Tax cheat register won't achieve fairness

Why, whenever the government declares war on tax cheats, does it feel like they’re taking one step forward after taking several leaps backward?

I see HMRC are making a noise today about their crackdown on tax cheats. Strategically timed no doubt to pour some water on the flames of anger that were ignited by news of Barclays' tax bill. This was closely followed by the shameful admission by the government that UK based multinationals will not be expected to pay tax on foreign profits.

The Managing Deliberate Defaulters programme will see letters arriving on the door steps of 900 tax cheats. The message will be: “We’re onto you and we’re watching you.” It’s meant to act as a deterrent to suspected tax fraudsters who will be put under increased scrutiny and if they’re found to be deliberately evading their taxes then criminal proceeding “may” also start.

I suspect this will only really hit small businesses and whether HMRC will be able to effectively resource this at a time when it has already cut a third of its staff since its creation and plans to cut 13,000 more over the next four years, remains to be seen.

The Department says that one of the main aims of this programme, which will name and shame those that don't comply, is to “reassure the compliant population that HMRC's does take action against deliberate defaulters.” This is an essential point for any tax system; it needs to be deemed as fair to be workable.

The vast majority of us are compliant in our tax affairs and we have had enough of seeing the super rich and big business being treated with a somewhat laissez faire attitude by government while the rest of us are forced to lump the burden.

Last week, Barclays owned up to paying just £113m in corporation tax during 2009, just 1% of the £11.6bn in profit it made. This sparked more mass protests organised by UK Uncut campaigners on Saturday. This included occupying branches of the bank and turning them into libraries and even a makeshift comedy club at its Tottenham Court Road branch with a Big Society bail-in set from comedian Josie Long. Brilliant stuff!

Tax justice guru Richard Murphy was on the case, being interviewed in response to the Barclays announcement by BBC TV news on Saturday. This coverage was no doubt made more possible by the coinciding protests of hundreds of activists across the country. His blog post from that day, 'Barclays - paying tax but where?' did an excellent job of getting to the nub of the issue. 

Murphy again popped up on our screens on last night's Newsnight (28 minutes in) commenting on the scandal of our government's plans to stop taxing the profits made by foreign branches of multinationals that are resident in the UK. This is as a result of HMRC's consultation on corporate tax reform which sought the views of big businesses and their advisers. How's their next consultation going to be run? What to eat for Christmas dinner - only turkeys need reply.

Treasury Minister David Gauke introduced the consultation stating: “In recent years, too many businesses have left the UK amid concerns over tax competitiveness... the UK is headed for a more competitive, simpler, and more stable  tax system in the future, creating the right conditions for investment.”

But this exercise wasn't about making it simpler for companies to pay tax, it was about making it simpler for them avoid paying their tax.

The theory goes that if multinationals don't get cosy tax breaks from our government they'll move their base elsewhere. However, as Richard pointed out when this was put to him on last night's programme, in reality this isn't the case.  

In today’s Guardian Duncan Weldon quite rightly identifies that the 50p tax rate for those that earn more than £150,000 has been a major contributor to the 17.8% increase in tax receipts seen in January of this year. It seems that, rather than just keeping our fingers crossed and hoping for a trickle down approach, taxing the rich really does work.

We need to ensure that those that can afford the tax burden are made to pay up and not given preferential treatment and effectively allowed to hold our country to ransom.

The government must end the madness of letting banks pay just 1% on their profits and pandering to big businesses, allowing them to avoid paying their fair share. Until this is done, it will be an insult to the ordinary taxpayer every time we hear a millionaire cabinet member utter the words, "we're all in this together," and the protests on our high streets will continue. 

A brief history of sci fi film

As it's Saturday, and the campaign against the cuts seems to be coming along just nicely today, I thought I'd take my blog posting outside of the political bubble they've been inside of late. And as watching Alien last night made me remember just how great science fiction films can be, I thought I'd shine a light on the sci fi movie genre.

First off, I'd really have to say I'm not some kind a sci fi geek but I did have a phase while a student when I took a module in Science Fiction Film and devoured quite a bit of what the genre had on offer.

