Ring out the old, ring in the new. It's a phrase that will resonate with many tonight. It also has an extra resonance in the case of Irvine Patnick, whose death was announced yesterday (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-20872924 ).
Patnick was, of course, the source for the Sun's infamous front page a few days after Hillsborough; he was the willing conduit for South Yorkshire Police's campaign of lies & smears. Patnick happily supplied Murdoch's rag with the allegations that, inter alia, the fans pickpocketed the bodies around them, that the fans drunkenly & aggressively stormed the gates to the Leppings Lane terrace (a myth repeated by Bernard Ingham in his "tanked-up mob" quote to the press less than 24 hours later), that the fans urinated on the bodies of their fellow supporters, & that first aid staff were attacked when they attempted to help.
This blog named Patnick almost exactly six years ago (http://condensedthoughts.blogspot.co.uk/2007/01/naming-names.html ). I continued to cite him periodically over the next few years, knowing that Patnick couldn't sue for libel because it was, to coin a phrase, The Truth. However, his passing, welcome though it is to many, now means, regrettably, that he won't appear in court on a charge of perverting the course of justice.
That tiresome sentiment about not speaking ill of the dead was wheeled out by some on Twitter last night, notably Harry Cole (https://twitter.com/MrHarryCole ), contributing editor of the Spectator --a magazine which has always had such good things to say about Merseyside-- & Donal Blaney (https://twitter.com/Donal_Blaney ), an occasional scribbler for the Daily Mail's curiously-titled Right Minds blog &, in the words of Iain Dale, "The closest thing we have in Britain to a Fox News commentator". Sometimes you really are damned by your own allies, aren't you?
If it really is indecent to criticise & castigate those no longer able to speak for themselves, it's a convention that Patnick himself patently ignored. Patnick was a liar & a coward of the first order. Let that be his epitaph.
Lenin isn't much quoted these days (well, it was a while back & his utterances pertained to a different country & century), but he did have what would now be viewed as a pithy soundbite for those who complain about poverty & deprivation, yet won't do anything to challenge the system that creates it: labour lieutenants of capital.
It's a phrase that came to mind when Joe "Tea & Sympathy" Anderson wrote to David Cameron last week, complaining about the effect of the ConDem cuts on cities like Liverpool (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-merseyside-20716881 ):
"Mr Anderson said he feared the council would not be able to help vulnerable and desperate people in 'some of the most deprived communities, not just in Liverpool, but the country'.
"He wrote: 'I believe community cohesion is being seriously threatened by the lack of funding to our city and others.'
"Mr Anderson added: 'I believe that the so-called "summer of discontent" will happen again if we do not address this issue.' "
Strong stuff, eh? So what is Joe prepared to do about the cuts that, as he rightly says, will cause so much damage to the city? Well, he'll call a "cuts summit" (http://www.liverpoolconfidential.co.uk/News-and-Comment/Mayor-and-Bishop-to-host-cuts-summit ).
The LC article reports that Anderson & James Jones will invite the leaders of the councils representing Birmingham, Bristol, Newcastle & Sheffield to to the meeting at the Arena & Convention Centre on January 18th, at which they'll "demand changes to what they say is the Government's unfair distribution of local authority funding."
Certainly, the need to highlight the issue is unarguable. Liverpool faces a 52% funding cut between now & 2017/18.
However, awareness of the situation is, or should be just the starting point. Anderson, unfortunately, seems not to realise this:
" 'We are demanding the Government listen and take notice of the dire situation faced by local authorities, and we will be highlighting how their policies are jeopardising the services we provide.' "
All very well, But what if Cameron & Co. take time out from their busy schedules, smile pityingly at this civic cri-de-coeur & continue apace with the cuts? What then?
Well, the answer is nothing. Joe "Tea & Sympathy" Anderson, along with the rest of the current Labour Party would never countenance a strategy of disobedience or Militant illegality.
That unwillingness to go down the road of rebellion is the real issue here, not Anderson's doubtful claim that the civil disturbances of August 2011 will be repeated (apart from a handful of scally-orchestrated incidents, mainly around Smithdown Road, Liverpool didn't burn that summer; Toxteth '81 it wasn't).
