*

And lo, I did gaze into my Crystal Ed-Balls and there I did see… a somewhat distorted version of myself. So instead, I thought I’d just make some stuff up and see if I turn out to be right.

*

This morning, I voted. And for the Democratic Liberalites, no less. Now, with this looking like potentially the closest race in British election history, I thought I’d make some wild and preposterous predictions.

*

*

Firstly, the outcome, then the next 3 Labour leaders… and their contenders… then the next 2 Tory leaders… and their contenders… then the Chancellor, Home Secretary, Foreign Secretary… Justice Minister, Business Minister… the core spine of the coalition deal and queen’s speech… the make-up of the rest of the cabinet… and finally the gruesome fate of Ed Balls.

*

And the Winner Is…
No one. I know, going out on a limb there. Who would have predicted that? Apart from, well, everyone. Yes, it’s fairly likely we’ll end up with a hung parliament with a Conservative party in possession of the most seats. But I’ll start by predicting that the Tories won’t have enough seats to claim victory.

*

*

Most projections have only considered the Lab/Con swing and have ignored the Tory’s innevitable losses to the LibDems through the Con/Lib swing, which is likely to be around 7% (I’ll eat my headgear if it falls below 5%).

Here’s where the real predicting begins-

*

Harriet Harman, PM
First thing on Friday morning, Harriet Harman (of the Labour Party) will visit the Queen (of England, Scotland, Wales, Northern Island, Australia, the Falkland Isles… and a few other geographical regions) and state that she has enough seats in the House of Commons to form a government.

*

*

It’s possible that the Labour party may set up Alan Johnson in Brown’s place rather than Harman. However, given the speed I’m predicting them to act and Harman already in place as deputy leader, few MPs will think it worthwhile to rock the boat with a leadership vote already tabled for the near future.

So, temporarily at least, Harriet Harman will become Prime Minister. How’s that for left-field (pun intended).

*

The Deal
In the early hours of the morning, Gordon Brown will have resigned, leaving Harman in charge of an interim Labour government. Immediately – or possibly even before – someone (my money would be on Peter Mandelson, but it could be Harman or Brown himself) will call Nick Clegg and offer him:

• The guaranteed introduction of a system of Proportional Representation. Perhaps not the Single-Transferable-Vote system the LibDems prefer, but something close. Lords reform will probably be added here, but both parties are in favour, so it’s really just gravy.

• Four seats in the cabinet – including one of the “big three” (Chancellor, Home Secretary or Foreign Secretary) and possibly the Deputy Prime-Minister position as well. That much may depend on just how large a share of the votes Nick has – and I doubt he’d take it either (see below).

• A guarantee to pass – if not all, then a significant portion of – the LibDem’s “Freedom Bill” – which encompasses education reform, immigration reform (though not the amnesty) and political reform, among other things.

• An agreement to scrap ID cards. This would never pass without a massive majority anyway, so many Labourites may see it as a small loss.

• The introduction of the LibDem’s banking measures (separating the risk-heavy investment banking from risk-light savings and loan). This has been the least contentious of the LibDem’s top measures and, to my knowledge, has not been criticized at all by the other two parties. Next to this, only Trident and the Amnesty have been higher on the LD agenda (excluding voting reform and the Freedom bill, which we’ve already covered) and Labour can’t give the LDs either of them having spoken stringently against them.

All of this will be announced – along with other details – in the Queen’s speech on May 25th.

*

*

It is possible that a deal like this already exists – though, of course, that would never be confirmed by either party. However, it’s possible that both sides already have a list something like this – specifically so that an alliance/coalition can be quickly agreed upon in principle to prevent months of debating which could allow the Tories in through the back door.

*

The Coalition
And that will happen of Friday morning. There will be, perhaps, two hours of haggling over the key points above – maybe more, maybe less – and an alliance or coalition will be formed, in principle, with the finer points worked out once government is sitting.

*

*

The problem here may be that, when the parties later come to iron out the final details, the talks may break down and quickly destroy the alliance/coalition. We’ll have to wait and see.

*

The Second Unelected PM (third if you count Harriet)
Following this agreement, Harman will call a leadership test to determine which member of the Labour Party will become the Prime Minister. Harman herself will probably not stand, though I won’t rule that out completely. Instead, we’ll have the options of:

• Harriet Harman. Deputy leader and natural successor to Brown. Will have much support – as she did in the campaign for deputy leader. However, the fact that she was deputy leader under Brown may count against her in a Labour party looking to try and re-invent themselves.

