I’ve been solidly blogging for five years. It’s been a lot of fun, and I have made a lot of new friends in a field I would never have dreamed of five years ago. But the time I can dedicate to running a blog of my own simply isn’t there anymore. However, this is not the end of my ramblings. Far from it.

The new direction, as the post suggests, is a new project that I have been asked to be part of. I have been invited to join the team at the new political magazine “Politics On Toast“. So even though I won’t be publishing articles regularly on this blog anymore, I will still be writing for Politics On Toast, as part of a fantastic team of writers that have already been recruited.

So here’s to the future.

The revulsion in to extent as to which he attempted to listen in to people’s mobile phone messages is unparalleled, and quite rightly so. When the news was about celebrities and politicians, none of us really cared. After all, we loved to read about in the red tops whether we admit to it or not. Which is why the Mayor Of London Boris Johnson’s previous comments, when taken in context of what was known about the case at the time are understandable. Hindsight, though, is a wonderful thing, and no matter how much the public didn’t care originally, that all changed when it was revealed that Milly Dowler’s phone was hacked by Mulcaire. Nobody knew that ordinary people or victims of crime had been hacked. But the reason I call for a sense of perspective is that we should remember that these crimes of hacking are not new, they happened years ago. Which is why the pressure on the current Prime Minister is a little unfair. If anything, the only thing he has made the mistake of was hiring someone who took the rap for his staff’s wrongdoing by quitting his job. At least he claims that he didn’t know what  they were doing, only time will tell if that was true or not.

The things is with Coulson’s appointment, is that there are many parallels with another dodgy appointment outside of politics, which I will use as an analogy in this case. The appointment in question was when my team Charlton Athletic appointed Iain Dowie as manager.

In the Dowie case he claimed that he had not lied about his departure from Crystal Palace, and that everything was above-board. Despite warnings from fans and commentators that Dowie was damaged goods, his appointment was approved by the board based on the assurances that he gave. Sound familiar? Okay, so there is a major difference in that Coulson did a good job for David Cameron, but resigned because of the emergence of the scale of the original scandal, and Dowie was sacked because he was both rubbish, and it turned out that his assurances weren’t exactly correct. But the point still stands, when employing someone it has to be based on what you actually know, and not here-say. The previous government brought in employment laws for that exact reason. So to say that PM is practically complicit in this case is quite frankly wrong, even if it turns out that Coulson did lie to get the job.

Anyway, back to the point.

Despite the fact these crimes happening years ago, and there hasn’t been any revelation yet that there are any new ones, yesterday’s news the Sir Paul Stephenson was resigning as Met Commissioner. I actually feel sorry for Sir Paul, after all he was not in charge of the Met when the original investigation took place. If anything the only he reason he has had to resign is because he too employedsomeone who had worked at the News Of The World, and since been arrested. But like Coulson, at the time of his appointment did anyone know of any factual reason why he shouldn’t have been appointed? Also, the Met are being dragged through the media because a statement that Rebekah Brooks made to a Select Committee years ago, in which she hinted at payments being made to police for stories. Again, this is not something that can be levelled at Sir Paul but he has never the less taken responsibility for, even though it didn’t happen on his watch.

No, if anyone should be apologising or resigning it should by those figures that actually had involvement in the case. So to those protagonists I have these questions.

• Sir Iain Blair - Labour’s lap-dog Met Commissioner. He was the Commissioner in charge at the time, why did do nothing, and why no apology since?
• Gordon Brown - Despite his allegations against the Sun, and Sunday Times, which seem to be falling apart as they are providing evidence and he hasn’t, has played a pivotal role. His personal friendship with Rebekah Brooks? His failure to launch an enquiry? Although he blamed this on Civil Servants who thought an election was around the corner, because of his constant dithering.
• Andy Hayman - Why did he not follow the evidence, or even look at Mulcaire’s notes? It was sloppy policing aimed at solely getting “a result”. He got Mulcaire and Goodwin, result done.
• John Yates - What was he told to review? Was he asked to review the case of just the Guardian’s allegations in 2009? Plus, if he was asked to review the case and failed to do so properly what else has to he failed to investigate. Conspiracy theorist are already looking at his involvement in the Cash for Honours investigation.
• Coulson, Brooks, and Wallis - What did they really know, and what (if anything)  did they hold back from their subsequent employers.

Also, for Brooks, Coulson, Wallis et al, I would note this word of caution (no pun intended). They may have been arrested, but they have not yet been charged with anything crime or tried. Just as in the case of Lord Levy’s arrest during the cash for honours scandal, itwas spun by Labour that that arrest was purely routine to help gather evidence. We should all view these arrests as the same, routine, until the judgment of any trial is handed, we are all innocent until proven guilty.

As I said at the start, we do need a sense of perspective as to when these activities happened. If there was a culture of no holds barred by the media, who allowed them to get away with? The previous government. If there were major failings in the original investigation, who oversaw that? The previous Commissioner.

