@Daily_Express Ann Widdecombe’s column gives us a valuable insight into the mindset of The Tory Party

I find it increasingly difficult to believe that Ann Widdecombe was a Cabinet Minister, who had graduated from Oxford.

Her column today begins with the assertion that we are all being unfair to banker’s and priests.

The two groups are not comparable, in that the charges levelled against priests are directed at specific front line priests. Condemnation of their superiors is based on their covering up the crimes of their front-line personnel.

With banker’s the situation is almost the reverse.

Here the criminal acts are being committed at the top level, not by your local branch manager or front-line cashier.

Here the crimes are occurring at the banker’s equivalent of The Vatican.

Her defence of Bob Diamond is based on the assertion that the problem lay with a few rogue trader’s, although all the reports, in your paper, have indicated that they were members of a culture of such behaviour and that this behaviour was possibly endemic throughout the whole banking sector.

I’m sure, based on past articles, that Ann would be quick to assert that Bob Diamond deserves his huge salary and bonuses, because of the responsibility that he bears.

What responibility could that be, when she denies that he could possibly be aware of how his hired help (who hired them, or the people who hired the hirer’s?) misbehaved?

She ventures further, into the money laundering scandal, and asks that we (who have to offer up passwords, proofs of identity and details of our inside leg measurement’s just to speak to one of their call centre’s) believe that Higher echelon bank officials asked the same questions of the men offering them suitcases of cash.

I’m sure that most people like myself have an image of the banker looking only at the cash and thinking Ker-ching!

In our present economic circumstances, it is difficult to think “banker”, without adding the adjective “greedy”.

Her brief muddying of the situation by comparing bank’s with hospitals doesn’t really work very well, in view of the numerous stories and exposé’s of how Hospital Trust Administrator’s are over-riding the clinical decisions of their medically trained hired help.

And how crass to offer, as a plea, how much of our money The Bank’s give to charity .

Hhow crass to try and excuse their behaviour by reminding us of how much the banking sector brings into the Economy, as if an honest banking sector couldn’t be just as profitable and as if this money was her clinching argument for consenting to drop any moral argument.

Again, Ann pushes on with her worship of the profit motive by discussing the refusal of private refuse collection firms to wheel wheelie bins to their refuse collection wagons.

She adds this scandal to the lists of Health and Safety fiasco’s, blithely side-stepping the fact that the original reason for the refusal has more to do with privatisation of refuse collection and the acceptance of the lowest tender.

This is not about strong and healthy male employee’s (I’ve not noticed any geriatrics or 16yr old girls doing the job) putting their Health at risk.

It’s about the time and cost of operatives walking an extra 2 yards per house.

It’s about Time and motion,

It’s about piecework.

I doubt very much if their employer’s give two pins for the health of the operatives, so long as it doesn’t cut into their profits.

Finally, she has a go at us for not being patriotic.

She condemn’s us for not rejoicing in The Olympics, in the same way as we welcomed the Jubilee celebrations and The Royal wedding celebrations.

Presumably Ann has her tickets to the Olympic VIP lounge’s, if she wishes them.

We, the public, have paid far more for the Olympics than for our contributions to those other events, mentioned.

We, the public, were also given an open invitation to view the spectacles associated with those other events.

Not so The Olympics.

Outside of London The Olympics are just another 20-odd BBC channels, which we are paying for.

Within London, they are an extra few hours a day on the daily commute.

Yes!  Some people were able to afford Some tickets and yes, they were actually lucky to enough to get tickets.

Some were, even, lucky to get tickets to the events that they particularly wished to see.

Apparently, having a relative competing in an event wasn’t as important as having the right contacts.

The jaundiced view, from where I sit, is that this is a jolly for politicians, corporate sponsorship’s, politician’s and P.R.’s, with merchandise to promote.

Again with another crass observation from Ann:

The security risks are dreadful but no more than during other huge events including the Jubilee”

Really?

The Queen (or the tax payer) shelled out £56 million to G4S to provide security?

Were thousand’s of extra troops called in to protect the Royal Barge?

Were missile sites set up to protect The Cathedral?

The only good comment that I can make about her column is that it gives an insight into the thinking of the people, with whom Ann socialises.

The people in charge of this country.

Advertisements

Tags: , , , , , , , ,

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


%d bloggers like this: