No sooner did we learn of George Dubya's action in baling out the US banks, a measure designed of course as a "last ditch" attempt to save his party's arse from a well deserved electoral kicking, than BBC News reveals Gordon Brown's personal and close friend J K Rowling is handing over a milion pounds to rescue Labour from the prospect of bankruptcy.
Ms Rowling's decision to donate this sum to the party for their "tireless campaign to eliminate child poverty" is driven, we are to believe, by her hatred of Tory plans to restore tax incentives to those who choose to make a solemn, public and legally binding declaration of their personal commitment to each other in front of their friends, relatives,and anyone else in the world who cares to come and watch.
Well I suppose a woman who the likes of Max Clifford would have us believe struggled against hunger and the cold of a scottish winter as a single mum to pen the final lines of the epic battle between Harry Potter and the Professor Quirrel / Lord Voldemort "gestalt" in front of the Mirror of Erised might retain a great deal of empathy with those who find themselves in the same straitened circumstances.
But if she felt that way, then why not provide those funds to the organisations that ACT for those people rather than the organisation that does sod all for them and indeed creates more such people nearly every day. After all, there are now quite a few British women who have been left as single mums with children thanks to Brown and his predecessor who had their fathers depart this world leaving their blood etching an ochre stain into the sand and rocks in Iraq and Afghanistan for a start.
I wonder if that close personal friendship with Gordon and Sarah has in fact been tapped to simply prop up the cancer-ridden corrupt hulk that is all that remains of the political party that once commanded the loyalty of the British Working Man. I wonder if this has anything to do with the fact that if the party goes belly-up, the members of the NEC and that includes Gordon, will be personally liable for the debts ? That is, after all, the reason why , when their General Secretary had to resign for turning a blind eye when dodgy donations from a property speculator were laundered to appear to have come from his friends and employees, the hedge Fund Manager they found to take over the job told them in no uncertain terms this was an unaceptable risk.
But let us stop and think a minute. When Terry Pratchett was interviewed on Radio 4 about his donation of a similar sum to Alzheimer's research as he had just found he was a victim to a particularly nasty variation of that medical horror, he was, he said, relieved that his financial circumstances were such that he "would not be a financial burden upon the state". Very noble of him, except that I put it to you that it would be a burden that should be borne willingly because he is entitled, through his tax on his earnings, to have that burden shouldered. As are we all.
But as that thought passed through my mind, I read the rest of the article on ms Rowling's donation. She has made £560 million from the marketing of her creation, and good luck to her for it, for I hope my memoirs, when they are published, make me a tiny fraction of the amount she has amassed.
Then I realised that one milion pounds is less than 0.2% of the sum she has made. Looking to my own income over the same period, it is as if I donated six tankfuls of petrol from my wife's car to the cause. And, to be honest, if someone out there were to promise me they would use such a gift to incinerate labour party HQ with Gordon still in it, then I say "bring your jerry cans round to Chez JoG"
I leave you with this last thought. Now the party finances are secure for the time being at least, Gordon can come out of his hiding place and turn up for his party conference. I see his aides are even now arranging for him to receive these happy tidings ...
Ms Rowling's decision to donate this sum to the party for their "tireless campaign to eliminate child poverty" is driven, we are to believe, by her hatred of Tory plans to restore tax incentives to those who choose to make a solemn, public and legally binding declaration of their personal commitment to each other in front of their friends, relatives,and anyone else in the world who cares to come and watch.
Well I suppose a woman who the likes of Max Clifford would have us believe struggled against hunger and the cold of a scottish winter as a single mum to pen the final lines of the epic battle between Harry Potter and the Professor Quirrel / Lord Voldemort "gestalt" in front of the Mirror of Erised might retain a great deal of empathy with those who find themselves in the same straitened circumstances.
But if she felt that way, then why not provide those funds to the organisations that ACT for those people rather than the organisation that does sod all for them and indeed creates more such people nearly every day. After all, there are now quite a few British women who have been left as single mums with children thanks to Brown and his predecessor who had their fathers depart this world leaving their blood etching an ochre stain into the sand and rocks in Iraq and Afghanistan for a start.
I wonder if that close personal friendship with Gordon and Sarah has in fact been tapped to simply prop up the cancer-ridden corrupt hulk that is all that remains of the political party that once commanded the loyalty of the British Working Man. I wonder if this has anything to do with the fact that if the party goes belly-up, the members of the NEC and that includes Gordon, will be personally liable for the debts ? That is, after all, the reason why , when their General Secretary had to resign for turning a blind eye when dodgy donations from a property speculator were laundered to appear to have come from his friends and employees, the hedge Fund Manager they found to take over the job told them in no uncertain terms this was an unaceptable risk.
