At this year’s Liberal Democrat conference, delegates have been provided with environmentally friendly jute conference bags. They will be expected to use them again next year, rather than being issued with new ones. But reflecting a theme at this year’s conference, the bag scheme has something of a hole. If the Lib Dems are serious about increasing their popularity, surely lots of new people will be at conference next year – without this year’s jute bag. It’s an idea that looks good in principle, but flaws are found with barely five seconds of armchair thought.

In this way, it’s quite similar to “green taxes”, which the Liberal Democrats have voted in favour of today. The first big test of Sir Campbell’s leadership may have been passed with flying colours, but the first big test of logic is failed. Green taxes place the tax burden on polluting activities to discourage them. Yet the moment Green Taxes work, they fail: That is, the moment people are discouraged from polluting activities, there is no tax revenue for public services.

So, effectively, the Green Taxes either have to be stupidly low, so they don’t discourage people, or stupidly high, so that a few pay a lot for a little pollution – which hardly fairly distributes the tax burden, since those who can’t switch to expensive renewable energy sources (the lower socioeconomic classes) pay more. It’s easy for CEO to buy a new non-polluting car, it’s harder for Unemployed Joe who’s driven the same old polluting banger for the last twenty-five years. If anything, it’s the reverse of a LibDem policy.

I was going to write about Charles Kennedy at this point, but I’ve just fallen off my chair with shock. Tony Blair acutally features on the Labour homepage. Admittedly, he’s tiny (much smaller than “Dave the Chameleon”), but it’s a step forward. I think this might be the first time since before the last election. Sadly, nothing to rival the LibDems’ MingCast, but I can dream.

Guido reckons it’s a tipping point. Maybe he’s right. Today’s Popbitch tagline:

Does this mean it’s all over?

Previously, on sjhoward.co.uk:

Mr Blair’s statement has put a sticking plaster over his gaping wounds, the question is merely how long it will last. It won’t last seven or eight months. It only needs one comment from one MP, one letter, or one more resignations to painfully tear the sticking plaster away, and it’s just too tempting.

What I didn’t even begin to predict was that it would be Charles Clarke of all people who broke the co-ordinated silence, seemingly in an attempt to register that he hates the world now he’s been sacked. And now Labour’s got itself into an unrecoverable mess. Labour is entertaining complete self-destruction. And boy, is it entertaining.

Labour is divided, and by fielding a realistic Blarite candidate against Brown, as now seems likely, Blair will actually have managed to pull apart the whole party. The longer he remains in office, the greater the sniping, and the greater the division. Fielding a controversial candidate deepens the division still further, and even if a mid-way ‘third’ candidate was found and won the leadership, there’s no way the party would have chance to unite behind such a leader in just two years.

Right now, I can’t see how the next election can be lost by the Conservatives – it would take them to do something pretty damn stupid.

But, y’know, it’s quite fun to watch. Quote of the day comes from The Observer, reporting Tony Blair’s alleged comments about Gordon Brown:

I have never known how mendacious he [Gordon] was, how full of mendacity.

Of course, someone of Blair’s stature would never just say ‘fucking liar’. Not in a million years. Ahem.

And it’s fun watching them trying to pick credible alternatives, too. Let’s look at the options:

1. Alan Milburn: Mr “I’d do anything to win“, he’s had form for some time, and probably doesn’t warrant revisiting. Ewww.
2. Charles Clarke: You are kidding, right? Who’d be in his cabinet? He hates the world.
3. John Reid: Mr “Attack Dog“, also a proficient liar. It would be quite entertaining to see him try to be nice to voters, rather than aggressive. Certainly a favourite from the entertainment perspective.
4. Alan Johnson: The least offensive, but with the charisma of an earthworm. Labour’s approximate equivalent of IDS. Or IBS.

Actually, my favourite Blairite for the job would be Hazel Blears, and no-one seems to be considering her. Think of the fun of seeing if her ridiculous perma-smile and grating chirpiness could survive a humiliating electoral defeat. Is that cruel? Probably.

I’ve never considered Blair to be one of the greatest orators to have occupied Number 10, but maybe I’ve underestimated him. It’s quite impressive to see him give a full statement about leaving office without using the word ‘resign’. Or even ‘quit’ or ‘leave’. The nearest thing he’s given to a soundbite is

The next party conference in a couple of weeks will be my last party conference as party leader.