• Alan Johnson. Bookies’ favourite. Seemingly well-liked in the party. Probably seen as a good interim leader and peacemaker. Not the youngest man in the world, so won’t be overtly worried about the chances that his premiership could be short-lived.

*

*

• Peter Hain. The shock entry that surprises everyone (except you, now) and who emerges as the only other realistic competitor to Johnson. Why Hain? Well he’s a known figure on the fringe of the party and closer to old-Labour than new-. Given Brown’s departure, some of the party may want to return to the roots and clean themselves of the sullied badge of the Brown/Blair New Labour. Most significantly, he surprisingly came out in favour of tactical voting yesterday – an odd move. Ed Balls’ similar declaration may mean (1) he is also thinking of running, but if he does, he’ll fall flat, (2) he’s backing Hain, (3) he said it to give Brown a more heavyweight figure to respond to so he could counter the call without validating Hain or (4) he actually thinks people should vote tactically.

• Not David Milliband. He’s not that stupid. It’s a known secret that Milliband-the-younger has been touted as leadership material for some time. And if Labour looked set to lose this election, he’d probably be facing a coronation to lead the Shadow Cabinet – and oust Cameron and the Tories a few years down the line. However, given the unstable nature of any coalition government (at least at first) and Mervyn King’s warning on the fate of the next government (that their cuts will have to be so severe they will be out of power for a generation) Milliband won’t want to take the top-job just yet. He’s young (relatively) he can afford to wait on the sidelines and take the leadership (a) before the next election – if the Lib/Lab coalition survives the full term or (b) after a second election, once Labour are in opposition.

It’s not impossible that people like Ed Balls and perhaps even Alistair Darling (Chancellor) might run. But I seriously doubt it – Balls is seen as something of Brown 2.0 and Darling has made it publicly clear that he doesn’t want the job.

Regardless, Johnson will win.

*

And in the Blue Corner
Oh, and while all this has been going on, David Cameron has resigned as Tory Leader – though reluctantly, claiming the moral victory, effectively being forced out by David Davis’ camp – and been replaced, probably unopposed, by Ken Clarke. Clarke will also be seen as an interim figure and will likely be replaced before the next election – he’ll know that, but the Tories will want an economically-versed front-man to level the right charges against a Lib/Lab coalition inevitably struggling to fix the economy.

*

*

When and if Clarke steps down – depending on how long the Lib/Lab coalition survives – the battle to succeed him will be fought between Liam Fox and an outsider like Gove or perhaps Grayling. At an outside bet, George Osborne.

No matter who the contender is, Fox will win.

*

The Next Government
Anyway, that’s two pretty major predictions. They’re almost certainly not going to happen like that. So why stop there. For my next trick, I shall predict the Lib/Lab coalition cabinet (or, at least, the important positions).

• CHANCELLOR > Alistair Darling. No change. Despite the prowess of Vince Cable, it’s a no-win for the LibDems to put him as Chancellor. If the economy recovers, the credit will go to Brown and Darling for guiding us through the recession. If the economy tanks, the current chancellor will get the blame. All sides will be happy to leave Darling where he is – and there he shall stay.

• HOME SECRETARY > David Milliband. Known, respected, not-widely-considered-a-prat. Milliband will want to stay close to the action and with the focus of the next few years on the economy, Home-Sec will look relatively blameless.

*

*

• FOREIGN SECRETARY > Nick Clegg. I doubt he’ll take deputy PM (that will likely stay with Harman). The LibDems will want to keep their underdog-card in reserve for the next election and they’ll have it in spades if they’ve been seen as the only force propping up an ancient and decrepit Labour regime. Clegg is perfect material for Foreign-Sec – experienced in the EU, fluent in several languages. And he also gets to be the guy who brings the troops home from Afghanistan (again, assuming the coalition lasts the full term).

• JUSTICE MINSTER > Chris Huhne. Despite Clegg beating him to the LibDem leadership by only 1.2%, Huhne has been a staunch ally to Nick and is experienced as the LD equivalent of the Home-Sec. Since Justice only broke away from the Home Office when Brown took office, it’s a new yet powerful department and the ideal place outside the top three for the LibDems to place someone for maximum coverage.

• BUSINESS > Vince Cable. Where better to put a doctor of economics than in charge of the department in charge of helping instigate the recovery. Well, the Treasury, but we’ve covered that. With Cable in Business he can still put his skills to use – and the LibDems won’t mind if the media start speculating that Darling is just Cable’s puppet. Then they can take credit for success and more credit for correcting failures. Plus, he’s taking over from Mandelson, so he’ll look like an Angel next to the (now) self-styled Dark Lord.