But let us stop and think a minute. When Terry Pratchett was interviewed on Radio 4 about his donation of a similar sum to Alzheimer's research as he had just found he was a victim to a particularly nasty variation of that medical horror, he was, he said, relieved that his financial circumstances were such that he "would not be a financial burden upon the state". Very noble of him, except that I put it to you that it would be a burden that should be borne willingly because he is entitled, through his tax on his earnings, to have that burden shouldered. As are we all.
But as that thought passed through my mind, I read the rest of the article on ms Rowling's donation. She has made £560 million from the marketing of her creation, and good luck to her for it, for I hope my memoirs, when they are published, make me a tiny fraction of the amount she has amassed.
Then I realised that one milion pounds is less than 0.2% of the sum she has made. Looking to my own income over the same period, it is as if I donated six tankfuls of petrol from my wife's car to the cause. And, to be honest, if someone out there were to promise me they would use such a gift to incinerate labour party HQ with Gordon still in it, then I say "bring your jerry cans round to Chez JoG"
I leave you with this last thought. Now the party finances are secure for the time being at least, Gordon can come out of his hiding place and turn up for his party conference. I see his aides are even now arranging for him to receive these happy tidings ...
"OK Gordon, the baliffs have gone, you can come out now"Latest Update 21st September: A BIG hat tip to Sir Henry Morgan who was good enough to comment on my article, and point me towards this blog and it's article 'charity begins at home'. Having read it, I went to this page on the Times Online website, but that seemed to me to not quite spell things out so I went looking and found a more damning gruniad article that explains the same situation.
I recall Piers Brosnan being interviewed by Jonathan Ross and being taken to task for the overt placement of brand names in his latest Bond film. You know the one, he sits in the hotel room, slips the silencer onto the gun, and takes a big shot of Smirnoff vodka.
Brosnan's response was almost as cutting as his one of his character's .famous one liners. We have a choice, he said. Either we make Bond films in Britain in which Bond drinks Smirnoff Vodka, drives a BMW, wears those watches, uses this brand of mobile phone and stays in that hotel chain, or we make Bond films in America where production costs are so much cheaper. So if the price of doing my job in country I love working in means I must pour a glass of water out of a bottle blatantly showing a Smirnoff label and then act as if it was proper vodka I have no problem with that. So what's your problem with it ?
But Prague is low on Euros and welcoming of the big film crew. Which is why Casino Royale moved across the pond. And Harry Potter was heading the same way until Brown cut warner Brothers a really cool deal.
So is Ms Rowling's gift the payback for a blockbuster kept in the country of its main character's birth ? "No Comment", as property developers say in police interview rooms nationwide.
I recall Piers Brosnan being interviewed by Jonathan Ross and being taken to task for the overt placement of brand names in his latest Bond film. You know the one, he sits in the hotel room, slips the silencer onto the gun, and takes a big shot of Smirnoff vodka.
Brosnan's response was almost as cutting as his one of his character's .famous one liners. We have a choice, he said. Either we make Bond films in Britain in which Bond drinks Smirnoff Vodka, drives a BMW, wears those watches, uses this brand of mobile phone and stays in that hotel chain, or we make Bond films in America where production costs are so much cheaper. So if the price of doing my job in country I love working in means I must pour a glass of water out of a bottle blatantly showing a Smirnoff label and then act as if it was proper vodka I have no problem with that. So what's your problem with it ?
But Prague is low on Euros and welcoming of the big film crew. Which is why Casino Royale moved across the pond. And Harry Potter was heading the same way until Brown cut warner Brothers a really cool deal.
So is Ms Rowling's gift the payback for a blockbuster kept in the country of its main character's birth ? "No Comment", as property developers say in police interview rooms nationwide.
Whole lot of magic in what you write JOG.
ReplyDeleteGood article.
J K Rowling was no more a single mum in need than I was Elvis' brother. In fact this lady was yet another who was given a helping hand up the ladder by influential people who would one day want their investment repaid. Even her scripts are not as original as we have been led to believe, as the ideas and storylines have been lifted from many other much older books, as anyone who has read them will soon find themselves thinking deja vu on many occasions.
ReplyDeleteI think Rowling just went and blew a few quid more than she gave Our Gordon. A few people I spoke to today said no more Rowling books in the house. One lady said she would put them out in the bin. Good idea.
ReplyDeleteGreat pic JOG.
Cheers,
Harry.
Well we've got all the books, but Mrs JoG has laid down the law that we won't be watching any more of the films (!)
ReplyDeleteJoG
ReplyDeleteNever thought of asking the REAL reason she gave Labour a million? Go read this:
http://bastardoldholborn.blogspot.com/2008/09/charity-begins-at-home.html