Thinking Paper #9 - Screaming schoolgirls – Is Barack Obama bigger than The Beatles?

By Tim Massingberd-James

Abstract

This week, Barack Obama embarked on a week-long European tour. In Dublin, he addressed an audience of 25,000 screaming Irish schoolgirls, and the tour sees him playing massive gigs at various venues in Ireland, the UK, France and Poland, accompanied by an entourage of 1,500, including a personal chef.

If Barack Obama were a band, he would undoubtedly be one of the biggest in the world, but would he be bigger than the Beatles?


Is Obama bigger than The Beatles?

The Beatles' biggest European Tour was in Summer 1965, when they played dates in Italy, France, Spain and the UK, before jetting off to the US for more gigs. This focusses on large European powers, and was undertaken during the Cold War, when it was basically impossible to consider taking the tour to Poland. At the time, the Beatles were described by the USSR as the "belch of Western culture" and in the 1980s McCartney was refused permission to play behind the Iron Curtain.

So, the largest tour of the Beatles had about the same number of countries (and screaming girls) as Barack Obama's Tour, and was only about a week longer. Details remaining from the tour show that alongside eight gigs, the band held press conferences, radio interviews, stayed in hotels, and even attracted political scrutiny in the Italian Parliament, with MP Mr. Quintieri questioning whether the Beatles would pay their taxes, in an echo of Mayor of London Boris Johnson's electioneering / questioning of whether the US Embassy should be paying the Congestion Charge during Obama's visit. Records show that the Beatles even attended a reception in their honour in Jerez, Spain, on 1st July 1965, much like the Obama's probably attended lots of receptions.

At Buckingham Palace, Obama was given a 41 gun salute by the Queen, but this is just box-ticking when meeting a foreign head of state. It is worth noting that in June 1965 – around the time of the European Tour - The Beatles were given the MBE by the Queen, and were invited to Buckingham Palace later that year. There were, however, no guns.

Earlier this month, President Obama listed $4 million in personal assets and income, including book royalties, and pensions, however, Sir Paul McCartney alone was estimated to have a personal fortune of $1.2 billion in 2009, and if we add in Ringo Starr's wealth, we might raise the figure by a few bob, alongside the estates of George Harrison and John Lennon.

Conclusion

In conclusion, it would seem that the Beatles were as big as Obama in 1965, and as more than 40 years has passed since then it seems that they're probably much bigger. If we factor in the likelihood that the Beatles will all die before Obama, however, the President will undoubtedly win in the end.

_{^Picture by Anthony Baker under Creative Commons^}

Thinking Paper # 8: Prison reform - The Chris Huhne factor

By Ron Ford-Golightly

Abstract

Chris “Murray” Huhne, our beloved Energy Secretary, may or may not drive cars, he may or may not have been driving a car too fast and he may or may not have been behind the wheel of the speeding car in question. We do know however, that Chris Huhne’s memory seems to be returning to him.

We also know that England imprisons more people than any other country in Western Europe and marginally less per 100,000 of the population than China (and they really enjoy punishing their people). Finally, we know that there is room for more people in our prisons. The prison population in this country currently stands at 85,000 with a maximum capacity of around 100,000. In the opinion of the IIPBA this leaves plenty of room for Chris Huhne and all of his relevant hair products.


The Context

Chris Huhne has a lovely head of hair. He has a bisexual partner and a very disgruntled ex-wife. His middle name is Murray.

His ex-wife said that in 2003 he “pressurised” someone into taking his driving licence penalty points. Essex Police said that they were “investigating” but that they couldn’t wait to charge the “floppy haired prick”.

Investigators here at the IIPBA looked into these matters as a priority issue. After a lengthy internet trawl of Chris Huhne’s Wikipedia page, they found that there was no reference to Murray’s like of cars, let alone whether he can drive them fast enough to be considered speeding. In fact, according to Wikipedia, his personal interests include “Electoral reform, European single currency, economics, third world debt and development.” Our investigators found this humorous.

David Cameron recently said that he had “confidence” in Chris Huhne. Followers of the Prime Minister’s rhetoric know that this translates to: “he can stay for now but once he begins to damage my reputation I will drop him quicker than a Conservative election manifesto commitment”.

Prisoners and wardens: How would they respond?

Our social researchers showed 400 fairly aggressive and sexually promiscuous prisoners in England a picture of Chris Huhne to gauge reactions to his face. 87% of those surveyed said that he would make a “wonderful wife” and the remaining 13% said that he had lovely hair.

