A Janus Face

What would Cameron lose if Coulson went?

2009-07-09T13:49:00.004+01:00

There is sustained pressure on David Cameron's Director of Communications and Planning, Andy Coulson. What is his value to Cameron?

A former tabloid editor, Coulson is reputed to have been integral to broadening the appeal of the Conservative message, and has been particularly influential on crime and debt. How successful the Conservatives have been at this is open to debate - much of their popularity seems to draw from Labour's inherent and growing weaknesses. However this is surely a crucial role for a Conservative Party which realistically needs to step up their game and fully capitalise on if they are to gain a sizable majority at the next election.

His performance has improved. Responsible for 'hug a hoodie' he has clearly learnt better to balance the old and the new in Cameron's image of the Conservative party, something which has helped the party better exploit parts of the Lib Dem vote. It would be tricky for anyone starting from scratch on this difficult balancing act, particularly someone who has not had the baptism of fire of starting with the Conservatives on a low ebb during the Brown bounce, and reticent detractors like Tebbit at their zenith. He has helped consolidate Cameron's power and drive the shift in the party image past the Parliamentary party and membership so in this respect he has been tested and has probably learnt much.

He is liked by journalists. I have heard he is a very straight reliable divester of the Conservative line to top journalists. His replacement may fulfil this role too but this is an unknown. We know how these relationships can turn sour in government and Coulson is certain to join Cameron in Downing Street.

No wonder Labour MPs and the Liberal Democrats want his head.

Chloe Smith, the 'no hoper'?

2009-07-03T10:38:00.006+01:00

Interesting coverage in The Times today of the forthcoming Norwich North by-election. The paper argues that a "wounded and angry city" could turn away from Labour and make the "no hoper" Chloe Smith a credible candidate.

From even my basic understanding of the electoral numbers this seems an incredible interpretation. The seat is Conservative target number 168 at the next General Election. The Conservatives would have to win seats like these to get an overall majority and current polling figures should give them the swing required to win here even in a General Election.

This is a by-election, so naturally the Governing party will do relatively badly.

Either The Times are extraordinarily badly briefed, or they want a Conservative victory to seem like a surprise against the odds victory. I give them enough credit to think the latter is true. If so why? Is it to make a better story or are they actively supporting the Conservatives?

I wonder if Rupert Murdoch has been to any meetings in Westminster recently...

And today barmy Fox anchor supports: death to America!

2009-07-02T14:28:00.002+01:00

Just spotted this gem of nonsense from Fox's mad media monster anchor Glenn Beck.

If you have heard Beck speak before you might assume you know what you're in for. I advise you to fasten your seatbelts all the same.

He actually argues, get this, that if he was Osama Bin Laden he would avoid instigating a terrorist attack on America at the moment, because, wait for it, this event would be the only thing that could force America to prevent a terrorist attack...

Thereby preventing the end to which he had already secured... no wait... THAT DOESN'T MAKE SENSE.

What's worse is he is actually hoping for a terrorist attack to wake up the authorities. Really like to know what he does to keep his job as it would make fascinating for people being laid off everywhere.

Violence in Iran reported by persiankiwi on Sky News

2009-06-24T17:44:00.002+01:00

Just noticed Sky is reporting on persiankiwi's tweets this morning about new bouts of violence in Tehran today.

They quote this tweet:

"I see many ppl with broken arms/legs/heads - blood everywhere - pepper gas like war," persiankiwi writes in English.

I actually re-tweeted this so I wonder if they heard about it through my twitter? Suppose I'll never know. Anyway if you twitter its worth following this person here: www.twitter.com/persiankiwi

BIS: Science to the fore?

2009-06-09T17:48:00.005+01:00

Lord Mandelson gave his first speech as Secretary of State for BIS rather than BERR today following the second re-branding of the department in less than two years (Business, Enterprise and Regulatory Reform to Business, Innovation and Skills).