So I'm afraid it will be a case of cometh the hour, cometh the cuts, administered by a whimpering Joe & Co.
Of course, it doesn't have to be that way, not when the disdain & hostility of the ConDem cutters is evident to all (http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/comment/against-george-osbornes-war-on-the-poor-and-the-vile-stupidity-of-his-workers-vs-shirkers-narrative-8397330.html & when, moreover, the class warfare of the cuts is being explained to a US audience (http://www.newyorker.com/online/blogs/johncassidy/2012/12/george-osbornes-journey-from-austerity-to-cruelty.html ).
The BBC report on Anderson's letter to Cameron was accompanied by a comment from the BBC's North West political editor Arif Ansari, who observed:
"David Cameron did want strong, outspoken city mayors. He has found one in Joe Anderson."
A "strong, outspoken" city mayor wouldn't complain about the cuts, yet meekly implement them. However, that is precisely what Joe "Tea & Sympathy" Anderson will do.
The cavalier disregard for one of Liverpool's most distinctive & elegant buildings, India Buildings by its owners Green Property group has sadly continued since I commented on the matter a few months ago (http://condensedthoughts.blogspot.co.uk/2012/09/answers-needed-over-india-buildings.html ).
The owners stupidly (& illegally) removed six bronze plaques from the building's exterior last month (http://liverpoolpreservationtrust.blogspot.co.uk/2012/11/green-property-group-vandalise.html & http://www.liverpooldailypost.co.uk/liverpool-news/regional-news/2012/11/22/future-of-india-buildings-in-doubt-after-liverpool-council-cautions-owners-over-illegal-removing-of-entrance-plaques-99623-32280635/ ). According to the Post's report, the building's tenants were informed that "in the interim the public will soon be denied access from the Brunswick [Street] entrance."
Green Property's intention to deny access to the public in this way has become something of an embarrassing farce for them; contradiction has become the watch-word for their approach. You have to wonder about the expertise & judgment of their PR advisers Paver Smith (http://www.paversmith.co.uk ), an outfit which proudly declares "managing reputations" to be its forte on its home page.
There is controversy concerning Green Property's wish to deny public access through the arcade. Its thoroughfare was built on what used to be Chorley Street & legal opinion seems to suggest that permission from Liverpool City Council would be sought for such a move.
Perhaps realising that their position is very much open to question, Green Property performed a volte-face on the plaques, restoring them to the building's exterior (http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/liverpool-news/local-news/2112/11/23/u-turn-on-blunder-at-liverpool-s-india-buildings-100252-32290010/ ). However, the damage caused by the plaques' removal in the first place was significant (http://liverpoolpreservationtrust.blogspot.co.uk/2012/12/india-building-mutiny-by-green-property.html ).
Green Property are seemingly unconcerned about the fact that people's livelihoods are at stake on this issue. Instead, mixed messages have been issued from the owners, perhaps reflecting a level of pathetic incompetence or internal dissent within the group (http://www.liverpooldailypost.co.uk/liverpool-news/regional-news/2012/12/04/liverpool-india-buildings-arcade-stall-holders-set-for-public-sit-in-99623-32358392/ :
"Green Property manager Gill Thom wrote to shop tenants saying two retail experts reviewed the arcade and there was no positive feed back on the arcade's future.
"She wrote : 'We were advised the space would be better used as management offices to support the building as staff would be more accessible. We will contact tenants in due course.'
"But Green Property director Mike Tapp said: 'There are no plans to close the Brunswick Street entrance or public access to the arcade.
" 'We are committed to spending capital money for modernisation and changes. It is a struggle to get retailers into Holt's Arcade because it is not a destination, so we want to put building management offices there as a stop-gap.' "
Judging by their hitherto lamentable actions, one has to take their claim that such a move is "stop-gap" with a pinch of salt. Additionally, it could be argued that the reduced footfall in the arcade is attributable to, among other factors, an unwillingness or inability of Green Property to properly project to a local audience the asset they own; Liverpool One's emphasis on tacky consumer culture is absurdly cited by some as a factor. It isn't. What the arcade has to offer is qualitatively superior to Grosvenorpool's tawdry fare (http://www.baytvliverpool.co.uk/vod/?vid=JBV50b38ff3c9d65 ).
