Showing posts with label Chris Bryant. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Chris Bryant. Show all posts

Exposed

Chris Bryant is not letting up on his crusade against Rupert Murdoch, but perhaps the real reason why he is so angry is beginning to come to light.

A few years ago the Sun put this picture and headline on its front page:

     

Apparently they were expected to put this picture on the front page under the headline, "BRYANT'S IN HIS PANTS."

   

Chris was appalled that they not only managed to spell his name incorrectly, but that they allegedly spent a large amount of money on an unflattering photograph rather than use the one he had put on the web.

I'm not sure I share his judgement about it being unflattering, though. It looks unposed and natural, whereas the one he sent out looks flashy and exhibitionist.

Bookmark and Share

Another example of Labour's insouciance

Following Chris Bryant's failure to understand what the word insouciant means, Neil Kinnock has kindly stepped in to provide us with a perfect definition. Referring to reports in the press that his son Stephen is gay, he said:

     

“When you are up against garbage like that, the only way to respond is with a shrug and a smile."

Wales on Sunday, 18 September 2011

But did he just shrug it off and smile? Of course he didn't.

According to Wales on Sunday he's reacted with "fury" and "launched a blistering attack" on the media. He called what was written about Stephen "a lot of bilge" and said it was an example of one of "the most vicious forms of personal attack".

-

Isn't it strange that Labour politicians like Neil Kinnock and Chris Bryant say one thing, but in fact do the exact opposite of what they say?

Why is it that remarks about a person's sexuality result in furious and very vocal complaints from both these politicians, but others are expected not to kick up a fuss or complain when their language is attacked?

Bookmark and Share

The Insouciant Pantomime Dame

Thanks to BlogMenai for reminding us that Chris Bryant is a man with double standards. Following Jonathan Edwards' complaint about this article in the Daily Mail, the Labour MP for the Rhondda provided this quote for the Independent on Sunday:

"I can't believe Jonathan Edwards has risen to the bait. Roger Lewis's piece is fatuous nonsense, but the last thing people want is a moaning version of Welsh nationalism. Wales is at its best when it is triumphantly insouciant about the criticism of others."

Independent on Sunday, 28 August 2011

I'm sure that some people might not know what "insouciant" means. But to save anyone the trouble of reaching for a dictionary, Chris Bryant has been kind enough to provide us with an example.

After being called a "pantomime dame" by George Osborne just before Christmas last year, he didn't just brush it off and carry on regardless; he took it as a slur on his sexually and shouted that the remark was "homophobic". He immediately went to the media and on Twitter to complain that George Osborne was wrong to say it and should apologize.

     

So there we have it: if someone makes an insulting remark about someone who is gay, the "insouciant" Chris Bryant thinks you should make an issue of it and demand an apology.

-

It looks like Chris Bryant was using a big word he didn't understand ... either that or he's a two-faced hypocrite who has one set of standards for himself, but applies the exact opposite set of standards to others.

"I can't believe Jonathan Edwards Chris Bryant has risen to the bait. Roger Lewis's piece George Osborne's remark is fatuous nonsense, but the last thing people want is a moaning version of Welsh nationalism gay rights. Wales The gay community is at its best when it is triumphantly insouciant about the criticism of others."

Why should Cymraegophobia be treated any less seriously than homophobia, Chris?

Bookmark and Share

Who could possibly be interested in Scotland?

This short clip from last night's Question Time perfectly demonstrates the BBC's complete inability to grasp the realities of devolution:

     

Leaving David Dimbleby's patronizing arrogance to one side, we need only ask ourselves one simple question to demonstrate the sheer hypocrisy of the situation: Are questions and comments about Westminster's policies on things like the health service or education to be banned from all editions of Question Time on the basis that viewers in Wales, Scotland and the north of Ireland would not be interested in what was happening only in England?

Of course not.

It's another example of the usual double standards, so deeply ingrained that most people in the British establishment are blind to it. For them the UK and England are one and the same thing. The BBC expect people in Wales and Scotland to be interested in England (and of course we are) but they can't imagine that anyone in England will be interested in Wales or Scotland.

And listen to the clip again to hear Chris Bryant's contemptuous ridicule of the idea that anybody outside Scotland could be interested in the Scottish economy ... for if he says that about Scotland, we can be damn sure that he thinks exactly the same about Wales.

Much as Labour want us to believe otherwise, the contempt agenda is not limited to the Tories and LibDems.

Bookmark and Share

Analysis and Strategy - Westminster

This is the first of two posts in which I'll give my analysis of what the European results might mean for Plaid and, in particular, how this should shape the way we approach the next elections. This post will concentrate on the next general election, the second will focus on the Assembly election in 2011.
 

1. The seats Plaid already hold

The three seats we already hold are very secure. In Caernarfon we have more than four times the vote of any other party. In Meirionnydd Nant Conwy it is two-and-a-half times, and almost that much in Carmarthen East and Dinefwr.
 

2. Plaid's target seats

These comprise the four seats that, even before the political turmoils of the last month or so over expenses, we would have a reasonable expectation of either winning or being very close to winning.
 

In Ceredigion we are more than 3,000 ahead, and it seems almost certain that we will retake this seat.
 

In Ynys Môn we are just over 2,000 ahead of the Tories, and over 3,500 ahead of Labour who currently hold the seat. So this also looks secure.
 