I always find the best sci fi films are the ones that manage to successfully combine great special effects with the exploration of the human condition and how it will survive in a future increasingly controlled by science and technological advancement.

The film that really combines these most effectively for me was Stanley Kubrick's 2001: A Space Odyssey. It's probably most famous for its soundtrack; from Richard Straus's chaotic accompaniment to a primate's throwing of a bone that represents man's first tool, to the contrastingly choreographed Blue Danube that plays elegantly over the whirling space station of the future. Forty years on and it's still spectacular to look at and it visualises so well the theme of how our species would survive in a universe that would become increasingly alien. How would man exist in a space and time that he would find unfathomable? A question simplified later on to brilliantly entertaining effect in Robert Zemeckis's Back to the Future.

To be fair I've never really scratched much underneath the surface of this genre. But I suppose that's because there are more bad than good sci fi movies. The 1950s were arguably the genre's heyday, and while others had really come of age by then such as the Western and Film Noir, this era was dominated by mainly juvenile B-Movies, that were often entertaining albeit with a preoccupation with McCarthyism paranoia. I mean, titles like Red Planet Mars say it all really.

As a genre it didn't really take off until the baby boomer generation that had grown up watching these 50s B-Movies started to make their own movies. A watering down of the cold war infatuation, coupled with having greater special effects at their disposal, gave the likes of Steven Spielberg's, George Lucas's and Ridley Scott's films much smarter and more mainstream appeal. In fact, other than Kubrick's contributions there had been virtually no science fiction film taken seriously and gone mainstream until Star Wars was released in 1977.

I would have to say the late 70s, early 80s period was the golden age of sci fi movies so there is no surprise that the list below is dominated by them. By the end of the century however, the genre seemed to have become a victim of its own success. By this time the film galaxy had become saturated with big budget Hollywood blockbusters. The likes of Independence Day and Armageddon tried to continue what the likes of Close Encounters of the Third Kind and ET: The Extra-Terrestrial had started but they lacked the soul of those films and were poorer relations because of it.

Of course the less said about the Star Wars prequels, the better. It's easy to say this in hindsight, but the reason they never worked was because we knew all the key plot twists and turns before we'd watched them. We'd grown up imagining the events that had happened before Episode IV and we didn't need to see them for ourselves. The beauty of Star Wars is that it started like all good story telling should do, halfway through. It's like hearing the reminiscences of an elderly relative; we find their stories entertaining and can imagine them through our own mind's eye but we don't need to have them visualised for us. That said, it didn't help that the dialogue and acting were so utterly dreadful.

Too often by the turn of the century films looked magnificent but fell foul of putting style over substance. Certainly the Star Wars films and the likes of The Fifth Element are classic examples of this trend. It's quite telling that the film I'm most fond of from this period is Tim Burton's Mars Attacks which brilliantly lampooned the genre.

I have seen a few sci fi films made in recent years that have given me 'a new hope' for its future. The best of these are Sunshine, Danny Boyle's intelligent foray into sci fi territory; District 9, which successfully used the B-Movie alien-invasion format to explore themes around South Africa's apartheid system; and Moon, a UK film directed by first-time director Duncan Jones (David Bowie's son) boasting a great central performance from Sam Rockwell accompanied by a HAL-like computer with smiley expressions for the i-phone app generation. Jones's film doesn't quite make the list below but his Dad does.

You might think that there are some glaring omissions in my list of best sci fi movies ever. Embarrassingly I've never seen Metropolis or the original Solaris. Blade Runner should probably be in there but I've just never quite got all the reverence attached to it. Maybe it's because I came to it quite late on and it didn't quite match my expectations. I much prefer Alien as Ridley Scott's films go. I know it could be argued that it's more of a horror film than a sci fi, to which I'd say, "of course it's bloody sci fi! I mean, it's set in space!"