A sit-in by the building's tenants is planned at 1.30 tomorrow afternoon. If you're in the vicinity, showing your support for them would be greatly appreciated.
The squawks of indignation from the tabloids (& the Telegraph) over Leveson's recommendations were entirely predictable; never mind that his report paid worryingly scant attention to online publishing (http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2012/nov/29/leveson-web-print-undermine-regulation ).
Rushing to rubbish Leveson were the usual suspects, those who think that hacking the mobile phone of a dead schoolgirl is no more than an unfortunate mistake, & that "privacy is for paedos" (http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2011/nov/29/paul-mcmullan-leveson-inquiry-phone-hacking ).
Scuttling out of the sewer to augment the cause of mendacity & smears is a rodent who has had ample cause to lie low in his subterranean habitat over the last few months, Kelvin MacKenzie. Not so fresh from his doorstepping by Channel 4 News' Alex Thomson (http://www.channel4.com/news/kelvin-mackenzie-doorstepped-by-channel-4-news ), the well-known liar appeared on LBC Radio in London to talk about Leveson &, yes, Hillsborough (http://www.lbc.co.uk/kelvin-mackenzie-defends-hillsborough-headline---exclusive-63699 ).
Being MacKenzie, he doesn't do remorse or contrition. He'll do embarrassment, for sure, as was so memorably evident when Thomson accosted him. However, the word "apology" is absent from the liar's lexicon. Moreover, MacKenzie feels that, in his own warped way, he is "a victim of this", adding that he fell for the smear story from South Yorkshire Police "hook, line and sinker". Many may well feel that the nautical phrase is apposite in that a watery fate would be the right one for a creature described by Trevor Hicks as "a low-life".
Be that as it may, MacKenzie's words of bluster & self-pity (to coin a phrase) only serve to entrench the image of him as someone who would knock women & children out of the way in the rush for the lifeboats as the ship went down:
"[MacKenzie] insisted he took 23 years to apologise as he didn't have the 'vaguest idea' that 'the whole thing was a parcel of rubbish' until the Hillsborough Independent inquiry report found there was no evidence to support the allegations."
Should we believe him? I do. I also believe that the moon is made of cheese & that Rupert Murdoch is a kindly old soul who sincerely believes in The Truth.
Recommended reading: Cath Bore's account of the "Speaking Truth To Power" event at St George's Hall just over a week ago: http://www.writingonthewall.org.uk/wow-news/125-hillsborough.html ).
With exquisite timing, the Leveson Report was issued just a couple of hours after the latest court appearances by Rebekah Brooks & Andy Coulson. Intriguing as it is to pore over the minutiae of the report as well as its main findings, Emily Bell displays clever counterintuition in a Guardian piece (http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/nov/28/leveson-irrelevant-21st-century-journalism ).
Formerly of the Guardian & Observer, Bell, who is now based in the US, observes:
"The free press of the 21st century consists of the distributed social platforms, the WordPress blogging software and the 'dark social' matter of the hidden web, as much as it is the venerable institutions that have local accountability to whatever regulator the UK government should seek to appoint.
"In her evidence to Leveson, Claire Enders -- a well-respected media analyst -- repeated what is probably a common perception, that important journalism needs to be done by existing institutions, as the web has produced nothing which would match the scale and projection of legacy organisations. From a distant perch in the US, where Pulitzer prizes now go to recent web entities such as Huffington Post and ProPublica, this assertion already seems out of date."
For all of today's (justified) broadcast coverage of Leveson, the trend identified by Bell is the one to track for the future.
Carol Gustafson may convince herself that her continued vow of odious omerta regarding her support for Bettison's appointment as Merseyside Police Chief Constable in 1998 will ensure that the issue goes away. It won't. Her arrogant refusal to account for her actions has already cast a stain on Bootle Labour Party.
