OPINION: Labour lost London the day they chose Ken

There are some in the Labour Party who, as soon as London Mayor is mentioned, cannot see beyond Ken Livingstone. Yes, when the post was created, back in the heady days when Tony Blair was still a popular Prime Minister and hadn't yet become a deluded, war mongeting, religious bigot, Ken probably was the obvious choice to run for Mayor. After all, he had run the old GLC, until Thatcher pulled the plug. But times change, and so has Ken.

Neil Kinnock, Ken Livingstone and a newt. Write your own amusing caption...

In recent years, Ken has gradually become totally unelectable.

The blatant avoidance/evasion of paying sufficient tax was just the icing on the cake of a series of revelations of the real Ken Livingstone: sexist, racist, anti-Semitic. And let's not forget the occasions he's chosen to thump someone. He's a thoroughly objectionable human being and the Labour leadership should have had the guts to select someone else to oppose Boris Johnson - there were plenty of candidates who would probably have done better - the obvious, and popular, choice, and one currently looking for a new role, would have been Oona King but, no, Labour went with Ken.

Mind you, I think just about anyone would do a better job than Ken Livingstone - a faulty lamp post on Westminster Bridge would probably make a better and less controversial mayor than Ken Livingstone. It would certainly be less offensive.

How can a man with dodgy personal finances and both questionable and unpleasant views on race and sexual equality be mayor of one of the world's great cities, and, arguably, become the second most important politician in the UK?

In many ways I'm astonished he got as many votes as he did, but then there are a scary number who vote for a party without looking at the candidate.

Hopefully this latest defeat has brought Ken Livingstone political aspirations to an end. He can go off and syphon his earnings through a company to avoid/evade paying sufficient tax, and he can spend more time bothering his newts (poor newts).

Good riddance to a bad penny. He was a man for his moment - but his moment should have ended twenty or more years ago.

Labour lost London the day they chose Ken as their candidate. They knew what he was like, but still they selected him. Suicidal? Maybe. Moronic? Certainly.

It's now time for Labour to reflect on why they, supposedly a party of equality, based on socialist principles, selected a money grabbing, selfish, egotistical bigot as their choice for London mayor, and they must also look at who chose him.

Ed Miliband hit by an egg

COMMENT: Reforming the NHS

I do find it strange that those campaigning for the government to "drop the bill" on NHS reforms are so blinkered in their view of the NHS.

It is fair to say that when the NHS was set up, way back in 1948, that it was the crowning glory of Clement Attlee's post-war Labour government, and one the 1946 Act that set it up, is still one of the greatest and most important pieces of legislation any government has ever passed. It doesn't, however, mean that things shouldn't change or that everything that was in the National Health Service Act was right or perfect - far from it.

Some supporting the. "drop the bill" campaign (a glib, overly simplistic sound bite that is typical if Ed Miliband's knee-jerk, gesture politics) seem so blinkered in their view, or just plain stupid, that they want the NHS left alone. They argue that it is fine as it is. They don't want anything changed.

That point of view is moronic. It doesn't exist in the real world. Only absolute idiots would support it. Sadly, many of those who were elected as Labour MPs in 2010 fit that description perfectly.

The NHS is an enormous monolith of waste, leaking tax payers' money quicker than a jug of water poured through a sieve.

The problem is that in the 64 years since it came into existence, governments of different colours have tinkered with it. Tinkering is no good. Tinkering is for the short-sighted. Tinkering is for the amateur wanting a crowd pleasing quick fix, but it isn't for the careful, thoughtful politician who wants to move the NHS into the 21st century.

And that's the problem. The NHS is still firmly rooted in post-Second World War politics. It is embedded in the Twentieth Century. Sure, the machinery of medicine might have changed beyond recognition, the treatments progressed, survival rates improved, etc. but the organisation and administration of the NHS, and it's excessive waste, remain firmly in 1950's Britain.

The idiots calling for Cameron's government to "drop the bill" are correct, in as much as this bill isn't right - it fails to address many of the fundamental flaws of the NHS - but they fail to offer alternatives that show any awareness of what is needed, and, in the whole, they want to bury their head in the sand, do nothing and keep repeating their meaningless (and somewhat dishonest mantra) that "the NHS is the envy of the world"!

The concept of the NHS is the envy of the world but no sane country would want to adopt this dinosaur which eats money at a ridiculous rate - way beyond what can be justified and way beyond what can be afforded.