Here are my top ten in particular order:

1. 2001: A Space Odyssey, Stanley Kubrick, 1968
2. Star Wars: Episode V - The Empire Strikes Back, Irvin Kershner, 1980
3. ET: The Extra Terrestrial, Steven Spielberg, 1982
4. Star Wars: Episode IV - A New Hope, George Lucas, 1977
5. Alien, Ridley Scott, 1979
6. Back to the Future, Robert Zemeckis, 1985
7. The Man Who Fell to Earth, Nicolas Roeg, 1976
8. The Day the Earth Stood Still, Robert Wise, 1951
9. A Clockwork Orange, Stanley Kubrick, 1971
10. Close Encounters of the Third Kind, Steven Spielberg, 1977

Priti vacant

Another day, another tired old headline attacking public servants courtesy of Priti Patel.

Since entering parliament at the last general election, Priti Patel hasn't so much been an MP on behalf of the constituents of Witham; more an agent for the Taxpayers' Alliance and the lazy right-wing press.

Today she attacks a so-called sick note culture in the civil service. "The cost to taxpayers of sick leave are astonishing [sic]. Much more needs to be done to eradicate the public sector sickness culture," she tells the Evening Standard. Does she even stop to consider the roots of the problem? That, after years of sustained job cuts in this area and woeful lack of resources, that morale is at an all-time low in many areas, leading to increased workplace stress and higher absenteeism. Of course she doesn't.

Priti clearly wants to continue to kick about government workers in a game of political football, portraying them as a bunch of stay-at-home, work shy layabouts who ring in sick for a week at the merest sign of a sniffle. They're intent on ripping off the taxpayer just so they can stay under the duvet and watch Cash in the Attic.

"This has to be an area the Government and other public bodies look at to save money to protect front-line services," she cries. What could possibly rectify this? I know, let's table a load of parliamentary questions to every government department so we can expose just how much these front-line service deliverers are ruining the economy. Let's introduce some draconian measures to get them to drag their arses back to work, that'll improve services and it'll solve the deficit. Maybe threaten them with the sack, that's another good way of getting civil servant numbers down, and they won't be able to ring in sick anymore because they'll be unemployed claiming benefits instead. Oh hang on, let's cut their benefits as well and their redundancy payments while we're at it. Yes that seems a lot fairer and is bound to improve morale.

To give the woman her due, she knows what will make headlines. Only last weekend, the Sunday Telegraph ran a story on senior civil servant bonus payments courtesy of figures Priti had obtained through a series of parliamentary questions. Was she jumping up and down decrying the fact that senior staff were awarding themselves huge bonuses when the majority of civil servants earn on average £22,000 per year with thousands earning barely above the minimum wage? No, she was apparently seething at what she saw as the "murky world of civil servant bonuses." Nevermind the bankers, it's those pesky Mandarins that are bringing this country's economy crashing to its knees.

She doesn't care for unions either. Last year just before a major national TUC-wide rally against government cuts she called various unions pretending to be a union rep asking if she could use facility time to attend the event. Again this got her exposure in the Torygraph who duly described her as a "rising star."

This followed a raft of questions that she had tabled on union facility time agreements; over 60 of them in fact. Cue more mention of her in the papers. Facility time is what union reps get away from their normal work duties so they can help their colleagues and negotiate with management. Her lazily trotted out statistics completely ignored the value of this. As Carl Roper, TUC national organiser pointed out if she had considered this:

"She would have discovered that the benefits far outweigh the costs as evidenced in both the TUC’s ‘Recovery from the Recession’ Touchstone Pamphlet and ‘Reps in Action’ a publication highlighting the value of union reps published jointly by the TUC and the CBI." 

Carl also cleverly pointed out that the 67 questions she tabled on this occasion alone would have cost the taxpayer over £10,000 in administration costs.

Maybe it's time an MP stood up and asked what the cost has been to her beloved taxpayers of all the questions Priti has asked since she was elected just so she can get her name in the press.

If one of her constituents was to write to her to ask her to sign an early day motion (EDM) she’d write back a refusal, quoting some six figure sum she’s found out it takes to administrate EDMs every year. She’s far too busy tabling questions that might get her some nice juicy figures to send to a journalist to waste your money on that sort of thing.