Bettison's tainted character has been rightly scrutinised & exposed over the Hillsborough cover-up. However, the Yorkshire Evening Post today runs a story which raises further questions about the man's history (http://www.yorkshireeveningpost.co.uk/news/latest-news/top-stories/former-west-yorkshire-chief-constable-bettison-at-centre-of-stolen-platinum-claims-1-5177890 ).
Watching an all-too rare home victory from a distance of three-and-a-half thousand miles was a welcome pleasure during my time in Manhattan. That the win was watched in the Liverpool Supporters Bar, located in the East Village (http://www.11thstbar.com/liverpool.php ), made it all the better.
Credit, too, to the owners, staff & regulars for helping out with the relief effort in the local neighborhood after Hurricane Sandy (the East Village was flooded) as well as raising funds for the Hillsborough Justice Campaign.
One striking thing about the US media is its chronic aversion to open criticism of Israel over its treatment of the Palestinians. There are honourable exceptions, to be fair. The Huffington Post departs from the collective narrative. Supposedly "liberal" papers such as the New York Times, however, are deeply reluctant to condemn Israeli acts of war, such as the latest vile outrages in Gaza. Taking their cue from an Obama administration which pulls its punches over Israel (http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2012/11/18/obama-israel-gaza_n_2154008.html ), the networks & printed media have read from the same hymn sheet.
It was therefore striking to see a large & vocal demonstration against Israel's actions today here in New York. Situated at 7th & W42nd, near Times Square, the crowd was addressed by a labor activist & an organiser of Occupy Oakland as well as Palestinian & Muslim American figures. A small counter demonstration was held just a block away by a motley collection of individuals waving Israeli flags. Two of their number attempted to rush the main demo, taunting the crowd whilst waving the Israeli emblem. The NYPD, out in force, wasted no time in arresting them.
Thus far, there has been no mention of this story in the mainstream US media, despite the presence of at least one TV camera crew. One wonders if this collective omerta would apply if it had been a small band of Palestinian figures attempting to rush a large pro-Israel rally.
Arrived in New York last night for a short vacation. Tired & exhausted after a queue of Biblical proportions at JFK Customs & Immigration (largely due to the Thanksgiving holiday), I checked into my hotel & then found a pizza place off Broadway. The Beatles' version of "Money" was playing on the radio as I walked in.
The guy behind the counter smiled & said to me, "Great band, huh?"
His eyes widened when I told him that I was from their home town. What his response lacked in eloquence it made up for in enthusiasm.
"No shit, man!"
Obama's re-election this week has, of course, been the dominant story. The failure of Romney & his rabid allies of Fox News & the Tea Party to unseat him has been met with an almost audible sigh of relief around the globe. Now that the election's over, the Oldham Echo has a suggestion for the Commander-in-Chief: visit Liverpool (http://www.liverpoolecho.co.uk/liverpool-news/local-news/2012/11/07/top-five-reasons-why-us-president-barack-obama-should-visit-liverpool-100252-32185114/ ).
Neil MacDonald's puerile piece begins memorably:
"US President Barack Obama was re-elected through the night, but despite the many challenges facing him in the next four years, the burning question on everyone's lips is when will he visit Liverpool?"
Yes, indeed, when will he pay such an important trip here? It's a question that has been leading all the news bulletins on CNN, the BBC, ABC, NBC, CBS & even Fox News (the network's anchors referring to "Marxist Merseyside"). Moreover, it's such a "burning question on everyone's lips" that possible & planned trips to South East Asia, the Middle East & Russia may have to be rescheduled to accommodate Obama's visit to Liverpool. The White House is expected to make an announcement in the next few days, I understand.
The Echo draws up five reasons why Obama (or POTUS, as it refers to him, nicking a piece of jargon from The West Wing) should pay the city a visit: 1. "One of America's founding fathers was born in Liverpool." Fair enough, I suppose, but sufficient reason to make a visit? 2. The International Slavery Museum. By all means, draw attention to the way in which the Slave Trade enriched the city's merchants, but is that a unique selling point? 3. The Fabs. Ah yes, it wouldn't be a proper Echo piece without a gratuitous reference to John, Paul, George & erm, whatisname from Thomas the Tank Engine, would it? 4. The Port of Liverpool. Mildly interesting to Americans, perhaps, but a compelling reason for Obama to visit? 5. "Loads more reasons". Yes, MacDonald really did write that. To be fair, he does mention a few more connections, however tenuous, between the city & the US. The mental image, however, is of a hack desperately grasping at the slightest link for the purposes of his piece.