He’s even managed to rush the sentence so much that it can’t realistically be used as a soundbite. That’s pretty impressive, and very well done. Is this this the first speech Tony’s done where he’s consciously avoided the soundbite?

Quite honestly, though, I don’t think it matters. I think even the smallest of the Labour minnows will not be put off from making their views on his Premiership clear just because he says it’s bad, and even the super-loyal MPs trotted out across every network immediately after the speech to scare them a little more won’t make them feel threatened.

Mr Blair’s statement has put a sticking plaster over his gaping wounds, the question is merely how long it will last. It won’t last seven or eight months. It only needs one comment from one MP, one letter, or one more resignations to painfully tear the sticking plaster away, and it’s just too tempting.

It was a valiant effort, though, and I’m rather impressed. Just not impressed enough to want him to stay.

There’s always been something of Greek tragedy about the Tony Blair story. He unites the party and the country, presenting himself as a down-to-Earth everyman with the power to put right the wrongs of the Tories, but is ultimately corrupted by addictive power, and now drives apart the very party he united through his desperate bid to stay on at the top.

There are now several letters circulating the Parliamentary Labour Party, some calling for Tony to resign, others calling for him to stay on. Could there be any more fundamental a division in the party?

His allies say he’ll be gone within a year, but really, it no longer matters. The party’s in turmoil, and there’s no way they will all unite happily around Gordon Brown – party unrest can’t be settled merely with a change of leader. Ian Westbrook reckons the party will be destroyed if Tony goes on for another year – I think it’s verging on that point already.

Whenever Tony goes, and whether it’s with his preposterous ‘Farewell tour‘ or not, it will be undignified, with him appearing to have been pushed rather than jumping. Iain Dale, who knows far more about such things than I, thinks the memo about the tour was leaked on purpose. If it was, it shows how poor the Number 10 Press Office has become at judging the news cycle – a ridiculous story about a big-in-his-boots Prime Minister planning to resign merely makes people call for him to do it right now.

Perhaps a quote from here sums it all up best:

What was a ‘lame duck’ Premiership has just become a ‘dead duck’ Premiership

Quack.

In an interview with The Times, the Dear Leader has said, with respect to when he will stand down:

people should stop speculating

Instead, we should

look at what I have said and draw conclusions about that

Eh? Maybe someone’s had too much sun…

There’s been much speculation over the last few days concerning Charles Kennedy’s drinking past, mainly fueled by the pending release of Greg Hurst’s new book. Essentially, though, it doesn’t seem to say an awful lot more than most people already presumed.

I say past drinking problem – but just exactly how “past” is it? I know that any recovering alcoholic would say they are never really ‘cured’ of alcoholism, but there’s certainly been a general idea that Charles has given up the alcohol after being in an alcohol detox Arizona center for several months, and is doing his best to adjust to life without it: An admirable ideal. Indeed, back in January, when admitting his problem for the first time at an extraordinary press conference, Charles said:

As a matter of fact I’ve not had a drink for the past two months and I don’t intend to in the future.

But Guido now appears to be suggesting that Mr Kennedy may not be living up to the high standard he’s set himself:

Sharper readers of the dead-tree-press will realise that headlines like “Kennedy ‘must recover’ before return” and “Sir Menzies Campbell made clear that he would be welcome but only once he is ‘fully recovered’ ” don’t make sense if he is now sober …

To be fair, when asked on television recently when it was he last had a drink Kennedy avoided answering the question. Guido knows that he has been the worse for wear as recently as June.

I like Mr Kennedy. I don’t think he’s the solution to all the world’s problems, but he was a different kind of politician to those who usually gravitate to the position of leader, and that was probably healthy for democracy. I would really hate for him to be politically damaged further by appearing to be deceiving the public a second time. I don’t think he’s done that yet, but I really think he needs to watch his step, and handle things very carefully and delicately.

Honesty may well be the best policy second time around.

You may have been wondering if your tax money is well spent. You’ll be reassured to know that vast amounts of it (goodness knows how much) have gone in to producing videos like this.

Particular favourite parts for me were the house which was “trashed” by knocking over a single wooden chair, and the fact that headteachers can “manage loo roll” online. That’s a real boon.

On top of this, the wonderful people at the Home Office have launched ads promoting their “Think U Know” website. Yes, that’s radio ads. Reading out the address thinkuknow.co.uk. They’ve now been withdrawn, after it took someone to complain that thinkuknow.co.uk sound exactly like thinkyouknow.co.uk, which is a different website altogether.