However, if the same constituent was to suggest starting a petition against prisoner votes, now that’s more like it, a nice big open media door for her to knock on. Why should those that ignore the law get a vote? It’s never right to ignore the law, unless that is, it’s a European law. Mind you, Priti has gone on record to state she thinks the death penalty should be reintroduced, I’m guessing she thinks that would solve the voting problem all together.

It’s about time Priti Patel was exposed as the ruthless self serving, media whore she really is. Next time you see her name in the paper, leave a comment with whatever lazy publication she’s been quoted in, asking them if they know how much she’s wasted in public money to get figures that are already in the public domain if only somebody could be bothered to do some research by flicking through a government department’s annual report. In fact, I’ve decided to use a new #pritivacant hashtag on twitter whenever I see some half arsed attempt at a “story” in the likes of the ES, the Torygraph or the Daily Fail.

Home Office victimisation and embarrassing images for Cameron

It's already been a busy week for union activists campaigning against the coalition government's cuts agenda and a somewhat embarrassing one for the man attempting to deliver them.

There was a decent turnout for today's PCS rally on behalf of two sacked union reps. The meeting in central London also saw the launch of the union's campaign against job cuts in the Home Office.

The two PCS reps, Sue Kendal, the southern and south eastern branch secretary, and Home Office group president Mark Hammond, both worked as senior immigrations officers in Kent until their dismissals last autumn.

Mark gave an impassioned speech at the public meeting about their plight and called for union members to come together at the national demonstration on 26 March to oppose government cuts. He referred to the creation of the welfare state after the Second World War as proof that, when the economy is struggling, investment in public services works rather than the course of harsh cuts the current government are taking.

PCS are campaigning for the immediate reinstatement of Mark and Sue who were dismissed on unsubstantiated, trumped up charges relating to a satirical newsletter. The union believes the Department used the opportunity to conduct a biased investigation to get rid of two senior reps who had recently led a dispute at the UKBA. It seems suspect that the sackings happened just as the Home Office were planning to bring in massive job cuts that they knew the union would be opposing.

The Home Office are cutting 8,500 jobs over the next four years. They have so far given no detail of how they intend to deliver these cuts. The arbitrary nature of these cuts proves that jobs and services are being put at risk while the government forces through an ideological driven agenda to reduce the public sector.

Following the rally, members marched across the street to Home Office HQ where representatives of the union accompanied by Mark and Sue and PCS parliamentary group Chair John McDonnell MP, attempted to hand in a letter of intention to ballot members on industrial action short of a strike. They were denied access to the building but not before Sir Gus O'Donnell (Head of the civil service) wandered into the fray.

Clearly recognising Mark Hammond but not quite placing the face he enquired as to how he was. Mark indignantly replied that he wasn't good as he'd been unfairly sacked and asked if he could have his job back. Needless to say Sir Gus beat an awkwardly hasty retreat. Notice of the ballot has since been served.

Culture cuts
The rally followed a stunt outside the national gallery yesterday which PCS used to highlight cuts in the culture sector. Coverage of this can be found on the Daily Mirror's website with an interview with union officer Wynne Parry. The stunt, which was timed to coincide with Valentine's Day, featured a Cameron and Clegg love-in in a bed in the middle of Trafalgar Square. An image that isn't for the faint hearted.

This is certainly an area where the cuts make a mockery of the argument that they will benefit the economy. After all, 10% of UK GDP comes from visits to the nation's museum and galleries and for every pound spent on the culture sector, the economy gets £2 back.

Cameron praise for staff he's cutting
As if bedding down with Clegg in public wasn't embarrassing enough for the PM, more embarrassment was in store today when a film of him applauding the work of Advantage WM, the West Midlands arm of the Regional Development Agencies, was uncovered.

Cameron sent a video message praising Advantage WM after it won top prize at the Midlands Excellence awards earlier this month. Could this be the same Advantage WM that his government are scrapping? The same Advantage WM where the 340 staff the PM so readily praises, are set to be made redundant?

"You are the doers and the grafters who are going to bring the wealth, the jobs and opportunity our country needs so badly," he told staff. Not anymore they're not! More on this story in The Guardian.