It's an image that remains in the mind when MacDonald concludes:
"Do you know any more links between Liverpool and America, or reasons why President Obama should visit the city? Let us know in the comments below."
Hear that sound? It's the sound of wooden fragments which formed the base of the barrel being scraped frenziedly.
We've been here before, of course. Not long after Obama's 2008 victory the Echo was asking the same question (http://condensedthoughts.blogspot.co.uk/2009/01/i-suspected-it-wouldnt-be-long-before.html ) & repeated it a month later (http://condensedthoughts.blogspot.co.uk/2009/02/letter-to-america.html ) when both the city council & Oldham Hall Street had high hopes of an "imminent" visit.
It would be interesting for Obama to contrast his own economic stimulus package with the savage cuts that Joe "Tea & Sympathy" Anderson is making on behalf of the ConDem government, I suppose. Perhaps that thought has crossed Mayor Joe's mind, too.
Anyway, we hope the invitation's been issued. We wait with baited breath.
Satirising the Tories has produced many a memorable moment over the last thirty-odd years. However, Nadine Dorries' decision to temporarily abandon her full-time job as an MP for a reality TV show (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-20217901 ) surely trumps the best efforts of comedians & commentators. Why devise a comic burlesque when your target is beyond parody itself?
That doesn't stop the Guardian's Michael White from having a go with a mildly amusing piece which presents a future political landscape changed by Dorries' success on the show (http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2012/nov/08/nadine-dorries-wins-im-a-celebrity ). And why not, you may ask. After all, Dorries is rapidly turning into the UK's answer to Sarah Palin.
Alas, White's mockery is marred by the sort of gratuitous jibe which comes straight from The Sun school of lying & libel:
"What had clinched it for Nad and turned her into a national heroine both in Australia and back home was the snake-eating bit of the contest. You don't get fazed by a bloody python if you've grown up among Liverpool fans in Anfield. Nad had strangled hers and fried a few python steaks for the TV crew. It tasted fine with some tomato sauce and a lager."
Those who work in the Westminster bubble are almost always divorced from the reality of life for those outside it. It seems like White is a case in point.
Enjoy your G&T in the Strangers' Bar, Michael.
The BBC's current compulsion to exacerbate matters when given the opportunity to exonerate itself continues. It emerged this week that tonight's episode of Would I Lie To You? featuring Kelvin MacKenzie is a repeat. The programme was first transmitted in 2009. Given what has long been known about MacKenzie, & clearly reiterated via the Hillsborough Independent Panel report, you would think that the BBC will shelve that particular repeat & air another one, wouldn't you? Well, they won't.
Seven Streets highlights the state of corporate dysfunction at the corporation (http://www.sevenstreets.com/talk-and-opinion/kelvin-mackenzie-would-i-lie-to-you/ ):
" SevenStreets scribe, Johnny Meadowcroft complained -- rightly in our opinion -- that it was disrespectful and wholly inappropriate to air the programme, while proceedings were continuing, and old wounds are still raw.
" 'We understand you're unhappy Kelvin MacKenzie will be on the programme as you feel he's an inappropriate choice of guest.
" 'This is a repeat of an episode first broadcast when Kelvin MacKenzie appeared as one of the panellists. We have taken extra care to check that there are no references to Hillsborough during the programme or to the Sun's reporting or the city of Liverpool in the light of the recent Hillsborough report.
" 'We'd also like to assure you we've registered your complaint on our audience log.' "
So the BBC is happy to repeat a programme which features an individual who participated in the largest cover-up in British legal history. Moreover, the corporation seems to think that the absence of any references to Hillsborough makes MacKenzie's appearance acceptable. Additionally, it is unconcerned that MacKenzie's actions may go before the Director of Public Prosecutions at a future stage.
