you're paid, and how often you go to the toilet.

And every now and then people get outraged by them and, after an election, they're replaced with thousands more who do the same.

It's said that the European parliament passes around 24,000 new directives per year. It's for this reason that people seem to be against them.

By the time you've read this, there have probably been another couple of new laws.
You are no longer allowed to decorate your bedroom without planning permission and it's illegal to sneeze on a Thursday.

Generally, we like, and want to preserve, locally-run businesses much more than we like globalisation and multinational superstores.

People frequently reject the European Union in favour of good ol' Westminster, and sometimes like the idea of local councils even though people believe they're run by snoring lunatics.

We like our police to be like The Sweeney or Dixon of Dock Green as oppose to the FBI.

We fight to prevent supermarkets from opening even though they sell convenient, cheap food - and we strive to save local shops even though they're expensive and the vegetables look like Andrew Lloyd Webber covered in shrivelled weeds and mud.

So it's not surprising that people are said to be against voting for a European representative and the turnout is said to be low.

People don't like the idea of large groups deciding what's best for them as the effort is too generalised.

So, with that, you'd expect people to get a little more enthusiastic with local council elections.

But recent suggestions say that many people don't even know who their local MP is; the only thing they notice with regards to changes in the local area is the occasional bus lane popping up or a sign telling you that you will be fined if you don't pick up your dog's bowel movements from the pavement.

The leaflets full of MPs smiling, for what appears to be the first time in their life, have appeared on the doorsteps all around the country - taking their place beside the adverts for pizza takeaways and full instructions about how to wash your hands.

There's something very different about local MPs.

They operate on a much smaller budget and so they can only respond to complaints of litter in the street, stand outside Post Offices in high-visibility jackets, and smile while having photographs taken with children, owners of local businesses, and broken incubators at the local hospital.

And of course, the highlight in the life of a local MP is when there has been a flood.
It's universally acknowledged that that any MP should, after a spell of local flooding, put on a suit and some wellington boots and talk to the victims of the flood as their wardrobe floats out of the upstairs window.

They must also congratulate the emergency services for doing what they're paid to do and to not selling their stories of corruption to the Daily Telegraph.

Apart from the occasional appearance in the local newspaper or on TV at election time, it's rare that you'll ever hear from your MP - that's saying you even know who they are.

It has been said, that for many people, the little leaflet that comes through the door at election time with photographs of the local MP at the neighbourhood community centre is the first time they've ever seen their face.

Many MPs do occasionally offer a local surgery where people can go and voice their opinions and ask questions over tea and custard creams - questions of which MPs are probably trained to either not answer at all or to answer in a way that doesn't actually give any information or promise anything.

Having attempted to interview an MP on the radio, it soon becomes apparent that you're not actually getting anywhere and they just keep changing the subject - they like a little less conversation and more photographs with Post Offices and potholes in the road. It seems all of this aggravation ain't satisfactioning them.

Voting for an MP seems to be like voting for which candidate you like the least.

While people are disillusioned with the whole idea of elections and voting -- when it seems that one vote will make no difference, that same vote can do no more harm.

Democracy: the power being with the majority of the people and being able, through voting, to change the current state of play. We should try it some time.

At the moment it feels like democracy is the freedom to elect our dictators - on a local or international scale, and it feels like a vote is a choice between shooting yourself in the left or right leg.

'It's understandable that people are angry'

The news today hit the streets of Britain where citizens took time out of window-shopping outside Marks and Spencer's to express outrages at the latest scandal of MPs expenses.

Not surprisingly many said that they were thinking of moving abroad.

They said that they had lost all faith in the government and, if they had the money, they would be off to make a new life in the Bahamas.

It has recently been reported that last year, nearly 50,000 Britons moved abroad, and it is said that nearly a third of people have the intention to do the same.

The amount of people wanting to become expats and swap Costa del Birmingham for somewhere more colourful is on the increase.

And there's little wonder why.

In a land where tea bags are the essential ingredient for any crisis, tutting at someone is how you express that you are absolutely livid, looking at your feet or reading a newspaper gives you the right to ignore whatever is happening in front of you, and queue-jumping is on par with treason; there are still people who can't help being a partisan and would rather stay in Britain and face the music.

Even if the music is the tinkling of your smashed car window, the screams of people running for their lives in the streets, or the sound of an MP running off with your last two pennies.