Everybody hates Eric

The message from the coalition to local councillors this week was clear: Cut deep, cut quickly and, above all, cut the complaining.

Whether you loved him or loathed him there was no denying that Eric Pickles played a big part in the Conservative Party's appeal at the ballot box last spring. It's interesting then that the one time darling of middle England is now being described as public enemy number one.

It certainly helped the Tories image to have a straight talking working-class northerner within their own ranks. They needed him there as a colourful alternative to an otherwise pallid, upper class, virtually aristocratic front bench team. But it seems the jolly down to earth uncle-figure mask has not so much slipped as been ripped off, screwed up and is soon to be thrown away when the next fortnightly bin collection comes round.

Taking a big fat dump
all over local government

His everyman persona appealed to a special kind of Middle England voter. The ones made in Pickles's own image who make their assessments of public life from the pages of the Daily Mail and what the old boys at the local golf club sagely shake their heads about. They drive big cars, complain about the rise of petrol, nod knowingly along with everything Jeremy Clarkson says, hate speed cameras, political correctness, the madness of health and safety laws and reserve particularly venomous indignation towards any kind of namby pamby bureaucracy.

Being one of the most vocal acolytes of the Big Society during the election campaign made Pickles an obvious choice for Cameron to appoint as Secretary of State for the Department of Communities and Local Government. However, on reflection appointing a man who despises local government so much was akin to appointing a Health Secretary who doesn't believe in medicine.

During the Thatcher years Pickles saw his star rise in local politics, becoming the leader of the Bradford City Council in 1988. His two year reign may have been short-lived but he still managed to earn himself a reputation as someone who was a firm believer in shrinking the state by forcing through deep cuts, introducing public private partnerships and trying to hand over services to community organisations.

This week saw a letter being written by over 90 prominent Liberal Democrat councillors, in which they criticised the scale and speed of the coalition government's cuts.

Lib Dem leader Nick Clegg unsurprisingly labelled the criticism as unhelpful but also went on to play his local city council Sheffield off of Manchester in an attempt to deflect the blame. He said that the Lib Dem led Sheffield council were making efficiencies without cutting too many jobs while across the Pennines in Manchester the Labour led council are making 2,000 job cuts to score political points ahead of the forthcoming local elections. Is he really suggesting that cutting jobs, closing public toilets, libraries and leisure centres as well as cutting down on bus services and care for the elderly are just being done out of spite, to make the coalition government look bad? It seems many of these Westminster politicians would do well not to judge their local counterparts by their own ruthless standards.

Banning council newspapers

Meanwhile back at the ranch, Eric Pickles ended the week by announcing a new code of conduct that would ban councils from producing local newspapers more than four times a year. This was a move that was even described as "draconian" by the Tory helmed Local Government Authority.

With the demise of the local newspaper many of these publications, rightly or wrongly, are the only true avenue for people to get information on local services and issues, that are actually written by local journalists who have an understanding of the local communities that they serve.

Any cost savings from this introducing this strategy would be negligible as many of them pay for themselves. They can be a source of revenue to the councils as they can be used to promote local services and initiatives and are a cost effective way of communicating with residents. As Shadow Communities and Local Government Secretary Caroline Flint points out: "Councils are duty-bound to publish statutory notices and could end up spending more on newspaper advertising."

So why is Pickles doing this? Could it be that he thinks it will make an easy headline-grabber for the right wing press to latch onto and applaud, lazily describing it as a cut in needless local expenditure of taxpayers' hard earned cash? Or could it be he's trying to put a gag on the rising voice of descent from local authorities reeling from the savage cuts they're being expected to deliver? This is a very likely reason when you consider that the policy includes the banning of material "constituting a political statement or being a commentary on a contentious area of public policy."

Whatever the reasons it does seem at odds with the so-called localsim agenda. Imposing a ruling as draconian as this is hardly an example of a bottom-up approach.

And what would Pickles himself rather public money be spent on? Well, we get some idea from one of his first actions as Minister. On entering DCLG HQ, he ordered a portrait of the Queen to be purchased and hung in the reception area. How was it funded? Well as the Department's press release proudly stated, "through savings made by consolidating seven sets of papers and periodicals for ministers and special advisers." Good to see so-called efficiency savings being put to such good use!