*

And now for some Pure Speculation
As for who will take the LibDem’s fourth cabinet spot, I’m still undecided. They’ll probably go for something where they can win some influence, but they may not have much choice. I’d expect them to end up with Transport or Housing – something middle-of-the-road.

As for who, David Laws would be the top candidate, though whether the LDs have enough bargaining power remains to be seen. It’s not impossible that Ed Davey could find a home somewhere other than foreign affairs (though he may get International Development instead).

However, Clegg and co may end up having to simply promote their current incumbent from Shadow to Actual. In this case it would depend on which position they find themselves with.

*

*

As an outside bet, it’s not impossible that a popular (at least, in Liberal circles) figure like Evan Harris (@DrEvanHarris – well worth a follow) may find himself at Energy and Climate Change or Innovations, Universities and Skills. Instead, he may get Science and Innovation – which isn’t, I was surprised to learn, part of the official cabinet, though he would still attend all cabinet meetings.

*

And While We’re on the Subject…
Expect Health, Eduction, Defense, etc… to stay with Labour. It’s also not impossible that the coalition might give the LibDems the speaker if they find themselves facing a fight for Leader of the Commons, Chief Whip or another of the top jobs.

Of Jack Straw, there will be no sign. Though pending developments, he may re-emerge somewhere down the line.

Ed Milliband will find his way into one of the higher jobs – as might Hain if he doesn’t end his career with his leadership bid. Also expect to see more of Tessa Jowel, John Denham and Hilary Benn (the man with the backwards name).

*

*

Paddy Ashdown will be made a Lord and will – possibly working with Peter Mandelson – spearhead a joint push for House of Lords reform (both possibly having some roll in the cabinet as well – though unlikely for Ashdown unless the LibDems break over 100 seats). Brown offered him Northern Ireland Secretary when he became PM, so it’s not impossible he could make a return.

The Digital Economy Bill will be repealed and replaced with a better version within two years. With prop-rep and given the lessons of this campaign, Labour will feel less inclined to bow to the whims of Rupert Murdoch – and the LibDems have already pledged to repeal it anyway.

*

*

Whoever gets Work and Pensions may well see their career go up in smoke. My money there’s on Ed Balls.

*

UPDATE: As of 5:00 on Friday, I would appear to have been mostly wrong. Still might get the cabinet right though…

*

*

In a time when “public interest” translates to “what makes more money”… is there any way to fix the broken media of the UK?

*

As predicted just a few days ago, the UK media has ignored the story about Tory MP candidate Phillippa Stroud and her church’s practice of performing exorcisms on homosexuals. This is, arguably, a story of at least equal significance to Bigotgate. And yet where is the outcry?

*

*

Where are the condemnations? Recriminations? Removal from the party list? Is Stroud’s support evaporating as she becomes political anathema?

No, of course it bloody isn’t. And it was never going to, either.

*

The Twits Have It
Check on Twitter and you’ll still see #PhillippaStroud trending. The Guardian and The Observer – the only major outlets to have reported the story – broke the news two days ago, and yet the hash-tag is still up there. Take a look at what people are tweeting and you’ll find a good 50% of tweets directed at the BBC, at Channel4, Sky, The Mail – anywhere and everywhere which claims to output “News” – and all of them asking why they were studiously ignoring Phillippa Stroud.

UPDATE: It appears I may have spoken too soon on the issue of Phillippa Stroud. A blog post is reporting that the BBC and Channel4 have both been gagged by a court-order from “high-up” in the Conservative Party. I’ll note that this is – currently – complete uncorroborated, but there may yet be hope for journalistic standards (if not the horrendous state of the UK’s libel laws which have allowed this to come to pass).

If I need to spell it out, the media of the UK has – for too long – worked towards its own interests and to hell with the public and their interests.

*

*

The word spin was created to describe media-manipulating politicians. But those politicians, on all sides, were simply playing the media at its own game – attempting to level the playing field. Those who actually beat the media were granted the coveted title of “Spin Doctor” – an ingenious media-invention designed to make the public disbelieve any utterance from said politician ever again.

And it worked.