Furthermore, we interviewed 69 prison wardens who face job cuts and below inflation pay rises under the government’s programme of cuts (too far, too fast!). Those interviewed responded “extremely positively” to news that a multi-millionaire politician who works for the Coalition government could face time in their prison. One warden from Somerset told our researchers that “with new fish, they like to leave the meting out of punishment to the bulls”. He went on to explain that bulls are a specific type of prisoner who specialise in “a rather unpleasant form of love making”.

Conclusion

In a trial conducted in the Royal Court of the Daily Mail comments page, the British public unanimously found him guilty. Furthermore, they think that climate change isn’t real and therefore none of this will matter. In fact, more people are angrier about Chris Huhne's work to prevent climate change than they are about his speeding. Our researchers found this humorous.

Policy Recommendations

1. Prisons should be reformed as a matter of urgency to ensure that Chris Huhne gets to maintain his high quality hair cut whilst incarcerated.

2. The Department for Energy and Climate Change (DECC) should be disbanded following his incarceration and each member of staff should be able to roam free in St James’s Park alongside the ducks and the homeless.

3. Chris Huhne’s ex-wife should be given an award at a ceremony attended by Nelson Mandela, Bill Clinton and Kofi Annan. Other invitees should include the Spice Girls, Simon Hoggart and Ryan Giggs.

4. All of the above should be implemented without any unnecessary bureaucracy in line with the IIPBA’s manifesto commitments.

_{^Picture from DECCgovuk under Creative Commons^}

Thinking Paper # 7: Imaginary Super-Injunctions – A way forward.

By Tim Massingberd-James

Abstract

With the news that an imaginary super-injunction hasn't been imposed by the Hon. Mr Justice Peter Talling to prevent the publication of non-existent pictures of the George Osborne engaged in an intimate act with a Mute Swan, the IIPBA looks at the blight of imaginary super-injunctions, and whether the prevention of publication of imagined news is healthy, in a modern democracy



Imaginary Super-Injunctions

The IIPBA is the nerve centre of modern politics, and as such is aware of countless non-existent court cases which ban publication of imagined facts about well known celebrities.

We feel we have a duty to report these facts, and as such this paper will examine the circumstances surrounding the following unreal news stories, which are common knowledge amongst Westminster illuminati:

• David Cameron is a Minotaur

• The BBC's Huw Edwards sleeps on a bed of fennel

• Sir Paul McCartney has kept a frozen weasel heart in a golden box in Dusseldorf since 1967, believing it to be the source of his musical power

• Channel Four's Rick Edwards once raped his own reflection

• Tim Henman once ate a lollipop stick whole without chewing

Whilst these stories are all manufactured by our elite team of pastry chefs, the individual words they contain are real words, except Huw, which is actually spelled Hugh.

However, imaginary super-injunctions are big business, with city law firms earning between £0 and £4.8m per case, and celebrities queuing up to pretend to take them out.

We must ask, however, whether the imagined gagging of the press is a notional infringement on the right to free speech, and whether we should allow these pretend injunctions to take place, when a quick Google search will normally provide spurious lies and gossip about any famous person you can imagine.

Conclusion

The IIPBA believes that media outlets should have the right to print anything they like, providing they make it clear that the stories they print are partly or entirely fictional.

A version of this process is referred to as yellow journalism and is practiced by many newspapers who pretend to be factual tomes whilst actually peddling rubbish.

To end the bureaucratic legal system which can be extremely costly for yellow journalists, we propose all newspapers should be required to carry an imaginary disclaimer on the 42nd page identifying which stories are factual, and which are imagined.

_{^Picture from fotopedia by Cyril Blazy^}

Thinking Paper # 6: Why won’t Ed Miliband ever be Prime Minister?

Abstract

On the continued theme of faces, the IIPBA looks this week at Labour leader, Ed Miliband and assesses what it is exactly that is so unappealing about him. Is it because he looks like a Panda, sounds a little silly, has zero to traces of gravitas, and “human” qualities that leave most humans wondering, and I quote, “if he does human, what the fuck am I meant to be?”.

We consulted several studies on the issue and carried out our own market research. The conclusion is pretty strong: he’s got a silly face.

Cited studies

• A study by Tailor and Harpington 2010, found that 9 out of 10 sniffer dogs, when asked to identify a human, could not pick Miliband out of a line up which included three tins of soup, a 2008 Lake District calendar, a copy of Heat magazine and one of those balls that some people make using elastic bands.

• We asked 39,000 people about Miliband’s “human” qualities. Our favourite quote from the responses we received was from Gary Smythe who said “I hate Ed Miliband; I genuinely hate everything about his stupid face”.