Two things to note:

1. The comma is missing from the logo despite the shift costing a total of £70 million according to one of my sources. (If they price the change by character, this omission saved the taxpayer £1.8 million)

2. Despite the fact that Mandelson's speech today was on how the new department would "put science at centre of vision of Britain's future prosperity," I hear BIS failed to consult either the Chief Scientific Advisor John Beddington or the Government Office of Science on the contents of the speech.

Oh well, who needs joined up government anyway?

UPDATE: Noticed Michael Crick pointing out that the subsumed DIUS is the only government department ever to have just one secretary of state (John Denham)

New song: '8759...'

2009-05-28T09:26:00.006+01:00

I've decided to start uploading tunes on YouTube, and likewise I'll share some of them on this blog.

This is the intro to what is otherwise quite a fast, loud and grandiose song which I'm still putting together (RSS Readers need to click through to see embedded video).

Do watch in HQ as the sound quality is quite poor as it is.

Sorry this has absolutely nothing to do with politics!

Boris slams Darling's revenge on Kensington and Chelsea

2009-04-30T10:28:00.005+01:00

Bozza published an attack on the Government's "soak the rich" budget on Monday.

His policy director Anthony Browne, who is formerly head of influential rightist think tank Policy Exchange, (or 'PX' to those in the know, darling) was in tow adding:

"the government’s class-war assault on high earners is really an assault on London."

Seems a bit shrill, but then he has evidently improved his rhetorical skills since December when he said

"All those on more than £100,000 a year will be at least £1,000 a year worse off because of the halving of their personal allowances. All those on more than £140,000 a year will be at least £2,000 a year worse off because of the scrapping of their personal allowances. It is almost as though the Budget is the revenge of England on the affluent of Kensington and Chelsea."

I wonder, when Anthony Browne eats a doughnut, whether he prefers to savour the pristine white icing around the peripheries, or concentrate his efforts on the messy centre?

The Unscrupulous Mr Purnell

2009-04-29T17:45:00.006+01:00

Party political broadcasts tend to just amuse me but once in a while they can be truly disgusting.

This official Labour Party video shows us that when Work and Pensions Secretary James Purnell isn't slagging off people caught in a vicious cycle of poverty before the economic crisis, he travels the country finding out the impact of Labour's policies on unemployment. Awww, what a nice man.

Actually more specifically he travels to HENLEY!

Not only is Henley the single richest constituency in the UK, it also has the fifth lowest rate of unemployment in Britain. There are 641 other constituencies more deserving of the Secretary of State's time.

Rate of unemployment in Henley: 2%
Rate of unemployment in Birmingham Ladywood: 22.5%

22.5% ÷ 2% = Pathetic Government ignoring the people.

Those are the facts I could find but sadly I couldn't find out what was lower these days, poverty in Henley or our Government.

Watch the video below:

Government scrappage scheme takes shape - BERR

2009-04-28T11:46:00.000+01:00

Business Secretary Lord Mandelson commented:

"I welcome the level of interest from car manufacturers that have already said they are keen to sign up to the voluntary scheme and look forward to seeing them benefit from more new buyers very soon."

(Image from Failblog.org, quote and title from original press release)

Who needs comment when official quotes are more revealing?

A Sceptical Head

2009-04-20T12:00:00.003+01:00

David Cameron's former Chief of Staff Alex Deane puts his climate-sceptic head above the parapet today on ConHome, ironically to tell all the other blue green deniers to keep their heads down for the moment.

He doesn't believe that climate change is linked to human activity because he has read one wayward book that breaks with evidence that the overwhelming majority of climate scientists believe is effectively incontrovertible.

Like so many others I am terrified by the idea that leading politicians and decision-makers publicly or privately ignore the greater mass of scientific thinking on an issue which most scientists believe could shape life on earth radically.

Does it matter that his background links him so closely with the Conservative leader? Probably not. Still, its a little embarrassing nonetheless.

Right and Left, working in harmony

2009-04-16T12:43:00.004+01:00

These reports prove that ideologically polarised think tanks sometimes come to the same conclusions:

The Adam Smith Institute and the Fabian Society, who'd have thunk it.