The NHS needs to be reformed. Proper reform. Root and branch. No more tinkering. Someone needs to sit down with a blank piece of paper and rethink the NHS. No sacred cows. Nothing off-limits.

Without fundamental change the NHS will die a long, slow death and we will all suffer.

The NHS has been a major national asset, but as the nation's do graphic changes, we need a new NHS that is designed for the next 70 years, not the last 70 years.

If you insist on your meaningless gesture politics of who h "drop the bill " is one of the most inane that's fine, but start thinking about alternatives, because the status quo isn't the solution.

It's 2012, not 1948. The world has changed beyond recognition. The NHS needs to catch up, and quickly.

Why call George Osborne "Gideon "?

You hear it and read it all the time; Labour supporters who refer to George Osborne as "Gideon".

Why do they do it?

Isn't it just name calling and bullying?

Ok, ok, George Osborne's birth certificate has him as Gideon but he has, as is his choice, become known as George.

So Gideon is his real name? Yes. But Ed Miliband and Ed Balls are both really named Edward - should we insist that they are always called that? Should Ken Clarke always be Kenneth? Should Maggie Thatcher always be Margaret?

Labour supporters object, quite rightly, to Cameron's name calling and bullying but lose all respect when they call George Osborne Gideon because it is being done to try to make him sound posh, privileged and Tory.

George Osborne wants to be called George. Labour supporters should respect that.

COMMENT: Fred Goodwin loses knighthood and 2 RBS bosses turn down bonuses. So what?

Tabloid politics has its victory. In fact, it has had two in a matter of days.

Firstly, the boss of RBS, and one of his underlings, were forced to turn down bonuses and, second, Fred Goodwin has been stripped of his knighthood.

The tabloids can't claim sole responsibility for these great victories; they were aided and abetted by sound bite politicians who saw that the bankers were damaged antelope on the Serengeti plain, an easy target for the lions of Westminster.

It's all such a nonsense. It's tokenistic politics lead by tawdry journalists with little or no grasp of the bigger picture.

Why do I say that?

Because, while a bonus isnt paid out or a bauble is taken back, this does nothing to change the mechanisms, systems and culture of banking - institutions that, recent events have shown, control more governments than elected officials.

Two senior executives turn down bonuses totalling less than £2m. These bonuses were in the form of shares and required the bank's value to increase before they kicked in. Whoops! And saving £2m is less than a drop in the ocean when you remember the banks were bailed out to the tune of £70+ BILLION!

As for Fred Goodwin's knighthood... do what?! I'm sure he doesn't give a flying fig whether he has a silly title given to him by discredited politicians and a parasitical monarch who costs the nation more than £200m per year (on a normsl year, liads more on a jubilee year) with very little return (and yet gets her close family to say the nation should buy her a new £70m yacht as a pressie for having shaken hands so well).

Politicians need to do something to change the banking system and withholding bonuses and taking back baubles does nothing to achieve this.

Politicians need to take back control of economies and actually run their countries for the benefit of the people.

Cameron and Miliband (and probably Clegg, though nobody cares what he says any more) will celebrate and bask in the glory that the tabloids will bestow on them but anyone with a brain will see through the veil of spin and realise that they have achieved absolutely nothing.

Cameron, Miliband and the tabloids are like Oceania in 1984 - celebrating victories for which there is no evidence. They tilt at windmills but fail to address the real issues.

It's time for politicians to do something about the banking system - it needs a root and branch review and overhaul - and no amount of victories over pantomime villains will do anything to improve the world.

Sadly, too many see bankers as evil. They are not evil, but the system that they, and politicians, work in is corrupted beyond repair. A new system, with new purpose, a social awareness and conscience is needed.

Cameron may as well give the RBS execs their bonuses, and give Fred Goodwin his title back. These will make no difference to the all-pervading culture of greed and self in which the banks have been allowed to operate.

Any politician who suggests this week's events will make a difference are lying to the public and deserve to lose their seat.

People need to stop being fooled by superficial politicians, and manipulative newspapers trying to push the blame onto another sector of the establishment. Sadly, when the history of the last 20 years are written it may well be called the age of tokenism.

Miliband's PMQs cock-up

Either George Osborne goes on budget holidays or cleaners and dinner ladies are paid a lot....



... or Ed Miliband is a total muppet!