From his clamping down on periodicals, newspapers and various other forms of written communications I can only come to the conclusion Pickles is not a keen reader. No wonder he doesn't seem troubled by the closure of public libraries. Unfortunately this probably doesn't mean we'll be saved from his ghost written autobiography in a few years time. Now there's one book burning I wouldn't mind going to.

Cameron tries to pull a fast one

Former England cricketer Darren Gough has confirmed that he was asked by the Prime Minister to stand as the Tory candidate in the forthcoming Barnsley Central by-election.

This may surprise some but as a Talk Sport presenter, I'm sure Gough possesses many of the attributes highly sought after by the Tories. In fact, if that's what attracted Cameron he should look no further than one of Gough's new colleagues. No doubt Andy Gray's progressive views would  run with the grain of Tory policy.

Anyway far be it for Tories to rely on the gimmick of calling on a celebrity to stand in a constituency that isn't exactly in their heartland. Gough's profile since his sporting career hasn't only been enhanced by his radio presenting duties, he's also a former winner of Strictly Come Dancing.

Thankfully the former bowler has politely declined the PM's invitation. Although he has said that he'll campaign for whoever stands as the Party's candidate. The seat has been left vacant after Eric Illsley, who had already had the Labour whip removed from him, resigned over expenses misdemeanours. Cricketers of course are renowned for their honesty when it comes to handling money.

At least Gough's decision not to stand will spare us tiresome quips from the Commons floor:
"He's bowled a fast one there,"
"Owzat for a delivery,"
"I've faced some spin in my time but even Shane Warne would be proud of that one!"
or perhaps, "I thought there were six balls in an over but for the Labour Party there's only one Balls and it's all over!"

Oh what mirth we've all been spared. Not that I've given it any thought you understand.

He would have followed a grand tradition of top sportsmen standing as Tory candidates. There was fellow England cricketer Ted Dexter who stood but lost out on the Cardiff South-East seat in 1964, Olympic gold medallist Seb Coe who was MP for Falmouth for five years before he lost his seat. He was later to take his seat in the House of Lords and play a key role in landing us with the 2012 Olympics. And who could forget member of the British fencing team, Oswald Mosley...

Murdoch's monopoly, TV racism and Jimmy Carr's big wax face

The launch of Sky Atlantic is yet more proof, as if any were needed, that the Competition Commission needs to investigate Murdoch's media monopoly.

As I wrote on these pages a couple of weeks ago, the BSkyB merger bid by the Murdoch owned News Corporation, has been recommended referral to the Commission by Ofcom but Culture Secretary and friend of the Murdochs, Jeremy Hunt seems strangely reluctant to do so.

Now it seems if you want to watch your favourite TV series from old favourites such as The Sopranos and Curb Your Enthusiasm to hotly anticipated new arrivals like Boardwalk Empire and the latest series of Mad Men, you're going to have to switch to Sky to see them. I'm on Virgin Media and the only way I can get Sky Atlantic at present is by changing my supplier. Apparently the opening up of the markets is all about choice. The choice here seems to be either buying Sky or not watching what you want to watch.

Well I refuse to switch to Sky and will therefore likely have to wait months to watch the likes of Boardwalk Empire, Mad Men series 5, and some intriguing looking cop drama starring Tom Selleck and Marky Mark's older brother from New Kids Off the Block, until they're released on DVD.

In the meantime I'll have to get through the long winter evening watching edifying documentaries on BBC4, reruns of Family Guy on BBC3 or drive myself into a deep depression with endless news coverage. I'm sure there are those that would point out that I don't have to watch telly and could do something more worthwhile, to which I'd say: "Sod off, it's February, I just want to curl up on my sofa and be entertained."

Having been off travelling for the first few weeks of this year, I arrived back to find the emergence of Sky Atlantic had considerably reduced my chances of being entertained. It's not helped by the fact that British TV all of a sudden seems to have become a bit more racist - if we're not expected to howl with laughter at the funny traveller types in My Big Fat Gypsy Wedding there's always a bit of good old fashioned jingoism on offer courtesy of Top Gear. But if I'm not feeling up for a bit of casual racism what choice have I got?