But no one actually starts the day by thinking "I'm completely happy, I have the perfect job and a huge salary. I'm moving to New Zealand."

You're more likely to say "I'm extremely unhappy. I hate my job. I have no money and there's nothing good on the telly. I'm moving to New Zealand."

Everyone's going to New Zealand. The other popular choices are Greece where they like to stand on the side of the pool and jump on your head while you're swimming, or throw a ball in your face - or to Florida where they don't swim; they shout and play volleyball.

While many Britons, especially pensioners, prepare to pick up sticks and look for warmer climates, a report from hotel-owners all over the world have said that when British people go abroad they're badly dressed - if at all, loud, untidy and binge drinkers.

Apparently, hotel managers don't appreciate it when the Brits get drunk, do the Macarena in the hotel reception at 2am, and then run off to spread chlamydia.

So that's the pensioners' retirement plans ruined.

But it's hardly surprising people are getting the urge, now more than ever, to move abroad. They're tired of crime, the weather, and the government.

There are two rules in life. Rule number 1: Never undertake Morris dancing. Rule number 2: Always show resentment towards the government.

While it's sometimes dismal to hear constant criticism of the government and of life, it's understandable that people are angry.

The government may have been glad that the swine flu issue dominated the headlines since they knew their revelation about their expenses were coming up - to take the limelight away from their spending habits and their new refurbishments.

There was a time when unjust theft would have got you a prison sentence. Today if you're an MP it gets you double glazing and a knighthood.

People have spent their lives working and saving only to be left with no savings and no pension.

Having once dreamed of world cruises with sunlight dancing over their rum punch when they retire, they'll now have to settle on Complan: shaken not stirred, and a self-catering trip to Butlins.

And the money they pay the government in taxes has gone to funding war, a new kitchen in their second homes, and a £7.4million advertising campaign showing you how to sneeze in a tissue.

So it's no surprise people want to move abroad; spend their days in the sun until their skin goes to leather. Because a nation will turn its back on a country and government, if their government has turned its back on them.

'It's somewhat lucky that the latest crime report was released without much mention from the press'

It's been a relatively good time for the government this week. They've managed to quietly announce the fact that reports of car crime and violent crime are on the increase compared to this time last year.

They managed to slip it out so quietly, so that even the Daily Mail didn't notice; while Britain was battling, hands on hips, with an ice age, and Carol Thatcher was being swallowed up by the fires of hell.

The usual freedom-of-speech argument crops up even more frequently now, thanks to the Jonathan Ross and Russell Brand scenario that nearly caused World War III.

It seems these days you can't talk about cement or a loaf of bread without getting the BCM (British Collective of Moaners) or the WIFA (Weeds Instead of Food Association) on your back.

Even Jeremy Clarkson had a slap on the wrist, again, for calling Gordon Brown a 'one-eyed Scottish idiot'.

Scottish? That's a little harsh.

Taking the fact that everyone was making snowmen and debating which words are socially acceptable (the f-word only after 9pm, the c-word: never, and the n-word: also never - unless you're Quentin Tarantino) the Government had managed to mention the latest crime figures in a tiny report that no one would notice.

A report of crime figures are always depressing and hearing MPs talking about them is even worse.

When talking about action against car crime, use of the word 'tough' has increased 59%. When referring to violent crime, the incidence of MPs saying "tough" has gone up by a massive 81%.

We are now 76% more likely to be assaulted by the phrase "more bobbies on the beat" than at any time in the last 50 years and millions of us now live in fear of the trauma of waking up to discover that Jacqui Smith is going to be calling a press conference.

Jacqui Smith will also be disappointed that the crime figures have risen, despite all her best efforts to only get all Conservatives arrested on a regular basis.

The main area, it seems, where incidences of crime had fallen are with burglaries. The only increase being with those people who left their houses to attend their weekly Neighbourhood Watch meeting.

The latest report states that young males are still the largest law-breakers. But this is easy to sort out. All that needs to be done is to introduce new laws to balance it out a little across the whole of society.

Laws like: arresting people who believe that pressing the button to call the lift several times is going to make it arrive any faster, handcuffing people who walk away from a jammed printer - knowing full well they were the ones to jam it, and charging people who think that slightly lowering your head into your shoulders when it's raining is going to stop you from getting any less wet.