*

The Blame Game
Even I find myself playing the media’s much-loved blame-game. So often has this card been played that it seems to have become pure zeitgeist to react to any problem by asking who is at fault. It may be human nature, but the entirety of human civilization has been an attempt to escape “human nature”, so I refuse to let us off that easily. There are sometimes situations which are unavoidable, we all know this and we know that no blame need be applied in such events.

So why is it that these events inevitably lead to the most blame being piled upon one poor victim. One media pariah, fired out of the bright-red blame-canon wearing a banner saying “Buy the [newspaper of choice] – otherwise you won’t hear about important things like this!”

Does it matter that the Spin-Doctors were originally trying to put across a message? I’d wager Alastair Campbell signed up with Tony Blair to make sure Blair’s policies got heard above the din. Don’t do much of that these days though, do we Alastair?

Are they to blame? Of course. Are they solely to blame? Hell no.

*

Doctor, Doctor
The Spin Doctors were fighting a losing battle and instead of letting the media nose-dive itself into the gutter, they slowed the fall, eased it through the grating and provided a gilded staircase into the ocean of sewage below. Had the media simply driven forward, they may well have destroyed Tony Blair (sooner), but the rate and harshness of his demise would have left the public unable to ignore the media’s self-serving agenda.

*

*

As it was, with the politicians playing the same game, people forgot which way was up. And now we’re neck-deep in sewage and I have the alarming impression that a significant portion of the UK hasn’t even noticed.

*

The Sliding Scale…
The dynamic of the media – at least to my mind – is driven by sensationalism. At the top end of the scale sits the two worst offenders – those who, if made human, would currently be on trial in The Hague. I’m speaking, of course, about The Sun and, worse still, The Daily Mail.

Once one of these papers gets a story, they can set the entire media agenda. They report it, they sensationalize it, pervert the facts, quite often lie or deliberately misinterpret statistics and within hours, the rest of the mass-media has to report it too – because the Mail and the Sun have created News, and the other papers and websites and channels exist to report said News. Ignore it, and they lose out.

*

…and How it Slides
Then there’s the other end of the scale – The Guardian and, formerly, the BBC – who refuse to sensationalize, refuse to make a story out of nothing, but who are still forced to report the tripe peddled by the Mail and the Sun because it is – once they’ve finished with it – News.

Note that those two are both non-profit organizations. And yet even the BBC has now begun slipping towards the Daily-Mail-Zone – grandiosely announcing they will ensure unbias coverage of the election and then quashing anti-Tory pieces, giving David Cameron more than twice the air-time of Clegg and Brown and airing “balanced interviews” where a life-long Tory voter stands next to an Undecided.

*

*

Above are the BBCs profile pictures of Cameron and Brown. Cameron looks purposeful and intent, while Brown looks awkward and hunched. They must have several-hundred pictures of each leader – why choose these?

Shame on you Auntie Beeb.

*

The Gears of the Machine
In other words, the News which reaches the majority of the UK voting public – because those of us who tweet, blog and receive our news from Uncle Internet are still a tiny minority – comes from The Daily Mail and The Sun. While The Sun was supporting Labour, we at least had balance on the see-saw of political sensationalism. For every smear-campaign out of the Mail, the Sun would have something equally repugnant ready to throw back.

But now The Sun has sided with the Mail in a combined effort to bring down the Labour regime. And they might just succeed. I’m not naive enough to suggest that all of Labour’s problems stem from the allegiance of one newspaper – but I’m also not naive enough to suggest that the Sun’s influence is negligible.

*

Hypotheticals
Just ask yourself how great that Tory lead would be without the massive campaign of fear being directed at Gordon Brown.

If Nick Clegg hadn’t risen from nowhere and forced the Tory media-machine to fight on two fronts, David Cameron would have walked into Number 10 without breaking a sweat.

But what’s to be done? How can we reverse the force which drives public perception? Surely any attempt to force the media to change will be crippled by a campaign orchestrated by the very system it hopes to change?

Sadly, you’re probably right. However, this election may yet have one last googly to bowl (that’s a cricket metaphor, for the uninitiated).

*

Generation Gap
Two days ago, the Governor of the Bank of England – Mervyn King – warned that whichever party won this election would be out of power for a generation, their cuts would have to be so severe.

*

*

Perhaps with that much stacked against them, whoever takes power after Thursday will find themselves free of the chains of party-politics. If you’re guaranteed to lose the election no matter what you do, then you might as well do what you think should be done – regardless of public opinion (as set by the Daily Mail).