Yes, it took a listener to tell the ASA that Think U Know and Think You Know sound the same on radio. Nobody from John Reid to the person doing the recording managed to notice. The ad’s now in the bin.

This government promised to cut waste. Something tells me it’s failing.

Update: As if you weren’t already convinced that the video was a waste of time, I can’t even show it any more!  It’s been withdrawn on the basis that it breached Government copyright. Despite being posted by the Government. Well done.

It can’t have escaped your attention that, yesterday, John Reid seemed to be doing the job of the Prime Minister. In Tony’s absence, Dr Reid took his position chairing COBRA. Whilst the good people of the USA were addressed by their President, our glorious leader was tanning himself on holiday, so we were addressed by Dr Reid. In fact, Mr Prescott didn’t really do any of the duties of the Prime Minister in his absence – so why his title is Deputy Prime Minister, and quite what his day-to-day job is supposed to be, I’m not sure.

Guido appears to have discovered that the reason Mr Prescott wasn’t available to lead the country through a national crisis is that he was responding to an article called ‘Prescott really is in the hotseat’ from Wednesday’s Daily Express. Fantastic leadership.

In other news, would it be cynical to suggest that the airlines would quite like the cabin baggage restrictions to continue? Suddenly, they’ve got a whole new revenue stream, as they can realistically offer novels and newspapers at highly inflated prices, reasoning that people will buy them on board if not allowed to take them on board. Furthermore, the advertising rates in their in-flight magazines can shoot up, because they suddenly have a captive audience that largely ignored their offerings forty-eight hours ago. And without big, bulky bags, boarding becomes much quicker, and hence turn-around shorter. In the longer-term, the overhead lockers could be done away with, saving a huge amount of weight, and cutting fuel prices too. This could be highly, highly profitable for airlines… even if it does scupper Ryanair’s latest plan to offer mobile phone calls on-board. I imagine the newly-created market would be more profitable than that one anyway.

As I write this morning, news is just reaching sjhoward.co.uk towers of a foiled terror plot to blow up planes in mid-flight. In response to this, hand baggage has been banned on aircraft departing from the UK – all that is now allowed is a clear plastic bag containing travel documents. And medications. And glasses. But that’s it. Except for baby food. Oh, and wallets. But not much, really, no. Forgot to mention keys – they’re still allowed. Oh, and ‘small personal items’. Which I guess doesn’t include small personal explosives. And everybody’s being hand searched, and the clear plastic bags are being X-rayed for reasons that aren’t clear to me. US flights are having two searches, just to make sure, and you’re not allowed to take liquids on board. Except the baby milk, but you have to taste that to proove it’s safe. Books and newspapers are too dangerous to take on board, because you could give someone a pretty nasty paper cut. It’s beyond parody.

Really, this is quite a wonderful idea. Everybody is carrying an identical clear plastic bag containing identical passports and tickets. How long before everybody ends up with somebody else’s passport and tickets? That’ll complicate things a bit.

The terror threat level has been raised to ‘Critical’ – the highest possible level. Or at least, it has in some places. The MI5 website says it’s ‘Critical’, but the new exciting important Intelligence.gov.uk reckons it’s only ‘Severe’. Good to see a unified approach. And the police have just been ‘explaining’ the threat level. ‘Critical’ means that an attack is expected imminently. The police say they’ve foiled this plot, aren’t aware of another, but it’s possible. So they’ve raised the level from ‘Severe’, where an attack is ‘Highly likely’, to one where an attack is ‘expected imminently’. Even though threre’s apparently no specific threat. Yup, this is the new intelligence logic.

Why any organised group of terrorists would bother trying to smuggle bombs in hand luggage anyway, I really don’t understand. It’s far too risky. It only takes one of them to be discovered for an organised security response to prevent the others happening. There are many ways of getting explosives on to an aircraft that stand less chance of being discovered, as shown in Whistleblower a couple of years back (and I don’t think anyone is seriously suggesting those loopholes have all been closed). Why go with the riskiest option? Organsied terrorists wouldn’t.

Perhaps the new security’s a good thing. I got on a flight last Friday – and off at the other end – without having my ID checked once. My passport never left my pocket from entering the airport to leaving at the other end. There’s a lot of tightening to be done, if you ask me. But then, I flew with an airline that charged extra for hold baggage – they’ll be rubbing their hands with glee today…