Actually, it is not just Francis, but all politicians and the media. We are continually bombarded with government propaganda - which is passed off as 'news' - and the majority of the public sit in front of their television sets, or read their 'newspapers' - and swallow it, hook line and sinker.
Politics Home informs us that Cameron has received a major boost in his poll ratings - a piece of propaganda which Richard North, EU Referendum, debunks most satisfactorily. As I commented on his blog, it continually amazes me that anyone can actually believe that any of them are doing a good job. That same source (Politics Home) also informs us that the government plans to take on the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR). Once again Richard North, EU Referendum, steps in to debunk that piece of news too, revealing it to be exactly what it is - just 'spin', or propaganda.
In the Daily Telegraph we have Nick Hurd, Minister for Civil Society, writing on the subject of giving to charity. Two immediate observations: Nepotism does not exist in political parties? Just what is it about those in politics who use the diminutive form of 'Nicholas' that they appear to be idiots? My apologies, I digress yet again! This article is yet another attempt by government to 'nudge' us to a certain pattern of behaviour - one could almost accuse them of an attempt to 'hurd us like cattle'. We are told that it is not the government's role to tell people what they should do (hell Nick, just where have you been for the last few years?) but are then informed that companies must encourage employees to volunteer. (my emphasis) Why should individuals be 'encouraged' (for encouraged' read 'coerced') to contribute money to 'charities' to which they have already contributed by money previously extracted from them by force? For example, why should people voluntarily support Friends of the Earth or the World Wildlife Fund? In the case of the latter they received £147million - out of a total of £194million - in fees and grants, confirmed in their Annual Accounts for 2010. Part of that £147million came from the EU, money which appears to have been spent lobbying the EU to maintain EU policies.
We are also informed in the Daily Telegraph that Cameron is about to do yet another 'U' turn and ditch his promise to overturn Labour's ban on foxhunting. Yet Politics Home announces that Agriculture Minister, Jim Paice, has 'slammed' the existing law on foxhunting - follow the Independent link. Also from the Daily Telegraph we are informed that some ministers have been accused of 'total hyprocrasy' (nothing new there, then) for campaigning against cuts in their constituencies. So we have the ludicrous situation whereby those ministers can argue against policies that, should they be debated in the Commons, they would have to follow convention and support the government, of which they are members, if they wished to retain their ministerial positions - which further illustrates yet again that the question of whom MPs are elected to represent is, once again, most pertinent.
That not one of the newspapers mentioned above highlights the criticisms that Richard North and I both raise is most noticeable, which confirms my assertion that Maude is truly leading us up the garden path.
Change of URL
2 years ago