Police Medics Go Wild!

2009-04-15T14:43:00.007+01:00

Some pictures of police medics I received today.

I remember medics getting a bit carried away at uni but I'm sure they were never this rowdy.

G20 policing: we must establish the truth to learn the lessons

2009-04-08T12:29:00.015+01:00

I shared the concern of Andy Hayman former-Assistant Commissioner Special Operations at the Metropolitan Police when he said today "the commissioner must ask serious questions about the style of policing. If left unchecked, we have a more violent crowd in uniform than the crowd demonstrating."

After the reports, the emotion and the scandals over policing of the the G20 protests, we need a full independent criminal inquiry into police action which establishes what happened, how it came to pass. It must attempt to establish accountability with reference to the command structure of the Metropolitan police for misinforming the public (some statements already retracted) over the events.

We then need a long hard unbiased academic think about police tactics around political protests in Britain, working partnership with the IPCC and the Metropolitan police.

This is why:

"From outside the camp looking in we could see young people, hands in the air to show they were non-violent, being pushed around and in some cases beaten by police. According to reports from inside the camp the officers carrying out the beatings were covering their ID badges so they couldn't be identified. As well as violence and intimidation, the protesters in the enclosures, including women, had to suffer the indignity of urinating in public. "
Guy Aitchison

"On the way we heard on the radio that the situation in Bishopsgate had suddenly become ‘tense’. This surprised us as the atmosphere when we left, about 15 minutes before this radio news report, was entirely peaceful and convivial. It also seemed surprising since at 6pm, the scheduled activities in the Camp were:
(1) Buddhist meditation;
(2) how to fight climate change with poetry; and
(3) activist trauma support.
We decided that we’d take a careful look back at the Camp once we’d finished the important business of having our dinner.

When we approached the Camp for the second time, at around 7.15 pm, the situation had changed completely. Approaching from the Liverpool Street station end we were confronted by a line of police vans, nose to nose, completely blocking entry to the Camp. Police officers in riot helmets were lined up behind the vans. Gradually, they formed a line in front of the vans.
No-one allowed in; no one allowed out. We thought of the family with the toddler. Had the police allowed some people, e.g., those with young children, to leave before they drew up their lines?

Why were the police doing this? One answer: “It’s the superior powers, I’m afraid”, said one policeman in good temper (rather in the spirit of the WW1 infantry song, ‘We’re here because we’re here because we’re here because we’re here’).

Another police officer (something like): “I don’t have to give you an explanation because I am acting on information which is not available to you.”

A third police officer: “There was violence inside the Camp.”
So I looked the policeman in the eye: “That’s bare-faced lie - I was in the camp just before this started and I know it wasn’t violent.”His reply? He immediately conceded, with a bit of a laugh, that, yes, he had indeed lied. Feeling a rush of republican self-righteousness hitting me, I asked him if he thought that this is how police officers properly serve the citizenry: by telling them bare-faced lies. Obviously hoping that I would just shut up and go away, he sort-of laughed again and agreed that, yes, this is how police officers properly serve the public.

Some officers were wearing balaclavas under their riot helmets. I pointed out to one officer that this meant I couldn’t see his face properly. (I later learnt from another officer that they are worn because of their flame-repellent properties.) I then also noticed that he had no identification number on his jacket. Thus, if things got nasty, and he ended up in a tussle with a protester, the protester would have no way of identifying him: no face, no number. I reported this to the Legal Observer on the scene. About ten minutes later, another officer hastily tacked on some identification numbers to the offending jacket."

Stuart White

"Another demonstrator had already called 999 and was getting medical advice from the ambulance dispatcher. “Four police with two police medics came. They told her [the first aider] to ‘move along’”, said Peter Apps. “Then they pushed her forcibly away from him. They refused to listen to her [the first aider] when she tried to explain his condition.”

The first aider, who did not wish to be named, said, “The police surrounded the collapsed man. I was standing with the person who’d called 999. The ambulance dispatcher wanted to talk to the police, the phone was being held out to them, but the police refused.”