• In a study by Young et al 2008, sociologists asked 150 two year olds to look at pictures of existing Cabinet members of the then Labour government. All but three of them began crying when they saw a picture depicting Ed Miliband smiling. One of the mothers of the children involved claimed that her child’s first word followed shortly after the experiment – although unsubstantiated, the child reportedly said the word “hate”. We would like to suggest to our readers that this is definitely true.

• During a brainstorming session we held with a troop of Bonobo monkeys, 98% of participants threw shit (their own and others) at a picture of Miliband on the wall. Despite the session being attended primarily by Bonobo’s, this is called “chimping”. Headline stat: 98% of all Bonobo’s choose to “chimp” Miliband's face.

Conclusion

Gary Smythe captured the predominant feeling we captured in our research and leads us to the very basic conclusion that he will never be Prime Minister because of his “stupid face”.

_{^Picture copyright ARCHIVED Department of Energy and Climate Change, used under Creative Commons license^}

Thinking Paper # 5 – Will Nick Clegg’s face last the full 5 years?

By Ron Ford-Golightly

Abstract

There has been widespread discussion about whether the Coalition will last until 2015, but we here at the IIPBA think that this is a mere side issue when compared to the more pressing factor of Nick Clegg’s face and whether will see out the 5 years. IIPBA analysts have looked at a time lapse video of his face between May 2010 and May 2011 and have drawn out several interesting trends set out in the analysis below.

Background

Nick Clegg has a face just like me and you. He also has feelings. Sadly, he heads up a political party that, before May 2010, tended to be somewhat idealistic in its policy position. Upon entering Government, it had to leave all of these policies behind in the face of reality. Unfortunately for Nick, many of his grassroots supporters don’t see the value in leaving behind much of what makes the Lib Dems the Lib Dems, in large part because they don’t earn a quarter of a million pounds and have not been tainted by power.

The Detail

Returning to Nick Clegg’s face, we will now focus on the factors at play in the decline of his face, notably: free lunches, late nights, some angry performances at the House of Commons, rage, regret, the wind and last winter’s snow.

Daily Routine

According to our sources, Nick Clegg eats approximately three animals a day, he drinks seven cups of coffee and rarely gets access to fresh fruit and vegetables. He sees the outside of his office for the 20 minutes that he spends in the toilet and he sleeps sporadically between trying to get into No10 through the connecting door (he regularly fails). Upon getting home, his wife, Miriam, demands a foot rub and its 1am before he opens his red box full up with briefing that he will never read from Civil Servants who simply don’t care as much as they should. Each day lines form around his eyes and mouth and his face falls slightly further towards the levels of Lib Dem polling.

Workload pre-government

As leader of the third party, workload tends to be light and sporadic. Sources suggest that as Lib Dem leader in opposition he used to wakae up for 10am, watch Jeremy Kyle whilst eating his Weetabix (it makes you strong) before making his way down to Lib Dem HQ for 11ish. Some days he would read his emails, other days, not so much. He would enjoy a budget lunch at one of the many canteens at the House of Commons before settling down to have a nice nap in the afternoon, curled up on a sofa bed in his office with Chris Huhne’s dog. Occasionally, he would appear on television but only if he was accompanied by an aging but elegant TV celebrity.

Some days he would get really rather cross about something or other and 24 news stations might film what he said but then make disparaging remarks about it. He would be home for 4pm, make himself a nice bowl of soup with crusty bread and bed-in for the night watching soap operas whilst his wife (an international lawyer) made a real living. He would usually be asleep by around 9pm and is reported to have regularly dreamt about living in a harmonious society as a Bonobo Monkey.

Workload as Deputy Prime Minister

He’s bloody everywhere isn’t he? Pounding his fist on the despatch box, getting angry about political systems and making speeches which usually contradict what the Prime Minister has told him to say (good for you Nick). He seems to work terribly hard and likes to get involved with a bit of everything, making sure that Lib Dem views are sufficiently represented across Government. At the end of a hard day of getting a bit angry and terribly frustrated with the Civil Service, he faces his most arduous task of the day – getting through the red box. The red box is similar to a school child’s homework. A box packed full of all of the important things that he should know and tasks for the following day. For many new Ministers it usually replaces their wife/husband/partner as the night time bed fellow and is made up of very useless information which, in Nick’s case, won’t prevent the Tories from systemically bringing about the destruction of the Lib Dems at the next general election.

