David Cameron has started vlogging, or video-blogging, or YouTubing, or whatever the heck it’s called these days. It really is a masterstroke. Webcameron is an excellent idea.

It’s certainly caused something of a stir in the blogosphere: James O’Malley rather enjoyed it, I think:

The first thing that struck me about this was why is the Leader of the Opposition, a man who earns £127,000 a year, doing the washing up by hand? Surely he owns a dishwasher? Even the proletariat can afford a dishwasher these days! Surely this little piece to camera wasn’t all stage managed?

The other thing that annoyed me about the video was that there was no pay-off. Having watched a lot of videos on the internet, I was expecting it to all build up to something. I thought towards the end he was going to shout “SHUT THE FUCK UP, KIDS!” Disappointing.

Nathan Nelson is possibly even more cynical:

I use Ecover as I am a left-wing Guardian-reading wooly liberal who thinks he can save the planet by buying Ecover products – presumably, I was supposed to see Dave using Ecover and welcome his to my bosom immediately as a kindred spirit.

And Pal makes an even better point:

Crumbs! Dave nearly does the washing up! His hands don’t get wet – he just waves his green washing up liquid around a bit.

But what none of these blogs mention is that they – just like me – are doing exactly what the Conservatives want. We’re talking about them. Whether we think Webcameron is the best idea since sliced bread, or whether we think it’s carefully crafted and stage managed as to mean nothing, the fact is that it’s generating a Conservative buzz. Looking at the Technorati stats, Conservative Party is being blogged a hell of a lot more than Labour Party, and (so the theory goes) if we’re talking about the Conservatives, we’re probably listening to a little of their policy. And maybe even warming to them a little.

It’s exactly where Labour have gone wrong with Dave the Chameleon. That’s a cute character, which at a glance actually makes you think favourably of the Conservatives. Only people who stick around to listen to the full message get the criticism – and few bother. The Conservatives, on the other hand, give a positive impression at first glance – though arguably fall down on policy. But no-one’s listening by that stage anyway.

Cameron is playing a blinder. And I mean Cameron. This is the land of ‘Brand Cameron’. The Webcameron site has no Conservative branding. This is about selling him, not the party, and it’s working. Labour’s playing catch-up. The longer Blair remains as a drag on the Labour party, the bigger the lead Cameron gets. Gordon Brown, or whoever turns out to be the next Labour leader, needs to pull something pretty spectacular out of the bag if they’re to take on Mr Cameron. The next election could be very interesting.

Today is one of those wonderful days where an unfortunate confluence of events means that we can see through the government’s spin and political correctness, and gawp at the real decisions being taken in Whitehall.

Today, new legislation comes into force, spun as ‘banning ageism‘:

They make it unlawful to discriminate against workers under the age of 65 on the grounds of age.

The rules will impact on recruitment, training, promotion, redundancy, retirement, pay and pension provision.

Ministers have been popping up here, there, and everywhere over the last week emphasising that not only does this rule out discrimination against older people, it also protects the young from being discriminated against in favour of the old. Which is all fine and dandy, but sadly untrue.

Giving the lie to the spin is another new piece of legislation coming into force today: An increase in the minimum wage. Despite ageism now being illegal, this continues to have three tiers. 16 and 17 year olds receive a minimum of £3.30 per hour, 18 to 21 year olds receive a minimum £4.85, whilst over 21s get £5.35.

Ageism is, apparently, outlawed, but if I were to go and get a proper job today, I could be paid 50p an hour less than somebody less than six-months my senior. From where I’m standing, that smells a lot like ageism.

So it’s fairly clear that the government’s actual target here is the older generation. By preventing employers from retiring people at sixty based on age alone, perhaps the government think that this will become the norm, before they force it to be so by raising the official retirement age. But it’s a bit of a stretch even for Nu Labour to pretend to be discouraging ageism on the same day as retaining an increasing a three-tier minimum wage.

But thank you, Tony, for showing us how to ban ageism whilst simultaneously actively promoting it. I don’t think anyone else could.

Margaret Beckett, Foreign Secretary, Sunday with Adam Boulton (24 September 2006):

Tony Blair said he would not serve a full term through this Parliament.

Peter Hain, N. Ireland Secretary, Sunday with Adam Boulton (24 September 2006):

He (Blair) said he was going to serve a full term.

Good to see that everyone at the Labour Party Conference is singing from the same hymn sheet.

With due credit to More4 News.

Mr Blair’s getting quite good a slapping the Chancellor round the chops, it would seem. On today’s Sunday AM, he’s announced that

the most important thing is that this week we set out an agenda for the future

He wants to talk about the future, whilst avoiding the question of who might be the future leader. He wants to pave his own path, so that he’s telling Gordon what to do from beyond the political grave. Spinner reckons watching Tone’s interview is ‘perfect media training in action’. I call it ‘How to annoy the chancellor without even mentioning his name’.

Is this a brilliant final political play from the man whose career is defined by media-friendly political strategy? That’s up to Gordon. If he’s stupid enough to take the bait and directly challenge Mr Blair, he’ll not succeed. If he remembers that revenge is a dish best served cold (with a side order of cliché), then he can wait until he gets into Number Ten, and undo Mr Blair’s ‘reforms’ stitch by stitch, with the former PM unable to do anything to stop him. How satisfying.

And, when even the uber-loyal (if mad) Health Secretary agrees that your reforms have failed, maybe it would even be good for the country, too. Maybe.

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…