Another witness, Elias Stoakes, added “we didn’t see them [the police] perform CPR.”

Last Hours

"Within an hour of arriving, the same police who had stepped back and let me through closed in around the camp and refused to let anyone in or out. I then watched the police push forward into the crowd with a brutality that was not only shocking but utterly unnecessary. All the protesters put their hands in the air and sat down collectively on the road. Yet as the crowd lowered I saw a young man stagger back with his head split open, another boy with a broken nose, a girl next to me had been kicked between the legs.

Despite our repeated requests to be searched and allowed to leave the space, we were held there for six hours with no access to water, food, toilets or medical care. Proudly, throughout all this, not one person in the crowd reacted with violence to any person or property. People shared the little they had and held public meetings about the aims of the G20 summit. There was little show of anger, but much unhappiness. When, finally, we were herded out one by one at midnight, I felt cold to the core, chilled by the unprovoked aggression of those who I had been brought up to trust. I am deeply ashamed of my state, in which reasonable and calm protesters are criminalised and provoked in such a manner."
Beth McGrath

To the riposte that there is nothing that can be done, that this is inevitable and that blanket violence against anyone present is necessary when private property is under threat as it was at RBS that day, I would say have more ambition for our police! Look how effectively they have learnt to manage football crowds, which were renowned as the most violent in Europe not long ago, and look how police elsewhere in Europe still fail to strike an effective balance and clearly make violence inevitable through heavy-handed approaches. We can do better with political protests as well!

The need for a reappraisal of violent tactics is obvious and will I'm sure be examined in detail in good time. Yet there are more options to consider, if we are to learn from failure here and successes elsewhere.

Perhaps there needs to be closer liaison between protest organisers and police.
Perhaps we need more coordinated and codified organisation of entrance and exit to political protests as an alternative to 'kettling' which seems to have made the police's job of avoiding harming innocents harder.
Perhaps we need a greater emphasis on clear public information before and throughout the event to avoid frustration which can be the seed of conflict.
We at least need makeshift toilet facilities and drinking fountains if the movements of private individuals are to be so severely restricted.

UPDATE: "The Commissioner of the Metropolitan Police Service (MPS), Sir Paul Stephenson has requested that Her Majesty's Inspectorate of Constabulary (HMIC) undertake a review of the MPS in terms of its response to the policing of events whether planned or spontaneous and the associated potential for public disorder." LINK

Tory logo

2009-03-17T14:43:00.003Z

Labour List have made a little website where you can make your own Tory logo HERE

Here's my effort:

(Its a take on the used and reused vote blue go green campaign)

Mind you my logo is probably more applicable to Labour today. Phil Woolas just said in Parliament that any version of a migrant amnesty was "a well intentioned road to hell."

And you thought rivers of blood were taboo these days.

Me, me, I, I

2009-03-06T16:50:00.004Z

I was interviewed on Paul Burgin's 'Mars Hill' blog today.

http://paulburgin.blogspot.com/2009/03/twenty-questions-to-fellow-blogger-part_06.html

Please accept my apologies for being such a shameless self publicist

Why is Hague championing an enhanced Commonwealth?

2009-02-03T09:15:00.012Z

Conservative Shadow Foreign Secretary William Hague is going to speak today championing an enhanced role and the possible expansion of the Commonwealth, a story which the BBC covers.

Its a striking statement. I don't doubt that as a cultural and economic bloc the Commonwealth is covered as sparingly as it is considered by the public.

At first it seems a strangely old fashioned rallying call. My first impression was of course that it is a natural conservative instinct to hark to what they perceive as better days. It is in the conservative nature to remember the past generously.

But two other reasons strike me:

One, that Britain, having previously seemed a prime beneficiary of globalisation until the financial crisis broke, now looks to be one of its chief victims as the collapse of our financial sector sucks the heart out of our economic prowess and our relative import on the international stage. Britain may be coming to terms with this as a short term state of affairs, but our new situation may well last for a very long time. After all, the city may not recover and finance certainly can't sustainably return to the good old days.