Conclusion

The IIPBA believes that it is this very latter point which is the biggest contributor to the fall of Nick Clegg’s face. No amount of power, free lunches and back slapping can make up for the sad fact that Nick must surely be aware of i.e. since May 2010 the Lib Dems have been on a hiding to nothing. It was right for them to work with the Tories to form a Coalition and they would have been stupid to pass up the opportunity to work in Government and shape the country. However, it may result in the complete destruction of the Lib Dems in the long run and the collapse of Nick Clegg's face in the short term.

Final Answer to the question “Will Nick Clegg’s face last the full 5 years?”

Probably not, but the Coalition will. And David Cameron’s face will simply get shinier, smoother and ever so gradually pinker, in line with the predictions of Guardian cartoonist Steve Bell.

_{^Picture copyright Liberal Democrats, used under Creative Commons^}

Thinking Paper # 3 - Should we encourage our Prime Minister to drink more?

By Ron Ford-Golightly

Abstract

Alcohol is everywhere at the moment. It is in my blood, it’s in your blood, and it’s all over the dusty shelves of our country’s finest supermarkets. In the opinion of health experts, dutifully misreported by The newspapers (One dry Sherry before Sunday Lunch can increase middle class cancers by up to 95%), alcohol should be drunk in moderation, especially by those who drive cars or run our country.

In this paper the IIPBA will explore the issue in more detail, tackling the subject in the context of the performance of the Prime Minister. Should our leaders refrain to improve their political performance or indulge to speed up decision making? This paper will look at the history of alcoholism in our leaders and ask should we, the voting public, demand a minimum amount of alcohol intake for our Prime Minister?

Alcohol and Prime Ministers – A selective history

According to statistical research carried out by our in house polling experts, the IIPBA’s favourite drunk Prime Minister is Winston Churchill. Let’s look at his record:

(1) When Churchill was sent to the front line of the Boer war, he took with him 36 bottles of wine, 18 bottles of ten-year old scotch, and 6 bottles of vintage brandy (a drink he believed was essential to a stable diet);

(2) When King George V set a personal example to the troops by giving up alcohol, Churchill declared the whole idea absurd and announced he would not be giving up drink just because the King had;

(3) during the war he would take briefings from the armed forces chief of staff in bed or in the bath, usually with a bottle of champagne, brandy or whisky.

Looking at a longitudinal time series analysis of public polling, we can definitively say that the public love Churchill. He was a big fat drunk but also a successful wartime leader and eternally popular Prime Minister. Coincidence?

Of all the revelations in former Prime Minister Tony Blair's autobiography, his admission to habitually drinking wine and spirits each night was perhaps the most surprising. But did it matter? In terms of units drunk, he confessed, he was definitely at "the outer limit" of what would be regarded as healthy to drink in a week. If we leave out his rather hasty decision to condemn large amounts of people to a grizzly death, it’s fair to say that Blair was one of the most popular and successful Prime Minister’s of all time due, in large part, to his common touch and ability to make decisions after a few whiskeys.

Prime Minister Herbert "squiffy" Asquith, so called because of his penchant for certain toxins, used to sway on his feet when speaking or answering questions in the House of Commons. He even became the muse of a ditty writer during World War I (when "Mr Asquith says in a manner sweet and calm: Another little drink won't do us any harm"). However, Asquith was one of the longest continuously serving Prime Minister’s of the 20th century who has been noted by historians and social study’s alike to have been a successful peacetime Prime Minister.

William Pitt the Younger habitually drank several bottles of port a day, which is said to have been prescribed by his physician. Now this love of port didn’t go without its consequences. He died in 1806 at the age of 46, and from contemporary accounts it appears that he succumbed to renal failure and cirrhosis. However, Pitt was not only the youngest Prime Minister, but he also presided over what has been described as “one of the most completely successful ten years in the history of British government” (take that Gordon Brown).

Moving on to the cow headed, iron fisted, silent comedian, Gordon Brown was said to enjoy a bottle of Becks and a pizza with the “lads” (Ed Balls and Ed Miliband) during his opposition and treasury days. However, he also said that he woke up to Arctic Monkeys in the morning so I think we can safely discount both. According to Westminster rumours, he actually enjoyed Luke warm urine, hessian sacks and self flagellation. The rocking horse rumour is, to date, still unfounded. It may be too soon to determine what Brown’s legacy will be, but I think it is fair to say that the ten successful years of boom in the economy that he presided over was also one of the contributing factors which will make the next 10 years so miserable for so many. In summary, he didn’t drink as much as Tony and still went on to ruin the economy for a generation.

