A Long Time in Politics: Blears and Gurkha-thon

A Long Time In Politics: Sadie Smith’s Roundup of the Parliamentary Week / @smithsky1979

The story so far (with apologies to Round the Horne): the previous week had taken its toll on blushing, winsome Gordon Brown. Caught in a pincer movement between a group of outraged former Gurkha soliders led by grizzled, bearded Joanna Lumley, and by a group of MPs worked into a bloodlust over their Parliamentary expenses – all in the sort of frenzy only debate about reducing said expenses can induce in our elected representatives – the Gord was trapped.

Flashing a dazzling, disarming smile (see YouTubes passim) at his aggressors, he created a distraction which allowed the Home Office to announce a moratorium on Gurkha deportations and the whips’ office to get some fancy footwork on with regard to the expenses furore. Safe in the bunker, he ran a delicate hand over his fevered brow. He’d escaped! Hearing a sound behind him he turned, and what he saw made him faint dead away. In the corner, a towering giant of politics, not to mention deputy leadership elections past, lurked malignantly in the shadows. Opening it’s gaping jaws, it screamed the awful words:

“My name’s Hazel Blears.”

Okay, it’s not that funny but at least it’s clean, eh?

GURKHATHON (PART THE SECOND)

The sight of wee Nicky Clegg and the Conservatives’ answer to the Fonz desperately trying to jockey their way into Joanna Lumley’s press conference last week, with all the subtlety of tourists mouthing “Hi, Mum” behind news correspondents going live on College Green, had provided us all with some much-needed comedy. Not least because the Tories’ commitment to Gurkha justice had previously consisted of praying very hard they’d go away and not affording them any settlement rights or even a decent pension whilst they were in power and could, you know, actually do something about the issue. But toss in a celebrity and the chance he might get on the telly, and Cameron’s breaking the sound barrier to condemn the Government for, er, whacking up their pension entitlements and ruling that those who served post-1997 had the right to settle after four years service.

Meanwhile, the Home Affairs Select Committee held a special session on the Gurkha ho-down which featured the Defence Minister Kevan Jones and Home Office immigration Minister Phil Woolas. The starring role, however, went to Joanna Lumley whose evidence served to remind us all that it’s not just MPs who are destined to start believing their own press releases. Listen to Today in Parliament for more.

But my particular favourite was Patsy’s passionate assertion that the people who had written to her “didn’t care” about how much this would cost; one assumes that these correspondents are labouring under the misapprehension that the millions needed for this project are to come from the Magic Money Tree that Cameron et al have got stashed in a CCHQ back room as opposed to from TAXPAYERZ MONNEE! [copyright, The Taxpayers’ Alliance]. I’m not saying it’s wrong that Britain should bear the cost of a greater Gurkha settlement. I’m just saying.

Twenty-four hours later, St. Lumley met with the Beloved Leader and received assurances that a new policy on resettlement is to be decided by the end of May. Actually, in all, this was a victory for the Gurkhas – but blink and you would have missed it. The fourth estate were too busy hectoring Ms Lumley about which Royal had expressed support for her campaign (hey, they’ve got lots of money. Couldn’t they sell a county or something? No?) and John “ONE TONE” Craig of Sky News raising a sardonic eyebrow at the idea that Joanna should “trust” the Gord.

The Government is set to announce tomorrow that all policy is set to be outsourced to Joanna Lumley. But not until after the beatification.

THE CULTURE, MEDIA AND SPORT COMMITTEE ON MODERN CHURNALISM

On Tuesday the Culture, Media, and Sport Committee took evidence from Ian Hislop and others on the state of modern churnalism. Follow the TiP link (above) to listen to the News of the Screws dude’s strangled attempts to defend trouser-rubbing reportage of sex scandals as in the public interest.

ET TU, HAZEL?

If there’s one thing that’s about as welcome as the sight of Ben Brogan sitting down for an apple turnover and a friendly chat with one of the Triumvirate of Evil/Obi Wan Kenobe’s side of the Force (strike one according to prejudice), it’s an article from a senior Labourite with the words “vision”, “direction” and “lamentable” featuring in their address to the nation. This time it was the turn of diminutive one-time deputy leadership contender Hazel Blears who used an article in the Observer to get all “critical friend” on our asses whilst also managing to sneak a crafty one through the slips about “YouTube if you want to.” See what she did there? Eh?

Following, one assumes, some fairly discouraging words from the Gord’s neck of the woods, Hazel clarified her position. Y’see, apparently “lamentable” means “absolutely spiffing” in Salford and actually forms the basis of many a modern chat-up line amongst the local yoof. Whew! That’s a relief. You had us worried there for a moment, Hazel.

That the floppy haired boy wonder chose to raise the spectre of Observer articles past in Prime Minister’s Questions this week was a very poor show indeed.

And, of course, entirely unexpected.

ON THE ADJOURNMENT (ODDS ‘N’ SODS)

John Rentoul raises a glass to the crack squad of spinners behind the Gord’s latest photo-op and Hopi Sen reminisces on When Photocalls Go Bad XIV, whilst the Home Office’s “least wanted” list attracts the ire of an American “shock jock” named Michael Savage who, in accordance with the wishes of the LabourList lawyers, I am instructed to say is a thoroughly delightful chap, with sound views on our homosexual brethren, and who indubitably has an excellent literary career ahead of him.

Mos def.

—

This is the first in Sadie’s weekly series A Long Time in Politics. For more on Sadie Smith, check out her blog.