In short Britain may face a crisis of identity which would mirror the character (if not quite the scale) of that which followed Britain's collapse as a great power. Thatcher was credited with helping Britain carve a renewed unashamed pride into British national identity. Hague, a close student of Thatcher, may see his party's chance to emulate their previous performance by harking to influence and significance greater than that which Britain actually possesses.

Secondly, and more immediately in light of the World Economic Forum which wraps up this week in Davos, William Hague may be attempting to mark out Britain's economic territory if the world suffers stunted globalisation, renewed protectionism and diminished multipolarity. These things are not certain, but they are possible and I believe Hague would be careless not to keep such possibilities in mind as he is likely to help lead the next Government.

Could this be the beginning of the British drawback from globalisation to a rump of an old trading bloc that makes more cultural and economic sense to the Conservative party than the British public? Pessimistic, but not inconceivable.

UPDATE: Illuminating set of quotes from the speech at Conservative Home

Confidence in Britain (thanks Dave)

2009-01-23T11:58:00.002Z

Hurray!

David Cameron and George Osborne have hit the airwaves to exhort Britons to think positive.

The press release is a work of genius. Analysts are now expecting markets to rally forthwith as we all just forget about this silly recession.

Here are the best bits of the press release:

George Osborne stressed the need to restore confidence after figures showed that GDP fell by 1.5% in the last quarter.

"Britons absolutely need to cheer up if they are going to start blindly spending the money that they don't have again."

"The Conservatives absolutely want to help build consumer and market confidence. That's why we are emphasising the fact the Government is leading Britain into the abyss of eternal doom."

"Gordon you ruined everything, life is over, there is no tomorrow. Oh God... oh God... sometimes I just wish I could end it all with one of my big guns."

"The only thing that keeps me going is killing defenceless animals. That's why we're re-announcing our support for turning a blind eye to hunting with dogs"

"Only under the leadership of David Cameron, will people again be able to pay their gas bills while avoiding eating their own dogs."

ENDS

Kawczynski hilarity

2009-01-22T16:20:00.001Z

Yes, yes, if you didn't know already you do now Kawczynski is a wally.

I break from pressing work quickly just to recount when Kawczynski a while back went on Today and said that the BBC should focus more on non-white immigrants and that the corporation racist against the Polish.

I also remember him once making another over the top address to Parliament, asking"Won't somebody think of the people of Shrewsbury?!"

Sorry for the brevity, but don't have time for a full on character assasination today.

The Height of Hypocisy

2009-01-14T16:27:00.003Z

Just picked up on this: Tories attack Baroness Vadera's claim that she could see a "few green shoots" of recovery as "insensitive." (BBC)

Let me get this straight, the party that has recently made choices statements like:

[The economic crisis has created] "an incredibly good moment for us" Andrew Mitchell, Conservative Shadow International Development Spokesperson

and

"Recession can be good for us" Andrew Lansley, Conservative Shadow Health Secretary

says that comment was insensitive?? Hypocrisy doesn't come much better than this.

Another of the unelected joins BERR

2009-01-14T10:18:00.001Z

The Government announced early this morning that the appointment of the Chairman of Standard Chartered Bank Mervyn Davies as trade minister in the Business department (BERR), to help the Government respond to the banking crisis (Telegraph).

He will be made a Peer and becomes the latest BERR Minister to hail from beyond the elected House of Commons.

Before the Business Committee this morning Lord Mandelson of Hartlepool and Foy defended GB's latest unelected appointee saying

"I don’t think we should deny ourselves access to the talent pool of the Lords."

Surely as Davies is being made a Peer in order to join the Government (as was Peter Mandelson), the Business Secretary is himself denying our Government access to the existing talent pool in the Lords.

Facebook strikes again in latest Tory scandal!