If only that were true…

There’s several reasons why this won’t happen. Well, two…

*

A F**k in the Road
The Tories won’t do it – their reinvention is only half-finished – as long as they support policies like the Inheritance Tax Cut, they don’t represent half the people they claim to represent. They need the media machine to swing the game in their favour. Even if they look like losing power for yet-another generation, they’ll still need the likes of Murdoch and co if they’re ever going to return to office.

But what about the alternative? And, let’s be realistic, the alternative is a Hung Parliament. Whether that parliament is ruled by a coalition, an alliance – whichever or whatever – two parties will hold the balance of power.

And as long as their are two parties, there is no one entity to be blamed. Each will attempt to pass their seat in the blame-cannon to the other and neither will approach the blissful serenity of someone who knows they’re going to lose and decides to make the most of it.

*

I Have a Dream…
A dream of all peoples, of all party-colours, united towards a common goal… *ahem*… Lets, just for a moment, walk past the grim future I’ve painted. Let’s put aside the inevitability and impossibilities and dream. What would be done? What should be done? – if we are to ensure that the British media ceases its campaign against the interests of its own readership.

*

*

I don’t care if you vote Labour, LibDem, Tory, Green – even UKIP (because even balanced media would be unable to make your policies sound anything other than laughable). The only party I won’t include in this is the BNP – because I view them as less a party and more a form of sticky pond-life trapped in an embarrassingly useless evolutionary dead-end.

The point is – all parties have felt the wrath of the media when it catches the scent of profit – and, deep down, I suspect that all parties believe everyone would vote for them if only they were given a fair say. The fact that they’re all wrong in this regard is irrelevant.

*

Out with the Olds
We need to regulate “News”. The act of delivering the news to the people of a country should be a public service. It should be a duty – not a means to make a quick profit by sacrificing public figure after public figure on the altar of zeitgeist.

Let’s set down – in law – a definition of News:

• Let’s say anything wanting to call itself “News” has to stand by these measures. Including News Channels, News Papers and everything else – filling all loopholes.

• Let’s say it has to be utterly unbias – and define exactly what we mean, not the BBC-style “We’re unbias. Did you see how pretty Dave looks today?”.

• Let’s ban deliberately emotive language – I haven’t heard the word “plan” on the news in ten years, it’s always “plot”, “scheme” or, once, “machination”.

• Let’s impose strict measures for any outlet which gets the facts – or stats – wrong.

• Let’s set up an independent organisation with the power to impose those measures and even ban outlets which persistently flout these rules – not the toothless PCC which sits safely in Rupert Murdoch’s pocket, purring contentedly.

• Let’s add to the mandate of all Terrestrial TV channels to require them to produce News instead of the BBC’s brand of masquerading sensationalism.

• Let’s have some means of measuring accuracy and believability – and make sure the public know how each of their News outlets rate on that scale. Let’s even make News outlets publish that figure front-and-center.

Yes, they’ll say it infringes free-speech. They’ll rally the banner of Freedom of the Press. They’ll ignore that we’re not telling them what they can and can’t report – just making it illegal to report things they know are wrong or misleading. They’ll send out the rallying cry and bring the UK population marching in the streets – obediently demonstrating against their own interests.

And, worse of all, they’ll continue to try and oppress those rights which, at least in my mind, outrank Free-Speech and Free-Press and always have – Free-Thought and Free-Opinion.

*

Freedom of Thought
People have the right to decide for themselves – to choose their own opinions. They are currently being denied this right on a grand scale. It must end and I believe the above list is the way to achieve that.

The entire forces of worldwide mass-media will try to stop us.

But there is yet a hope, the tiniest glimmer, that they may fail…

*

*

If too many people vote Tory on Thursday; Friday 6th May 2010 will forever be known as the day when the entire LGBT community ran screaming from the British Isles.

*

I told myself yesterday that I’d cut back on blogging for the time being. I’ve been writing a lot lately (mostly because I’m currently recuperating from an ankle injury and unable to walk) and I know I won’t be able to maintain this blog-rate in the weeks to come.

Slow it down, I told myself, only blog when things absolutely need to be said.

*

*

Well thank you very-damn-much Philippa Stroud.

*

The End is Nigh
Philippa Stroud is making headlines today because of her Church – which is doing sterling work exorcising the demons which make people gay. Or lesbian. Or anything outside the standard heterosexual goalposts of right-wing Christianity.

Did I say “sterling”? I meant “ludicrous”.

*

*

Well, we all know Christians can be a bit nutty from time to time. Anyone remember the crusades? Spanish Inquisition? That whole paedophilia thing? What does it matter if there’s one more of them?

