<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><!-- generator="wordpress/2.2.2" -->
<rss version="2.0" 
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/">
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: The Cabinet</title>
	<link>http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2005/11/03/1910</link>
	<description>Every day the Prime Minister's Spokesman meets a small coterie of political journalists known as 'the lobby' for a topical chat, or 'briefing'.</description>
	<pubDate>Thu, 04 Dec 2008 18:26:00 +0000</pubDate>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.2.2</generator>

	<item>
		<title>By: Chuck Unsworth</title>
		<link>http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2005/11/03/1910#comment-3737</link>
		<author>Chuck Unsworth</author>
		<pubDate>Fri, 04 Nov 2005 12:01:59 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2005/11/03/1910#comment-3737</guid>
		<description>Much currently proposed legislation has arisen from policy decisions not actually mentioned in the 'manifesto' e.g. locking people up for 90 days, yet more 'initiatives' etc.

Is the PMOS saying that the Government should stick to the manifesto or not do so? 

Maybe the manifesto is just a series of pious hopes and aspirations.  If so, then it's no more credible than any other 'New Labour' utterances.

This is just the same old 'make it up as you go along' rubbish.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Much currently proposed legislation has arisen from policy decisions not actually mentioned in the &#8216;manifesto&#8217; e.g. locking people up for 90 days, yet more &#8216;initiatives&#8217; etc.</p>
<p>Is the PMOS saying that the Government should stick to the manifesto or not do so? </p>
<p>Maybe the manifesto is just a series of pious hopes and aspirations.  If so, then it&#8217;s no more credible than any other &#8216;New Labour&#8217; utterances.</p>
<p>This is just the same old &#8216;make it up as you go along&#8217; rubbish.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: john the revelator</title>
		<link>http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2005/11/03/1910#comment-3736</link>
		<author>john the revelator</author>
		<pubDate>Fri, 04 Nov 2005 09:58:39 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2005/11/03/1910#comment-3736</guid>
		<description>Absolutely right.  Not only that but they form a little club, dining, lunching holiaying to-gether, even, though he's not quite in &#34;the Lobby&#34;, the ghastly Simon Hoggart of the the Labour Guardian the LAbour BBC sharing with  the wretched Blunkett the bed of the Labour facility  Kimberly Quinn. What a grim thought. Here in Scotland the laughable prime minister jumpin Jack Maconnell holidays with the Queen of Scotland, Kirsty Wark at her palace in Majorca and then at election time she holds him to account on behalf of the viewers.  If you think things are bad with the London lobby, and they are, the gang of jumped-up councillors, bent solicitors and municipal thugs who constitute the scottish parliament are virtually worshipped by the groupies of the scottish press, the only thing approaching scrutiny appears in the correspondence pages of the papers and even that is a kind of licensed foolery, they will print nothing critical of themselves and nothing that would impede their &#34;access&#34;  to the the thieves and brutes at Holyrood.  Journalism, especially political journalism, is the new priesthood mediating on our behalf with the gods. NotBoatRocking is the new orthodoxy everywhere: Don't rock the boat and hope  for early retirement with an enhanced pension.  Depressing isn't it.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Absolutely right.  Not only that but they form a little club, dining, lunching holiaying to-gether, even, though he&#8217;s not quite in &quot;the Lobby&quot;, the ghastly Simon Hoggart of the the Labour Guardian the LAbour BBC sharing with  the wretched Blunkett the bed of the Labour facility  Kimberly Quinn. What a grim thought. Here in Scotland the laughable prime minister jumpin Jack Maconnell holidays with the Queen of Scotland, Kirsty Wark at her palace in Majorca and then at election time she holds him to account on behalf of the viewers.  If you think things are bad with the London lobby, and they are, the gang of jumped-up councillors, bent solicitors and municipal thugs who constitute the scottish parliament are virtually worshipped by the groupies of the scottish press, the only thing approaching scrutiny appears in the correspondence pages of the papers and even that is a kind of licensed foolery, they will print nothing critical of themselves and nothing that would impede their &quot;access&quot;  to the the thieves and brutes at Holyrood.  Journalism, especially political journalism, is the new priesthood mediating on our behalf with the gods. NotBoatRocking is the new orthodoxy everywhere: Don&#8217;t rock the boat and hope  for early retirement with an enhanced pension.  Depressing isn&#8217;t it.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Michael McCarthy</title>
		<link>http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2005/11/03/1910#comment-3735</link>
		<author>Michael McCarthy</author>
		<pubDate>Thu, 03 Nov 2005 19:09:48 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid>http://downingstreetsays.com/briefings/2005/11/03/1910#comment-3735</guid>
		<description>One of the many problems with the sad sacks who constitute the &#34;lobby&#34; and are kindly permitted to question the PMOS is that they never contest the outrageous fraudulence of the so-called &#34;mandate&#34;.  One of the many shortcomings of the UK's &#34;democratic&#34; system is that political parties put forward a manifesto at elections and, if elected, constantly reiterate the absurd claim that every single proposal in it, including deeply unpopular ones like &#34;reforms&#34; of public services that shovel money into the pockets of private firms, has the support of the electorate.  Everyone knows that this is pure fantasy, but isn't it odd that the lobby journalists happily collude with it?   Could it be because the kinds of journalists the government is prepared to invite to these briefings are precisely the ones who can be relied on not to rock the boat by raising really awkward, fundamental questions about the fraudulent way the UK political system operates?  
  </description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>One of the many problems with the sad sacks who constitute the &quot;lobby&quot; and are kindly permitted to question the PMOS is that they never contest the outrageous fraudulence of the so-called &quot;mandate&quot;.  One of the many shortcomings of the UK&#8217;s &quot;democratic&quot; system is that political parties put forward a manifesto at elections and, if elected, constantly reiterate the absurd claim that every single proposal in it, including deeply unpopular ones like &quot;reforms&quot; of public services that shovel money into the pockets of private firms, has the support of the electorate.  Everyone knows that this is pure fantasy, but isn&#8217;t it odd that the lobby journalists happily collude with it?   Could it be because the kinds of journalists the government is prepared to invite to these briefings are precisely the ones who can be relied on not to rock the boat by raising really awkward, fundamental questions about the fraudulent way the UK political system operates?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
