Nick Clegg 'answers' questions in Cardiff

Last Thursday I had the dubious honour of attending a question and answer session with Nick Clegg in Cardiff City Hall. It was meant to be invitation only, probably due to the grilling he got last time he visited the city, but despite that and despite not being on the guest list I was able to get in.

What did I get for managing to blag my way in? Well I managed to waste 45 minutes of my life which I will never be able to get back! Clegg was indeed his usual self, that of a despicable liar, I did not expect anything else but the levels to which he was willing to go to lie would have been amusing if not true.

The first question from the floor started off well with the speaker ironically offering greetings from his mother who had voted for the liberals to keep the tories out. However the questions were not all that great in my opinion and there was only to be a handful of them as Clegg only stuck around for 45 minutes, i think in reality it was probably less than that. Whilst it seemed obvious that the majority of people in attendance were angry at Clegg, noticed by the whispers amongst the audience this didn't really translate into the questions.

Those able to ask questions (many included myself despite having are hands up the whole time were not brought in to ask a question) generally asked about services they used or sectors they worked in to seek assurances that this services wouldn't suffer from the cuts. Naturally Clegg was able to worm his way out, particularly as this meeting didn't grant the questioner the right to reply. One example was when a teacher asked about the situation in schools where funding restrictions have already seen cuts to learning support staff which allows children with learning difficulties to remain in mainstream schools, she asked how this would be prevented. Clegg's reply utterly appalled me! He said that it was because there was too much bureaucracy in the system, that although funding would be cut giving schools and teachers the freedom to decide how the money would be spent would prevent this from happening. He gave the example of academies to exlain why this gives the freedom to choose! Quite disingenious as this doesn't give the teachers or any other educational specialists the choice of how resources are spent, it gives private companies, rather than accoutable public authorities th choice. In any case if the budget is cut some services will have to go but when this is coupled with a private company taking a profit out then the end result can only ever be cuts.


Clegg was caught out at one point though when he stated that future genrations should not be made to pay for 'our' mistakes, so he was questioned by a student on why the government was proposing to raise tution fees, Clegg responded by acknowledging it was a problem and went on about the difficulties that students face but generally avoided actually answering the question as you would expect from a politician.

Throughout the whole time Clegg managed to get in lie after lie, I presented it as a fact that there is no other choice but to cut public services, such a blatant lie, what he should have said is that according to his political philisphy there is no other choice! In reality there is definately anothr choice, reading through the last few entries of my blog will be able to see that. He also stated that NHS funding would increase, and whilst this technically is not a lie it is very disingenious as the funding will be below inflation rates in the health sector and therefore in real terms is a cut to health expenditure. He also stated that over all public expenditure would increase, this to me seems like it must be an out right lie, but if there is some truth in it then it can only be on the basis of bailouts for the rich and trident nuclear weapons, hardly the public services that come to mind when people think of public expenditure.

Over all the 45 minutes was a complete waste of time, though it would have been well worth it if I was able to get into the discussion and put these points and the alternative to cuts to Clegg, such a grilling would have changed the whole mood of any following questions and th general atmosphere in the room.

You are a Liar and a Murderer!

 Yesterday Tony Blair faced the Chilcot Inquiry over the Iraq war. An issue which had a profound effect on me personally as it was what turned me into an activist, so with my hatred of Blair all clear and out in the open what happened?

The enquiry from start to finish has been a farce declaring from the outset that the findings would not result in any prosecutions. Which brings into question the whole point of the inquiry, if not charges will be brought, if it won't result in a troop withdrawel and it obviously cannot reverse the damage caused to millions already.

Despite this Blair showed absolutely no remorse and the inquiry did not really push him all that much. Afua Hirsch from the Guardian said: 

He responded to a question about the controversial intelligence dossier with a speech about how seriously he takes the nuclear threat from Iran. He responded to a question about weapons of destruction in Iraq with a a reply about military action taken joinlty with Bill Clinton in 1998.

It wasn't restricted to simply avoiding the questions put to him George Galloway went as far as to say 

He was allowed to report that Iraq was in breach of UN resolutions in general and 1441 in particular. But in fact, they weren't in breach of it. There were no weapons of mass destruction..... Blair was allowed to tell a blatant lie.

The whole thing was clearly just for show and it was put incredibly well by Haifa Zangana when she said

Undergrads would have asked more probing questions.

Of course she is absolutely right and as an undergrad myself here coming the more probing investigation albeit confined to my blog. The whole argument about the legality of the invasion puzzles me as it was taken as fact previously that it was. Despite a vote in parliament agreeing to the invasion, the British government had no jurisidcition within Iraq and the UN didn't saction it. Not that the rights and wrongs should be determined by the law of the land.

I guess the argument about whether it was legal or not is focusing on whether the infomation provided was correct or not, but once again wasn't this blatantly obvious to anyone at the time. Blair said the 45 minute claim was a minor point so didn't really matter but it was picked up by the media. Now that may be true except for one important detail, Blair nor any other government official tried to correct the misinformation of the media. Quite happy to ride it out with a Lie. He also stated that it wouldn't have made a difference if the weapons inspectors had been given more time it would not have made a difference, well he's got that right they certainly would not have found any weapons.

By looking at what Blair actually said he made it clear that this was only able to happen in the post 9/11 era and that it was possible to gather the forces to do so! That despite there being no evidence between Saddam Hussien and Al'Qaida (and how would you find a link between a secular regime and religious hardiners?) that he could no longer take the risk with countries who wanted to aquire weapons of mass destruction.  Then went on to say that they did everything to stabilise Iraq, to stop attempts to distabilise the economy by protecting the oil fields.

So it's there that Blair gives us the real reason, Oil its the only explanation why so many barbaric regimes are left alone or become good 'friends'. Throughout the whole process Blair makes it quite obvious to anyone seriously looking at it that here knew what was really going on at the time and just lied for the sake of war. He claims that it has made the world a safer place but once again this is a blatant lie and doesn't really compare well up against the facts

Blair did however tell a couple of truths, the first being that the cabinet were well informed and made the decision collectivey, it is clear that they were all in on it and Blair is just being seen now as an individual to take the blame, not that he doesn't deserve it but the rest of them do too.

The other truth which he tells is that we shouldn't ask the questions of 2003 in 2010, we should be asking the questions of 2010 in 2010. So let's do it. Why are there still 7 years later imperialist troops occupying Iraq as well as Afganistan causing terror and destruction!

Meanwhile it is clear that Blair will walk free without any problems or a care in the world, unfortunately the same can not be said for Joe Glenton who is facing a 2 year sentence for going awol and  refusing to fight in these imperialist wars