Except that she’s head of the Centre for Social Justice – the Tory think-tank that dreams-up all of David Cameron’s Social Affairs policies.

*

The Big Heterosexual Society
That’s right – the woman behind the very core of the “Big Society” – the woman in charge of making the Conservative Party more equal, more fair, more balanced… is a raging, delusional, extremist homophobe.

Every policy out of the, ironically named, Centre for Social Justice in the last five years has been – at least in part – designed by someone who thinks the gay community should be corralled into some sort of massive prayer-pit and not allowed out until they can prove their new-found distaste for Cher.

Thankfully, this information has now been brought to light.

Or perhaps “stepped into the light” would be a better metaphor.

*

Demongate
It’s early days in what the media will likely soon dub gaygate or, if we’re lucky, demongate.

At least, I’d like to think they will, but with the entirety of the sensationalist-machine arrayed in the tory camp – many doing their best to exorcise homosexuality already – so I doubt we’ll see much more of this. The Tory press will quash it and the Labour/LibDem press are not those traditionally known for ramping up stories beyond their worth.

Still, we can dream.

Or perhaps we shouldn’t – just in case Phillipa Stroud finds out and tries to see if our heads rotate 360-degrees.

*

So who is Saint Stroud?
Aside from being God’s foremost weapon against the evil hoards of perfectly-normal-people, Stroud is the Tory candidate for Sutton and Cheam (in South London) – currently held by Liberal Democrat Paul Burstow who introduced the “Care of Older and Incapacitated People” Bill and voted against the Digital Economy Bill.

Burstow sounds like a nice guy. Plus he had a comfortable 7% margin of victory back in 2005…

*

*

…and he’s expected to lose.

That’s right, Ms Stroud is likely to win. She will go from loony think-tank leader – to loony parliament member. Dear God, don’t let her out of her tank!

*

The Wider Issue
But surely she’s entitled to her beliefs? Surely she’s allowed to choose her own opinions? Of course she is. I may not agree with her views, but she has a right to hold them. And this would be fine – if she were not a public representative.

This is, at its heart, the very problem with a non-secular government. It’s the problem with Phillippa Stroud. It’s the problem with religious parties in general.

Anyone running for office must be able to represent the people in their charge. Sutton and Cheam is a constituency holding almost 100 000 people. Playing the stats, 10 000 of those people will fall somewhere in the LGBT community. If Phillippa Stroud is elected, she can not – without renouncing her faith – represent those people.

*

Secularism
Should a Labour candidate be elected in Sutton and Cheam, he or she (currently she – Kathy Allen), would still have to represent everyone – even those who voted against her. That is what MPs do – they represent that region, not just those who voted for them and certainly not just those who share their religious views.

Anyone elected under a religious flag, for a religious party, cannot hope to represent constituents of other beliefs.

That said, it is perfectly acceptable for a religious person to be elected to office, providing they keep their religion separate from the affairs of their charge. But with the extreme views held by Phillippa Stroud – and they are, considering the UK Christian population as a whole, largely extreme – she will, in many instances, be faced with a conflict of interest between her faith and her civic duty.

*

Faith versus Duty
How is she to uphold the Human Rights Act when it gives equal rights to a portion of the population who she believes to be Demons? How is she to uphold the rights of Muslims? Or Sikhs? Or Hindus, Buddhists, Jews, Wiccans and Atheists? How does she uphold their rights when she believes them to be already damned to hellfire for all eternity? How is she to support or implement drug legislation when she thinks the way to cure drug addiction is with an exorcism and a good hard pray?

And that’s just her standing as MP.

How can we hope that she – as creator of social policy and rising star under David Cameron’s regime – will create policies which benefit everyone in the UK? Do we expect her to create and uphold policy which gives the gay community the same rights as married couples? Or anyone, come to that? If she did, that would be a sin in the eyes of her faith.

In short, can we expect her to represent her constituency when, to do that properly, she would have to – by her own faith – condemn herself to Hell?

I really don’t think so.

*

So – for God’s sake – if you live in Sutton and Cheam, it is imperative you vote LibDem on Thursday!

The Power of Christ Compels You! The Power of Christ Compels You!!!!

*

(Yes, I was really hoping the current Sutton and Cheam MP would be called Chris so I could use the “Power of Chris” line. Unfortunately, it was not to be. It’s almost as if some kind of “higher-power” was out to stop me… Must be Thor.)

*