The left-wing witch hunt wanting heads needs to remember, who was in charge when it all happened.

The whole scandal is abhorrent, no two doubts about. As Boris Johnson himself, when it was just about celebrities and politicians up to no good, your average person didn’t really care. But when it was revealed that victims of crime, and worse victims of murder, were also on the list of the private investigator involved, apathy about the scandal turned to rage. Me included. However, as I keep having to remind myself this happened back around 2006, and came to light with the jailing of journalist Clive Goodman. There are very few people left at the News Of The World from that time. Just three I believe, and there is no evidence that any of those were involved.

So is to really fair to put so many innocent people out of work, because of the actions of a few journalists that no longer worked at that paper? I’m not so sure. The problem is that disgust into the scandal meant that the brand was irreparably tarnished, and it was hard to see how it could ever recover. Especially, consider that company after company was pulling its advertising out. But, the more I think about it that announcement now seems even more cynical. It has been widely known for a while that News International was restructuring to save costs, as well as wanting to move into tv with the acquisition of BSkyB. But by ditching a tarnished brand, and creating a new tabloid instead does seem a little cynical, but why should we expect anything less from the media.

Now, turning back to the scandal itself. Like I said it happened a few years ago, but that hasn’t stopped serial bandwagon jumper Ed Miliband from trying to exploit it for political point scoring. But, NO party is going to come out of this scandal clean!

First there is the obvious link between Cameron and Coulson. Andy Coulson insisted that he knew nothing, but resigned as it had happened on his watch. David Cameron employed him because he took him at his word, and the police investigation at the time supported the view that he didn’t know. So for Ed Miliband to claim poor judgment by the PM in employing him is misguided. After all, he had been cleared of involvement or knowing about by the police, and he took Coulson at his word. But, as we all now know that investigation didn’t go far enough, or at worse was flawed. David Cameron wouldn’t have known that, nobody did. Did Coulson actually know what was going on? I honestly haven’t a clue. Then again if the police investigation was flawed it’s hardly fair to point the finger at current Met Commissioner Sir Paul Stephenson. No, it should be pointed at his predecessor  and well-known Labour luvvy Sir Ian Blair. After all, he was in charge during that flawed investigation, and Blair never did anything that upset his friend Tony Blair.

So Coulson, at that stage, was given the all-clear. Whether he really did know anything or not, hopefully, the current Operation Weeting will find out.

However, as I said no party will come out of this scandal clean. No matter how much of a bandwagon Ed Miliband jumps on, he doesn’t escape the fact that he was in the government when this scandal broke. And, more damning than that is that Labour actually discussed whether to hold a public inquiry into the scandal, and CHOSE not to! So, all of his calls for a public inquiry now are just cynical point scoring as Labour had their chance, and ad usual did nothing! Also, all of the vitriol directed at the “links” directed at the Tories and their links with the Murdoch press, shows their selective memories as Blair and Brown were both courting the Murdoch press for years. Perhaps it’s because they changed their allegiances that Labour are now so anti-Murdoch?

Then there is the calls by Ed Miliband calling for current News International Chief Executive, and editor when the Soham girls parents had their phones hacked, Rebekah Brookes to resign. He is right she should go! But, to then to say that the PM should be as well and isn’t because of a personal link between the two is wrong. The reason being is that it is wrong for ANY Minister to call for, or even force the sacking of an individual of a private company. Yes, she should go, in my view she has no morals. But, if the PM were to call for her head, or even puts pressure on the News International to sack herm then the government would be taken to a tribunal and lose. Didn’t Labour learn that lesson with Sharon Shoesmith? Also, if the government was to exert pressure on NI to get rid of her, to see the BSkyB bid get sanctioned that too would also be illegal.

Like I said no party will come out of this clean. For Labour to call for the head of the person “whose watch it happened on” really need to remember just one “whose watch” the scandal, flawed police inquiry, and lack of public inquiry, it all happened on.

As for Coulson, Brookes, dodgy officers et al, if there is evidence throw the book at the them!

The Work and Pensions Secretary, Iain Duncan-Smith is urging business to employ Brits, and not foreign immigrants. So he should to! The best things is that, as yet, the false indignation and the shouts of “nasty Tories” have not arisen. That is because during Labour’s time in power, even you stated a clear fact about immigration, you were branded evil and racist by the left. However, it is something that cropped up on the doorsteps time and time again during, and since the last election. Ordinary people know that a large number of jobs are going to foreign immigrants. That, today, has been proved as a fact.

What a nice change to see a Secretary of State, at last, being able to talk about immigration. Even if he is stating the bleeding obvious.