Let's remind ourselves of the liar's cowardice when faced with the sort of investigative TV journalism which was once the BBC's preserve (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_meOwyOZxDE ).
While we're on the subject of lies ( & its eager practitioners), it was grimly amusing to see Roy Greenslade round on a tweet from Rupert Murdoch a couple of weeks back in which the discredited mogul sneeringly referred to phone-hacking victims as "scumbags" (http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/2012/oct/14/rupert-murdoch-phone-hacking-scumbags ). Greenslade addressed Murdoch directly in the final few paragraphs of a post on his blog (http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/greenslade/2012/oct/15/rupert-murdoch-news-corporation ):
"Well, humble man, I guess it takes one to know one. Good luck with the News Corp AGM when scumbag investors ask pertinent questions about your company and then vote against you and your board.
"Not that it will unseat you, of course. You have the voting shares tied up. It's great to live in a free market when it's tilted in one's favour, isn't it?
"But this kind of insult could yet rebound. We're all scumbags now. So I call on all the scumbags of the world -- celebrities, readers, movie-watchers, satellite TV payers, investors, journalists -- to unite and throw off the shackles of the great media mogul. Boycott all that he owns."
Stirring stuff, to be sure, & no one of sound mind would demur from Greenslade's sentiments. However, it's a pity that Greenslade didn't take a similarly astringent view of Murdoch's surviving UK rag the day after the publication of the report by the Hillsborough Independent Panel (http://www.guardian.co.uk/media/greenslade/2012/sep/13/hillsborough-disaster-sun ). Isn't it?
A good deal of the criticism surrounding the BBC over the Savile affair is warranted. Augmenting that criticism, however, is opportunistic attack from those who have always been opposed to the corporation's presence over the airwaves. An obvious source of hostility is the Murdoch empire. It's therefore crass & grotesque for the BBC to have the well-known Murdoch lackey & proven liar Kelvin MacKenzie as one of the guests on the BBC TV show Would I Lie To You?, to be transmitted on Friday evening (http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b007r3n8 ).
Presumably, some genius at the Beeb thought having MacKenzie on a programme whose title draws attention to his mendacity would be oh so clever. One can only assume that the Savile affair has denuded those responsible for MacKenzie's appearance of all critical & ethical faculties. Perhaps the same people will invite Gary Glitter along to this year's Children In Need show.
There is, sadly, the probability that the show has already been recorded. However, you can still let the BBC know your views about MacKenzie's appearance & fee (understood to be about £1000) by visiting this site: http://www.bbc.co.uk/complaints/ .
The lamentable record of A4e has been well documented elsewhere. Tonight's Channel 4 News had some fresh information on the organisation chosen by the ConDems to force unemployed people into applying for wholly unsuitable vacancies. There followed a live studio exchange (let's not dignify it with the word interview) between Krishnan Guru Murthy & A4e's former boss Emma Harrison. What ensued came straight from The Thick Of It & warranted the term car crash TV. Sit back & enjoy, this is a YouTube moment:
http://www.channel4.com/news/emma-harrison-im-a-useful-face-to-have-a-go-at .
Now that Norman Bettison has resigned as West Yorkshire Chief Constable with immediate effect, as opposed to March of next year, the time of his own choosing (http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-london-20067716 ), it's as good a time as any to look again at the role played by Cllr Carol Gustafson as chairwoman of Merseyside Police Authority when Bettison was appointed as the force's Chief Constable in 1998. Gustafson has flatly refused to discuss or account for her decision to support Bettison, despite what was then suspected of his role in the Hillsborough cover-up (http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2012/oct/23/hillsborough-police-chief-bettison-eagle ).
It is understood that a growing number of Gustafson's Labour colleagues on Sefton Council view her as a potential electoral liability & that only her resignation as a councillor will lance the boil. Bootle's Labour MP, Joe Benton, has refused to comment on Gustafson's position, a stance which may well jar with many of his constituents. He can be contacted on 0151 933 8432.
Just a reminder of Gustafson's contact details: phone no. : 0151 928 6130.
email: carol.gustafson@councillors.sefton.gov.uk .