It's somewhat lucky that the latest crime report was released without much mention from the press.

While listening to the usual tough-on-crime-tough-on-the-causes-of-crime speeches; if you can hear them over the members of the crowd shouting 'bugger off!', there's a certain amount of disillusionment that no matter how many catchphrases are used it won't make a difference.

With murders, knife attacks, car-theft, and mugging threatening people every day, the government are set to be 'tough' on crime and anyone who disagrees with this will get a dead leg from good ol' Jacqui Smith.

'Millions of people watching all over the world, street parties and mass celebration'

A NEW dawn is upon America and upon the world.

Ever since Barack Obama first announced his candidacy in Springfield, Illinois, almost two years ago, we have witnessed a series of historic moments - each more significant than the last.

Barack Obama is, today, the world's most influential person, second only to Oprah Winfrey.

Of course, it wasn't only his ethnicity, charisma, and calibre that has made Obama the 44th President of the United States.

Even a flea, a dustpan, or Paris Hilton would have been better than George Bush.

At $42million Obama's inauguration party is set to be the most expensive and most-watched in history.

Almost $10million has been pumped into security as anyone from terrorists to plain idiots had to be looked out for.

But that shouldn't be too bad as, apart from Bush, all the other stupid people are either locked away in the Big Brother house or squabbling about obesity in Parliament back here in the UK.

And Obama's ceremony that has been going on for the last couple of days consists of, or has yet to consist of, Bruce Springsteen, Beyoncé, Mary J. Blige, Stevie Wonder and Shakira.

Compare this to George Bush's inauguration parties in 2001 and 2005 in which he pretended that Macy Gray, Lyle Lovett, Asleep At The Wheel and ZZ Top were his favourite artists, and so they were invited to come and perform to his audience of about 7 spectators; who were probably forced to watch at gunpoint or were just too slow to run away.

When asked about his terrible performance line-up and why no well-known singers were performing for his second inauguration, Bush used the excuse that America was "now a country at war".

This supposedly means that all of the best performers didn't come to his ceremony because of the war.

That's it. That's why he had singers no one had heard of.

It wasn't because they didn't like Bush but; Aretha Franklin, Bob Dylan, Diana Ross, Barbra Streisand, Elton John, Fleetwood Mac and Chuck Berry who were willing to perform for Bill Clinton's ceremony, were obviously too busy digging trenches at Afghanistan's front line to perform for George W.

And last week, Bush booked 15 minutes on all of the major television networks so he could make a speech about all of his achievements while in office. It's not yet decided, however, what he's going to do with the other 14minutes and 59 seconds.

He may decide to name the two things that didn't go quite to plan. Namely his first and second term in office.

And just to think that the most powerful man in the world, for two terms, is a man who asks questions like: "Is our children learning?" and has his finger over the big, red nuclear button with an unnerving idea that God is at his side.

Obama's personal train, over the last couple of days, has made its way from Philadelphia to Washington - following the same route that Abraham Lincoln took in 1861. A rustic old train.

I would have much preferred a private jet travelling in a high-altitude convoy, so you can step off the plane and wave at fans while walking down the steps like The Beatles or the Pope. All the spectators cheering and jumping for joy as you cross the tarmac without the regular holiday-makers with uneven sunburn, cheap airline headphones, an intoxicated slur, and deep-vein thrombosis.

But the American's certainly know how to have a party. Millions of people watching all over the world, street parties and mass celebration. The most we would manage in Britain is a shrug of the shoulders and a cheese sandwich for a new Prime Minister - each new one the same as the last.

But people all over America aren't just crying tears of joy and cheering that Bush is finally out of the White House, they're rejoicing at the fact that history has been made and the global table has been turned.
They see the world as a new place with just the election of one man who, at least, promises some sort of hope, no matter how fairytale, to add a new chapter to the American Dream.

A symbol of supremacy in the anti-racism movements and equality factions that have shed much time and blood throughout history - now as an icon, a stature, and an exemplar of social mobility on an international stage.

But with the economy, unemployment, the Guantanamo Bay issue, climate change and the like, all building up to catastrophic proportions, it would seem that Obama has taken the helm of a country in decline.

And now, as the USA welcomes its first black president, Americans have finally advanced beyond their racial past, and, perhaps ironically, picked a black man to clean up their mess.