It started around 5.30pm when my wife arrived at our church hall to open up for the beaver scouts. When she got round to the back of the church, to where our scout hall is located, my youngest daughter noticed a small fire and alerted my wife. They both quickly left the grounds to raise the alarm. It was at this point events started to take a very, very, sinister turn. My wife managed to call the fire brigade from a neighbour’s house, but when she left their house she heard the smashing of glass and furniture, and saw a man running out of the church, who then decamped over a wall into some neighbouring gardens to make his escape. Our church, the Wesley Hall Methodist Church on Plumstead Common, was the victim of a vicious arson attack!

The arsonist had started three fires in the church hall, and one at the rear of the grounds. The possible scenarios of what could have happen are still giving my the shakes as I write this. Friday night is our busiest night, when all of our scout sections meet there. There could have been kids as young as six involved. Thankfully the building was unoccupied, although my 6-year-old daughter who was with my wife at the time, witnessed everything and was scared out of her life! WHAT KIND OF SICK FUCK DOES THIS SORT OF THING!!! Sorry for the swearing, first time ever in my blogging career. But I am so angry at this individual as he not only set fire to a building that has been a second home since I was eight years old, but also put the lives of my family at risk!

The arsonist, was a black male aged in 20s. He was wearing a black shiny jacket, and made his escape via Nyanza Street (Plumstead, London SE18). If any of my local readers saw or heard anything, please contact Plumstead Police on 0300 123 1212.

Thank you.

Every single Freedom of Information act request carries a cost to the tax payer. No matter of the merit, or genuine need to know the information everything has a cost. Even futile or ridiculous requests. One such “ridiculous” quest was to Leicester city council, who have had to spend tax payers money to respond, to an enquiry about emergency preparedness plans. All seems sensible so far, but the request was to request what the emergency plans were for what provisions they have in place for a “zombie invasion”!

No, I’m not kidding, it’s true. Some nut job actually wants to know what their local council’s plans are for a zombie invasion. Leicester City Council, at a cost, had to respond!

Now, that is the problem with bad legislation. So maybe a chance to sort out the rubbish bits before they become law, may not be such a bad thing.

As for the zombie invasion, perhaps Leicester City council should watch Shaun of the dead for planning tips. That was sarcasm, by the way!

….In other news, a bear craps in the wood.

Sorry to be so turse, but really. Has there been anything revealed about his “dark arts” that we didn’t know already know about this odious man?

Only the British could come up with a ticketing system so confusing that it has left many baffled. Mind you, the clues were there, just look at our rail fares system and you get the hint that this was never going to be easy to understand. I would go as far as saying that the whole thing has been farcical. It would’ve been far better to have a first come first served process, at least that way you would’ve known what tickets you actually purchased. Instead you entered in to a lottery, where it now shows that by being reckless pays off. This being after one man bid for £34k worth of tickets and got £11k!

It also goes to show how farcical the system is when the Mayor of London, and gold medal athletes that are actually competing, can’t even get tickets. But a family in German, for example, can purchase what they want!! It even bugs me more that I live in a an Olympic borough. I can walk to some of the events, and I still haven’t got any tickets. So my life, along with the rest of the borough’s residents, is being turned upside down with precious few of us being able to witness why.

Quite frankly, it stinks!

A lot has been made in the media of the two leaders wanting to re-christen the “special relationship” after the Bush Blair alliance tarnished those words so much, and who could blame them. The difference now is that unlike Blair, who would never say no to Bush, we now have a PM that will say to Obama “now hang on a minute”. It makes a major difference.

It was good to see such a genuine show of friendship, and I for one hope it continues. After all, there has been too much US bashing from Labour benches over the years. Although this is understandable because it was their leader that basically bent over, and said to Bush “whatever you want sir”. So hopefully this anti-US feeling will now stop.

The special relationship with the US is now far more beneficial than before. I would personally go as far as saying more than our relationship with the EU, but that is for a another post.

Now I have no idea as to whether he did or didn’t get his estranged wife to take his speeding points, thus avoiding a driving ban, or not. All I know is that it is messy. Here’s the cases for and against Mr Huhne, on the speeding issue and not other things. As I’ve got plenty of issues with him! But i’ll stick to this issue.

The case against Chris Huhne is mounting. It appears he was in Essex when the offence happened. His wife has evidence that she wasn’t, and was in London at the time of the offence. There is also the recording of Chris Huhne warning someone to keep quiet about the incident.

Now, the case for starting with that recording. What was the motivation for recording him, and was he just saying “don’t saying anything in case it is misconstrued”. It’s possible, but yes a little unlikely. But then there is the biggest case for him in that the accusations are coming from a woman he cheated on, and it appears she wants revenge. So this could just be here muddying the water to cause him problems.

Either way he has smashed the three day rule, and the evidence in the case against is mounting, so how the hell is he still a Minister? At least David Laws resigned straight away, and he didn’t break the law (if he had the IPSA would have referred it to the police), which is what Chris Huhne is being accused of doing! Maybe it is the worrying fact for the Lib Dems that they have not got anyone to replace him?

Regardless of that Chris Huhne should go, and go now!