Window Dressing

Tony Blair made a joke in his speech yesterday which reportedly had them rolling in the aisles. The joke was apparently inspired by the late Les Dawson who said, "my wife's run off with the bloke next door. I'm certainly going to miss him". Tony version was, "At least I don't have to worry about Cherie running off with the bloke next door". This will mean nothing to you unless you happen to know that Gordon Brown's official residence as Chancellor, is 11 Downing Street. It was a good joke, given the rivalry between the two men. If I had told the joke however, I'd be annoyed that it overshadowed the speech, and that everyone knows it was inserted by his script writer Phil Collins and former communications chief Alistair Campbell, who borrowed it from Les Dawson. Funny how Campbell still appears to be deeply involved in Blair's performances so long after he was forced to resign.

This is what is currently annoying me about politics. It's all about window dressing and nothing about substance. Everyone will remember Blair's joke. I haven't even seen a report about the rest of his speech. It's not just New Labour, although they are clearly image obsessed, it's everyone. I realised yesterday that although I know David Cameron goes to work on a bike, had a windmill installed on his roof, and wants more women in his party, I have no idea what his view is on a Middle East exit strategy, or council tax, or inheritance tax, or immigration, or even id cards. I'd vote for him because I would vote for just about anyone who could remove the current administration, but I can't say I approve of him. It disgusts me.

There is a story in the news today about speed cameras, which always makes me sit up. In Britain we have the damn things about every 200m. I wouldn't mind if I thought they actually did any good, but the evidence to suggest that they make roads safer is not strong. The real problem I have however is the fact that getting caught by one of the evil things is just down to luck and one has no defence when one is caught. This may however change. The European Bill of Human Rights states that no one can be forced to incriminate themselves. Put simply, one has the right to remain silent. When captured on camera however, the police can't tell who was driving and therefore one has only two choices, admit the offence and get prosecuted, or refuse to give the information, and get prosecuted.

A case has been taken to European caught by two British drivers. Reports say that a judgement is not likely to come for some time. It's also worth noting that this case has already gone through British courts and been rejected. Well they would wouldn't they. I however would love to see this case succeed, and it could. I was amused by the reponse of the department for tranmsport who said they would "vigourously" defend current laws. Not surprising since they make money from speed cameras.

A bunch of paintings and drawings apparently by Hitler, have gone to auction in Britain. I'm not sure how the auction ended up in Britain, since the works were found in Belgium, but there you are. I have no issue with people buying and selling artworks by Hitler. It has to be accepted that he was a bit of a bastard, and as such I'm not sure why anyone would want to hang these on their walls, but I don't understand why people buy those hideous Staffordshire dogs either. It's a question of taste obviously. The auction was however disrupted by "comedy terrorist" Aaron Barschak.

Aaron Barschak is, in my view, about as funny as being kicked in the testicles. Again, this could be a question of taste, though I do remember that he was soundly trashed by critics at the Edinburgh fringe one year when he attempted a one man show. Barschak is really only famous for gatecrashing the 21st birthday party of Prince William at Windsor Castle dressed as Osama bin Laden. He then attempted to build a career around the incident, and failed. He is jewish it seems, which perhaps gives him more moral ground to object to sales of Hitler works. I still have a problem with censorship however. Even if the work was offensive, and it really isn't, why would you want to prevent it from being traded, or displayed? There are calls for it to be destroyed. It all seems very odd to me.