It has been a while since I contributed anything to Scribo, but I have been doing odd jobs behind the scenes of the site.  Foremost in these was the installation of Wordpress 2.7 - the latest build of the open-source blogging tool.  Although this gives no immediate improvements for readers, it makes everything a lot neater and nicer for the Doug, James at al.  I have begun work on rolling out the new features for you, our beloved readers.  That means writing new bits into the Theme design; and given that this is the first web stuff I’ve done since building this design well over 6 months ago, it’s a slightly slow process.

The first thing you should notice is that comments on blogposts can now be replied to directly - so your response is stacked beneath the comment to which you are replying rather than the blogpost as a whole.  This is something of a move towards “creating something as akin to a “community” in our comments section as we can manage”, to quote James.  I also hope to incorporate images in a more coherent way, possibly off the back of some code I’m working on for another project.

So, cogs are still turning at Scribo HQ despite the onset of University.

Things are getting interesting in local government (yes, you read that correctly).  It seems as if upwards of 20 councils have money stashed away in Icelandic banks, and are going to have some difficulty accessing their deposits following the nationwide banking collapse.

I am amazed that councils deposit money in foreign banks.  There is clearly benefit in not putting all of your eggs in one basket, but a decent spread around the British banks would surely be as safe?  More safe, even, I would argue, than investing abroad.  There is little that the government can do about deposits in Iceland, whereas should the British banks suffer in the same way the government could quickly step in and bail out council deposits if nothing else.

It will be very interesting to see how the councils resolve this severe problem, but retrospective thought should at least consider keeping money in the UK.

The Scribo team (or, rather, I on behalf of the Scribo team) apologise for the lack of posting recently.  Doug and James headed to University on Saturday, and I went up on Sunday.  Freshers’ week and general business have pushed blogging slightly off the agenda, but not off the radar.  Once the lectures and work begin, diversions will doubtless become highly desirable and blogging will return.  Until such a time, allow me to spend a brief moment considering the quandary George Osborne finds himself in.

George Osborne is a conservative and he believes in small government and low spending and economic freedom.  But he is a politician and he wants to win an election in just over a year’s time.  To attempt to seek a public mandate on the back of tax cuts is always a brave move, especially when the electorate is as skeptical as we are today, but to attempt to cut tax while the economy is tanking is folly.

Like it or not, when the economy begins to crumble the electorate wants to see leadership and good government.  This, in the eyes of skeptical voters, is not adequately achieved by tax cuts and slashes to regulation of any and every sort.  Like it or not, the Tories have been forced into a corner of accepting an escape-route to the crisis that fully contradicts their fundamental beliefs.  But there is nothing else for it.  Should they oppose the government line, they would be vilified by every other party in the Commons.  And they would also be contradicting the public perception of leadership in a crisis, looking instead like they would allow the economic situation to deteriorate.  Osborne may be a conservative, but he wants to win an election.  This aim trumps all else in such a fractured time.  He is on uncomfortable ground but his position is fully understandable.

The Met are in open revolt.  Does this mean that they see Boris Johnson as an opportunity for change?

Currently watching Ian Blair’s resignation live. Boris clearly being made the bogey-man. Fully expect the Home Sec to push that line harder.

I don’t care for unnecessary Boris-bashing - my interest here is this: can Boris spin this to his advantage? I doubt he can.

I bet Cameron will be livid at the “Nasty Party” jibes that will doubtless flood back.

The Tory Conference was not policy-heavy.  It was never meant to be.  Its purpose was to make the Tories look strong on the economy, and Cameron look Prime Ministerial.  The blatant “no-smiles-please-we’re-Conservative” approach was shameless but effective, and the theme of the conference seems to be a lingering frustration with government lying 18 long months out of reach.  At their conference last year, the Tories were wetting themselves with the prospect of losing an Autumn election - this year they were blue in the face with anticipation of winning 2010’s offering.

I think we can learn a couple of things from the conference, though.  First, that the Tories are now ready to lead.  Visionaries like Michael Gove are seriously planning for office, with a detailed description of the sort of education system he intends to put into place in a couple of years’ time.  Others will follow.  There will be none of the first-term time-wasting Blair admitted he was guilty of.

Second, we know that the Tories think the Labour party is weakest when “alternatives” to Brown look weak.  The sneering was almost palpable - “come on then, who are you going to replace him with?” rang through the West Midlands.  The image of David Miliband holding a peculiarly flaccid banana was so inexplicably ridiculous that open mockery was thoroughly acceptable: cardboard cutouts of Miliband were distributing bananas until the tone of the conference went from “serious” to “as if you are being told of the tragic deaths of both your parents and their siblings”.  Cameron’s keynote speech singled Miliband out for a personal attack - strong words were used to describe the “arrogance” of his politics, dwelling on the picture of aloofness.  There was no Brown love-bombing, which surely would have been enjoyable to watch, but the Miliband-bashing was tantamount to nodding the prime minister towards another 18 months in power.

Third, as a post-script, a word on my thoughts of Cameron’s view of Brown.  It is patently obvious that there is a potent animosity between the prime minister and his presumed successor, but I think Cameron’s loathing is superseded by rank astonishment at Brown’s inability to govern.  I truly believe Cameron expected an Autumn election, and his fantastic line (I paraphrase) in PMQs following the climbdown should be taken at face value - “he is the only Prime Minister ever to have canceled an election because he thought  he would win it!”.  To put it another way, “you had us by the nuts there: why on earth didn’t you buy yourself a mandate when you had the chance?”.  It is my firm opinion that Cameron thinks Brown is a bad operator, and thinks he would perform better.  It’s not just a seeking of power - it’s a seeking to replace the Labour government he has grown to loathe.

And fourth, it should again be noted just how similar Cameron’s ascendancy is to Blair’s.

The TUC conference is getting under way = news.  The TUC’s policy suggestions = not news.  The unions seem as tired as the Labour government.  It’s such a shame how these things work.

(see BBC | Tax rich at higher rate, says TUC)

For some light relief in these troubled times, check out the Presidential Look-alike pages from TMZ.com.  My favourite of the images is shamelessly reproduced here.  The feeble visual resemblance between Sarah Palin and TV’s Supernanny is redeemed by a classic caption: “one of them is great at raising kids”.  Ouch!

Doug is the resident Green here, but I can stray onto his turf long enough to spread the word of Caroline Lucas’ election as leader.

By all accounts she was the better candidate (although I am disappointed that only two people stood), and she deserves all congratulations for the resounding gulf between herself and Ashley Gunstock.  Jim Jay has more.

“I watched Mr Johnson’s speech on television and I was appalled. It looked like he had carried out some research but not quite enough.

“It’s criminal really and you would have thought he would be better-informed. What he said is like saying the English invented the Hoover but at the time it was called a Dyson. Mr Hoover would be furious, just as my family is about this mistake.”

As usual, for comment on matters Boris, see the Tory Troll.