In Llanelli we are just under 2,000 ahead of Labour. We must expect Labour's vote to recover over the next year, but perhaps by not all that much. That's because Labour now look likely to limp on at Westminster under the same old leadership. A new leader could have invigorated them, but the PLP has chosen to stick with what they've got. Therefore the general dissatisfaction with Labour is bound to continue. So Llanelli is very winnable.
 

Our fourth target is Aberconwy, which we hold at Assembly level with the new boundaries. This was a very close contest between Plaid and the Tories:

Plaid 4,236 ... Tories 4,228 ... Labour 2,453 ... LibDem 1,467 ... UKIP 1,951

On one level, it's easy to imagine that those who voted UKIP will vote for the Tories, which would make it easy for the Tories to win in a general election. But I think that's a false assumption. UKIP (if we leave aside the BNP) is essentially the only anti-EU party. There is a lot of anti-EU sentiment at large, which is shared every bit as much by people who vote for other parties on the usual domestic political issues: the economy, jobs, law and order and public services.

So Aberconwy is still winnable for Plaid, especially if we take steps to win over the 953 who voted Green. But it is the hardest of the four main target seats for us to win.
 

3. The new possibilities

Turning to other seats, I had not thought we stood much chance of gaining any seats at Westminster outside these seven. But thanks to Labour's demise and the expectation that anti-Labour feeling will only grow greater as they limp on for another year, I believe we stand an outside chance in Neath, the Rhondda and Caerffili.
 

In Neath Plaid were the second placed party in the last Westminster, Assembly and Euro elections. In each the margin has been getting closer. Up until now, the fact that Peter Hain was the highest profile MP representing a Welsh constituency counted very much in his favour. But that is now the very factor that is most likely to count against him.

Reactions to his return to the Cabinet have been mixed. Looked at from one direction, he's better than Paul Murphy ... but that's not saying much. The fact is that Peter Hain is tainted with financial irregularities on a scale much larger than most of those who have been exposed in the current expenses scandal. Not only that, but he appears to have his own starring role in the expenses scandal too.

However the thing that we should exploit to the fullest extent is that Peter Hain does not consider Neath to be where his main home is. The place he calls home is London. He was parachuted into Neath because it was a safe seat. In my view his Neath constituency should deselect him, but he has built up too much of a career to be moved now. Therefore he is a sitting target, an electoral liability.
 

The same is true of the Rhondda. It is another constituency where Plaid are clearly the only party that can challenge Labour. He is one of the batch of New Labour acolytes, parachuted into a safe seat with which he had no previous connexion. He is a blatant political opportunist who has and will change direction whenever it suits his political career. He started off by being a Tory, then was unashamedly Blairite, then put the knife into Blair when he thought he could get something better from Brown. He too thinks that London is his main home.

If his local Labour party had any sense they would deselect him, but they won't. Therefore the only choice left is for him to be voted out instead. I must however admit that I do very much admire him for his work with teenage pregnancy and teenage mothers. But he could do that work just as well as an MP for a constituency he had more connexion with ... or indeed if he were no longer an MP at all.
 

In Caerffili things are likely to centre around Ron Davies. When he was part of the Labour party he represented the face of Labour that was most receptive to devolution, and without him we might not have got the Assembly at all. But Labour have now moved on from there, even though the people of Caerffili have now elected Plaid in enough numbers in 1999 and 2008 for us to run the council.

I don't see Ron Davies being particularly inclined to return to Westminster, but I could imagine him in the Senedd. If some practical way could be found of combining the votes he received as an independent with Plaid's vote, Labour would be toast. The question is whether that partnership could be made in time for the Westminster election. If it could, the Westminster seat is there for the taking.

Some of my friends think that Ron Daves is very close to crossing over to Plaid. That maybe true, but I think that there might be more to be gained from him not joining Plaid. Our aim is independence, and Ron Davies probably isn't able to go that far. But that doesn't mean to say that he doesn't share our ambition for a Senedd not only with the primary lawmaking powers that we'll vote for in a referendum, but also for us to have responsibility over other matters such as taxation or the welfare and benefits system.

Therefore we have to see if there's a way of working with those who want (to use the Scottish expression) a "devolution max" constitutional settlement for Wales, coupled of course with the same day-to-day priorities of government for the economy, education, the NHS, transport and the environment. If there is, we can travel in the same direction for the ten years or so it will take us to get there ... and only then do we need to part company.
 

4. Conclusions

Things look very good for Plaid at the next election. You would put your mortgage on Plaid returning five MPs, and there is every indication that we will return six or seven.

We also have a slim chance in another three. And even if we don't win these for Westminster, we increase our chances of winning them at the next Assembly election in 2011.

In the meantime I don't want to be negative about any of the other seats in Wales. Unfortunately the first-past-the-post means that even if our level of support doubles in many other seats, it still won't make any difference to the outcome. Nonetheless there is important work to do; the spadework done now might make all the difference in the future, especially if constitutional reform at Westminster gives us some form of PR.

I'll write about the Assembly elections later. Surprisingly, my analysis is that things are not looking so good for Plaid in the Senedd, and therefore that we will need to do some serious work to improve on our fifteen seats there.

Bookmark and Share

Emulating my hero

 
     

The ayes to the right have it!

Bookmark and Share