2009-01-09T17:37:00.007Z

The news is out that a member of conservative future has attended a party dressed as Maddy McCann attired (in his own words on facebook for all to see) in "pink pyjamas, a teddy bear and a vial of fake blood." (BBC)

On a positive note, this must be the first scandal that involved neither incriminating photos or ugly racism!

You may remember the Tory researcher who in 2007 burnt a cork and 'blacked up' at a party, before being snapped and tagged on facebook. (Guardian)

You may also remember in 2008 the Tory councillor who attended a party dressed as a slave driver... with a 'slave' in tow! (Daily Record)

All hail the new progressives!

(RSS readers click through to see pictures)

Gaza

2009-01-05T21:06:00.000Z

I have refrained from speaking about the unspeakable in Gaza over the last few days because I felt that I had nothing to say which was not thought by a huge majority of people. I've been drawn into interjection because I was so appalled by the dogmatic and peurile takes of leading bloggers Iain Dale and Guido Fawkes.

I have always maintained, and I still do, that it is not for anyone who considers himself or herself as contributing to a responsible public discourse to 'take a side' because that is no basis for forming a dialogue around facilitating a peace agreement (which assumes that is the end which we in the UK wish to bring about).

For my part I believe the basis of a ceasefire should include a cessation of hostilities on both sides, the opening of the crippling blockade which has helped whip up radicalism and rockets Gaza, and the recognition of Hamas as a Government elected in a free and fair election, and Hamas's renunciation of their stated goal to harm the Israeli. These last points are obviously the most politically difficult to attain, but they could be possible if mutually agreed, and this can only happen through a dialogue which the current hostilities threaten to render impossible. All this then, once achieved would be the basis of a path towards an eventual two state solution and peace.

All that may sound Utopian, but there are actually quite strong signs that Hamas could accept such terms, especially if the UN collectively applied pressure for a resolution. As we know that must include the US, who like in Lebanon are keener to wait and watch Israel's neighbour weakened, watching too the destruction of all possibility of peace during our generation.

A ceasefire must occur before negotiations take place. Hamas, unable to lose face politically, has said it would negotiate after an Israeli withdrawal. The Economist actually argued that Hamas let ceasefire break down in order to force the issue of negotiations around a blockade that is now as old as it is painful. Hamas obviously badly misjudged the political mood of a Government both weakened politically and emboldened by the nadir of the American power vacuum. Yet few commentators predicted this, preferring to think Israel's eyes were on Iranian nuclear plants - understandable given the debacle of Lebanon that has become political poison for Ehud Olmert. Perhaps Hamas drew the same conclusions, we could not blame them for thinking that the prospect of another Lebanon would make Olmert's weak government balk, but instead war has tragically presented a perfect short term political escape route, and the timing could not be more auspicious.

Of course I know Guido Fawkes is not a serious blogger but frankly regular readers will know that in the main neither am I! I prefer to quip and joke facetiously in order to carry a serious point. I expect most of my readers read because my writing sometimes entertains them. I think that accessibility is the basis of effective persuasive public discourse. I fully understand Fawkes's appeal. Yet I cannot believe his treatment of these events.

Instead of posting a link to help my readers buy pizza for soldiers, I will post this LINK to a set of pictures taken today and yesterday and posted on 'canarypapers'. As usual I don't necessarily agree with all the views, but there aren't really many, mostly simple descriptions under each picture. I believe that if you are willing to form opinions about a topic you should first be able to look upon the deeds you describe. After all you affect their memory, and so help build the framework through which their meaning and ramifications are formed.

Who are Obama's biggest donors?

2009-01-05T17:29:00.005Z

Barack Obama's campaign just published the full list of his donors.

Change.gov: The Obama-Biden Transition Team | Donors

They put it on a 'blist' spreadsheet. Its apparently all there, but its pretty badly laid out. You can sort columns ascending/descending in the normal way, but if you sort numbers (i.e. size of donation, it sorts by the first, second, third (etc) number rather than the actual amount. You could theoretically print it off and plough through their 53,853 donors but that would be fairly arduous.

