One way traffic

Zowee. More G20 fallout: Just saw a spokesperson for the Police Federation refusing to agree that police officers covering their IDs was unacceptable. Combined with the “don’t let a few bad apples colour your perception of the entire force” rhetoric which has been trotted out over the past few days, you end up with an argument under which the police are neither individually nor collectively accountable when things go wrong.

I have nothing funny to say about the idea that the police should be allowed to operate anonymously. Particularly in situations where their role is to ensure the public can exercise its democratic rights in safety.

A new kind of responsibility

This is nice. Gordon Brown has finally apologised for the Damian McBride email slur thing, at an interview in Glasgow (presumably on the basis that anything said north of Newcastle immediately has 32.7% less impact, as proven by scientists). He also took “full responsibility”, thus:

…‘Asked if he took responsibility, Brown said: "I take full responsibility for what happens and that's why the person who was responsible went immediately."…

For a chunky lad, Gordon seems to have performed a positively balletic bit of doublethink here; ‘taking responsibility’ while simultaneously finding someone else responsible.

As politicians and government in general have grudgingly opened themselves up to ever greater scrutiny, we’ve gradually accepted the idea that proper ministerial responsibility isn’t really practical. If a Home Secretary resigned every time a junior civil servant lost a CD with all our banking details on it, Noel Edmonds would probably be Home Secretary by now, and that’s no way to run a country.

Which is all well and good, but “I didn’t know what my staff was up to” doesn’t really sound very statesmanlike, does it?

So, ministerial responsibility is back! But, unlike version 1.0, it no longer means “it happened under my watch, so it’s ultimately my fault”. No – welcome to a tough, macho new version of ministerial responsibility, under which ministers 'take responsibility' for cleaning up corruption and incompetence wherever it raises its head (after the event and neatly sidestepping the fact that they were, nominally, in charge).

Imagine the kind of 'taking responsibility' Dirty Harry might indulge in – that’s more where we are now. Gordon’s taking on the establishment, taking matters into his own hands and giving them a damn good shake.

See what we did there? Easy, wasn't it? Expect to see people “taking responsibility” all over Westminster very soon.

A big hello to all my new readers...

My joy at welcoming you is almost as great as my dismay that the words "Asspocalypse IV" have generated substantially more search hits than anything else I've written here.

Also, my Blogger dashboard has a new tab called 'monetise'.

It must be fate.

Never say you're sorry, except for "Asspocalypse IV"

Jacqui Smith. Always good value.

We seem to get one Government Minister or another on the Today Programme every morning at the moment, pointing out that they didn’t break The Rules* by spending public money on second (or third) homes.

But dear Jacqui is the only one who has to append “I did absolutely nothing wrong” with “apart from the porn, which I’ve apologised for”.

Before we leap to judgement though, we should remember that MPs do have a very stressful job**, shoulder the full responsibility (if they're ministers) for mistakes made in their departments*** and, thanks to the rigours of democracy, have relatively little job security****. So go easy on them, eh?

* As written by the very people who stand to benefit and, apparently, stating that MPs can have as many houses in central London as they and their extended families might need.

** Parliament sat for around 160 days last year. Attendance is generally far from compulsory.

*** Although, since the late 80s, not to the extent of actually resigning or, indeed, apologising.

**** As opposed to the rest of us, who move seamlessly from being fired to massively well-paid consultancy positions with shadowy international organisations, willing to pay through the nose for our connections and the veneer of respectability.

So, about this global problem...

Many of the people who could have prevented the current global financial crisis, had they only worked together a bit, today held a summit in the heart of London’s financial district, in a gesture of what can only be interpreted as aggressive irony.

A bit like being offered expensive reconstructive dentistry by the man who just knocked your teeth out with a bat, we’re now being told that the G20 leaders are the only ones with the experience to save us.

But, as we’re constantly being told (in the UK at least) this is a global problem, rather than being the fault of – for example – Gordon Brown personally, a craven regulator and a legion of financial professionals whose sole aim is personal enrichment. For example.

So, while we’ve got the leaders of every single country which has contributed to this mess in the same place, this is surely a great opportunity to point in one direction and say: “You – this was your fault. Whatever the banks or hedge funds or insurers may have done, your job is to make the rules and ensure they’re stuck to. So this global problem really is absolutely your fault.”

Not that it’ll help all that much, but neither will a commitment to doing “whatever is necessary” (were the Finnish holding out for “whatever we can be bothered to do”?). Even a little apology or admission of guilt would sweeten the gruel a little.

Note to our seven loyal readers: I know, it’s not as funny when I don’t pretend to be a newspaper (which makes these last couple of posts marginally less funny than not terribly funny at all). My misanthropy is such that I’m about to bring another human being into the world, simply because I don’t see why anybody should get away with not being born (surely the ultimate existential cop-out) and, consequently, I’m rather busy.

Normal service should resume shortly, or when the lazy little sod gets a job and moves out, whichever happens first.

And tell your friends, you freeloading fuckers.

Not in the mood

The UK economy is in meltdown, thanks to massive regulatory failure and unchecked greed among consumers and the businesses which serve them. The crisis follows a decade of spiralling property prices and easy access to no-questions-asked credit, which created a self-fuelling cycle of growth.

When it was revealed late last year that almost every bank was lending money to anybody who asked for it, then disguising these debts as rock-solid and selling them on, the entire financial services industry promptly retired with a massive pension.

In a bid to re-start irresponsible lending, the Government has used taxpayers’ money to buy these toxic loans, as well as giving more free cash to the banks, in the hope that they’d lend it back to us, which they haven't.

None of this has worked and the only people who were in a position to avert the crisis have yet to decide exactly whose fault it was. However, this is understandable, as they are also tackling other pressing questions, including:

A) How much of a bonus is too much? And can I at least have a few million for the things which didn’t cripple the economy? Thanks.
B) Should the taxpayer cough up for a house for my parents/lover/nanny, or would it be more tactful to just take an extra £30k on my salary?
C) Why has nobody told my husband he can get his porn for free on bittorrent?

Happy April 1st, suckers.