One programme I thought looked vaguely promising was Channel 4's new weekly satirical current affairs show 10 O'Clock Live. However, they've taken the format and presenters that didn't particularly work the first time when they tried them on election night - mainly because of too much Jimmy Carr - and come up with something that lumbers somewhere uncomfortably in between TFI Friday and Newsnight.

The main problem is they've decided to try and make it oh so achingly hip and given the four presenters - Lauren Laverne, Charlie Brooker, David Mitchell and Jimmy Carr - makeovers that make them look like clone versions of their actual selves.

Carr, looks particularly sinister. He already looked like a scary waxwork doll from a Hammer Horror Movie. Now at any moment you expect him to melt under the studio lights and for wires to spark out of his head causing his whole elegantly tailored suit to catch fire. That would probably be preferable to the guff he actually comes out with. Talking about the Torres transfer to Chelsea he said it cost him £50m to go from Liverpool to London. "The price of train fares these days!" He quipped. Admittedly not such a bad joke, only it wasn't because he'd fluffed his line live on air. And that's from the stand-up of the bunch.

The usually talented presenter Laverne seems reduced to pouting and patting the boys on the back saying, "well done guys" every time they make a funny. Yeah well done guys, well done for trying at least.

The fact that it's filmed live just seems to crank up the potential for fluffing their delivery. Supposedly the theory was it would lead to more spontaneity and hilariousness would ensue. But it all comes across as terribly overly rehearsed to the point where even the reliable wit Charlie Brooker comes across panicked. He must be thinking, "Who did this to me? I've become everything I hate. It must just be a bad dream. Next thing I know they'll be dressing me in purple and getting me to shout about cheaper car insurance alongside a puppet in my own image. Hang on, I am a puppet in my own image! Why can't I wake up!"

The most serious it gets current affairs wise is when David Mitchell chairs a panel debate. Last week it was on the privatisation of our forests. Only he didn't really chair it as such, just chipped in desperately from time to time, while two right wing men shouted over a woman from 38 Degrees.

The most cringe worthy moment was watching Jimmy Carr smarm over a solar researcher more or less taking the piss out of every single word she said. Maybe he's merely using humour to divert from the fact that if some such solar catastrophe (as she would have explained more clearly if he'd allowed her to) did ever occur, he'd be more at risk from having his big face melted than most normal humans.

The only person that comes out of this with any dignity is Armando Iannucci. I mean he didn't have anything to do with 10 O'Clock Live but it's obviously trying to live up to his far superior Saturday Night Armistice series. He must be thinking, "It wasn't as easy as we made it look after all. I must be bloody brilliant." Maybe he should bring it back. Then again maybe he shouldn't. After all, in the future any programmes worth watching will be exclusively bought up and we'll only have access to them if we buy a lifetime subscription fee to Sky Everything.

The flowers of Manchester

6 February is a poignant date in the footballing calendar, particularly if like me you're a Manchester United fan, as it marks the anniversary of the Munich air disaster.

On this day 53 years ago United players Roger Byrne, Geoff Bent, Eddie Colman, Duncan Edwards, Mark Jones, David Pegg, Tommy Taylor and Liam Whelan, along with club secretary, Walter Crickmer, trainer Tom Curry and coach Bert Whalley, as well as eight journalists, two crew members and two other passengers, were involved in a plane crash that would claim all of their lives.

The Busby Babes line up for what was to be their final match

The squad of the time, which was affectionately known as The Busby Babes, was all but destroyed on that snowy field outside Munich airport. Tributes to what many still claim was the greatest ever English footballing side will often be paid at this time of year. This was particularly true three years ago when, to commemorate the 50th anniversary of the disaster, the Manchester Derby was played out in unmarked, logo-free strips reminiscent of the time.