Prime Minister Dave – Recommendations

Dave has admitted to enjoying “a can of Guinness” sat in front of the TV watching darts (“There’s a good old boy, open me another Guinness wont you old chap”). Two things: one this has to be a lie and two why was he trying to win votes in the Republic of Ireland? Watching Dave drink a pint down his local pub on the TV during election night was like watching a young boy tasting his dad’s beer for the first time, trying ever so hard to like it but not being able to avoid screwing up his face in disgust (but daddy that’s yucky). The IIPBA can’t help but feel that a good Prime Minister needs to have a thirst for the old poison. From winning wars to presiding over decade long periods of good government, our finest leaders have always enjoyed a good old fashioned binge to help them along the way.

In summary, get with the programme Dave, the squeezed middle likes a man who can get through two bottles of red wine and still do his tax return of an evening. Don’t shout about your drinking from the rooftops (poor William Hague) just get down to a bit of hard edged spirit toasting whilst you pore over your red box. One, it generally makes reading easier and two decisions will come quicker because of the lift in confidence. Too far and too fast is more than acceptable when it comes to alcohol intake Prime Minister.

Thanks for listening.

^Picture copyright James Stringer, used under Creative Commons^

Thinking Paper #5 - On the need for a post-bureaucratic age -Is Muamar Gaddafi in league with bureaucracy?

By Tim Massingberd-James

• Abstract

Whilst Libyan rebels state that bureaucracy is the cause of losses in the Libyan ground war, Muamar Gaddafi maintains a significant bureaucracy. However, as seen elsewhere in the world, public officials have actually been a stifling force, and have delayed key reforms that may have led to much-needed changes. Muamar Gaddafi is only in league with bureaucracy because he has to be. Like all of us, he has no choice.

• Is Muamar Gaddafi in league with bureaucracy?

In a press conference on 6th April 2011, Libyan rebels complained that NATO bureaucracy was delaying their response to calls from airstrikes, allowing the Libyan regime’s tanks and artillery to attack rebel forces before retreating into civilian areas, to avoid airstrikes.

Many believe the reason NATO forces were so quick to become involved in Libya was a plan unveiled by Gaddafi in 2009, where he proposed the nationalisation of Libya’s oil wealth, effectively handing over resources to the country’s huge bureaucracy, which both American and Chinese officials described as ‘byzantine’ in leaked wikileaks cables. In a landmark speech on state TV, Gaddafi said "the state's economy has failed. Enough is enough. The solution is for the Libyan people to directly receive oil revenues and decide what to do with them".

However, as part of this plan, Gaddafi urged a radical reform of government bureaucracy, leading to senior government officials voting to delay his plans, with only 64 of 468 Popular Committee members in support.

In a 2003 Corruption Perceptions Index survey, where people were asked to rate the degree of corruption of the Libyan civil service on a scale between 10 (highly clean) and 0 (highly corrupt), a highly questionable score of 2.1 was awarded, showing that the Libyan bureaucracy, like Muamar Gaddafi, is perceived as corrupt.

In an article for the Independent in 2011, Paul Peachey described the way that Gaddafi keeps power in a country with no written constitution, where he is technically not actually president. Peachey said “in an essentially tribal society with no constitution and a decisionmaking process...the system is administered by an old guard whose livelihood depends on continued graft… so deeply implicated that Colonel Gaddafi could depend on their loyalty”.

Despite this, Otman & Karlberg’s “The Libyan economy: economic diversification and international repositioning” (Springer, 2007) shows that the numbers employed by the Libyan civil service actually declined between 1978, shortly before Gaddafi took power, when it employed 76,800, to 1983, when numbers had been reduced to 61,000. Since then, numbers have, to an estimated 118,000, but this is more than accounted for by population growth, which saw the total population of Libya rise from roughly 1m in 1962 to more than 5.6m by 2006.

Indeed, as part of a plan of reform for the Libyan public service, the Gaddafi family appointed the Adam Smith Institute to devise a masterplan for reform of the Libyan public service, but this was sidelined in 2007, when Saif al-Islam Al-Gaddafi, Muamar’s eldest son announced that the salaries of public sector employees will be raised by 25%, and also increased the employees' housing allowance by 237%.

• Conclusion

Whilst Libya maintains a significant bureaucracy, and NATO bureaucracy has apparently delayed air strikes on Gaddafi’s forces, it would appear that in Gaddafi’s Libya, far from being in league with the mad colonel, bureaucracy is one of the few ways his power is kept in check, to the extent that the Libyan bureaucracy has even been able to extract beneficial concessions in terms and concessions from his son.

_{^Picture © Abode of Chaos used under Creative Commons^}