The page failed after a couple of minutes, but that may well be because of the amount of traffic.

'The Obama-Biden Transition Project' profess to be publishing the information "In keeping with President-elect Obama's pledge to run the most open and transparent transition in history" but it would appear that they wish to avoid coverage similar to the headlines Clinton suffered last week.

I wonder whether on request they would provide an excel spreadsheet which could be effectively scoured. Perhaps they should put up a link to one, or alternatively sort the existing list out pronto, in the interests of transparency.

Technorati Tags: obama, donors, transparency, change.gov, president, president elect, US politics

MORI poll shows 37% of teachers once wore dunce's cap

2009-01-05T14:01:00.005Z

Just heard from UK polling report about an Ipsos MORI poll which revealed that 37% of science teachers sampled said that they would support teaching creationism in science lessons.

Errrr...

I thought I'd share this wonderful website with all budding science teachers: www.answersingenesis.org

Its a wonderful website, full of all the reasons why creationism is ~~completely delusional~~ great.

This particular page contains the answer to the timeless question "What really happened to the dinosaurs?"

"Dinosaurs are used more than almost anything else to indoctrinate children and adults"

"According to the Bible: Dinosaurs first existed around 6,000 years ago.³ God made the dinosaurs, along with the other land animals, on Day 6 of the Creation Week (Genesis 1:20–25, 31). Adam and Eve were also made on Day 6—so dinosaurs lived at the same time as people, not separated by eons of time."

That solves that mystery then, case closed. Priceless knowledge. Lets top indoctrinating our kids!

MRSA today

2008-12-23T12:51:00.007Z

Richard Branson today outlined things he'd like seen done to tackle MRSA, including coming down hard on hospital managers in 'failing wards'.

There are two truths which the public debate seems to be missing.

It is a horrible reality, but one we have to face up to, that untreatable MRSA is rife through UK hospitals and it cannot be removed. If you enter the average hospital and stay there for five weeks you will almost certainly contract MRSA. If you are in a number of typical vulnerable states MRSA is threatening. Moreover if you are elderly or already in a severely weakened state you are likely to pick it up much more quickly. Despite what Branson says, there's not much that can change this fact, least of all tough penalties on manages who haven't the power to improve the situation.

However there are simple and straightforward changes which could be made to markedly limit the spread of MRSA, and therefore unnecessary and currently inevitable deaths caused by it.

Firstly, it is not always the case that a patient, even on an elderly ward, diagnosed with MRSA is then isolated. This is not through incompetence on the behalf of nurses, managers, doctors or anyone else, it is because there aren't enough beds in isolation. Under Labour beds have been cut and in their place managers employed to haggle over them at a local level, supposedly optimising efficient use of resources. It is currently impossible for managers to justify the isolation of such large numbers of patients with MRSA, even if there are more as a result of their being quartered with other patients, who are often in a vulnerable state. The mechanisms surrounding distribution and the lack of identification of this for investment is at fault. This is a political issue.

Secondly, MRSA presents a classic case of where accountability is not necessarily healthy in all forms in the medical profession. An elderly patient who has been admitted for observation while weak may quite easily contract MRSA, or other even more fatal conditions like pneumonia (essentially through being inactive). After the initial tranche of tests, the value of their continued hospitalisation is actually sometimes questionable, especially considering the risks to themselves and to others if they then contract MRSA. Yet currently doctors might well be unwilling to recommend the patient be released because of the threat of litigation. If the patient dies (a strong possibility) in hospital the doctor cannot reasonably be held liable as the patient was treated properly to the best of everyone's abilities. If they are sent home and then pass away questions may be asked by upset family members. There is currently no provision for doctors to make the decision, without fear, to send a patient home to both prevent MRSA contagion and the onset of conditions like pneumonia. Of course once the patient contracts the conditions the proverbial horse has bolted and the patient is often better off remaining in hospital, even though their chances of survival might by now be extremely slim.

I feel these are justifiably political issues, and ones that appear to have been ignored again.