Manchester United football club, or more rather the major corporate international machine it has become, has seen fit to pay respect in various forms in recent years. A long overdue testimonial in 1998 to raise funds for the surviving families, while the 50th anniversary saw the official opening of the Munich Tunnel that runs along the South Stand of the Old Trafford stadium. There is also a sizeable exhibition dedicated to the memory of the crash in the club's museum and a memorial plaque with the names of the players and backroom staff that died is embedded high on a wall outside the 'Theatre of Dreams' below a clock that is forever frozen at 3.04pm, 6th Feb 1958.

On-line tributes are also paid on manutd.com and you can even see footage of the Babes' last match in Belgrade, if you're prepared to subscribe to MUTV that is!

I recently read Jeff Connor's revealing "The Lost Babes: Manchester United and the Forgotten Victims of Munich." In it, Connor makes a good case that these tributes have only been paid when it's suited the club and often, as was the case with the testimonial, with some degree of reluctance. In short, only when they have deemed it as a good marketing opportunity.

The book devotes its chapters to the stories behind the young players who were to have their promising careers cut short in Munich. There are first hand accounts given by surviving players such as Harry Gregg and Albert Scanlon and the families of the players. There is not a great deal about the crash itself but instead it concentrates more on its legacy. Overall I was struck by how the club have profited from the myth of Munich while not doing nearly enough to look after the families of the dead and surviving players.

Take the 40th anniversary testimonial. This only occurred it seems from pressure being put on the club by the surviving players through Gordon Taylor the chief executive of the Professional Footballers' Association. Only then was it made possible by combining it with the return of Eric Cantona shortly after his sudden retirement from the game. Eventually the testimonial match was postponed until 18 August rather then February because of King Eric's film acting commitments. Three weeks after the testimonial, Taylor in his role of chair of the Munich testimonial committee, received an invoice for £90,555.01 for the Frenchman's appearance and expenses.

In the end the testimonial did raise virtually £1 million that was split equally between those who survived and the immediate relatives of those who died. It does seem to be generally acknowledged that Cantona's appearance had a big bearing on so much being raised but why didn't the club stump up for his fee? I mean it's less than half of Wayne Rooney's wages nowadays!

When you look at how much money is around in football these days it does seem scandalous that the families had to wait so long to receive anything like the amount of compensation they should have received. After all many had left behind young families, with two of the players' wives being pregnant at the time. Unfortunately back then there wasn't the embarrassment of riches in the game even for the likes of Manchester United. However, I'm still left with the feeling that more could have, and certainly should have, been done sooner.

Gary Neville, himself part of Fergie's Fledglings, retired this week after a long and illustrious career. He said he was fortunate enough to have "fulfilled every dream I've ever had." Who knows what Red Nev will go on to do. Maybe he'll become a pundit or go into management. The truth is, financially at least, he's set up for life whatever he decides to do. His situation could not be further removed from the families of those that survived or had their short lives so cruelly taken away in Munich.

Angry at Cameron's ill-timed comments on multiculturalism

You're the leader of the country, a country that prides itself on tolerance, this is threatened by one of the biggest fascist protests to date on the streets of Luton, so what do you do?

Do you make a speech sending out a message that Britain doesn't subscribe to these views of hate and the targeting of particular people because of their ethnicity or beliefs? Do you make it clear that the views of this ultra right wing minority are in no way representative of the views of the nation?

Well, that's what I would have liked our Prime Minister to have come out and said today as the English Defence League were set to hold their biggest march to date, billed as a national demonstration by the Islamophobic, racist group.

But what did you choose to do instead David? You chose today of all days to attack the country's Muslim community and spout your views about multiculturalism not working. Idiot.

It shows just how out of touch with society he really is. Maybe multiculturalism looks like it's not working through the narrow windows of your Ivory Towers but ask the majority of people in Birmingham, Leeds, Leicester, Bradford and (yes even) Luton, and then they'll tell you how well they get along fine living side by side in their diverse communities.

Of course there are problems and it's your job to help overcome those but that's not going to happen if you make people feel more marginalised. Sure there will always unfortunately be a small-minded minority that have their fear and hate reinforced by reading nothing but The Sun and The Daily Mail and watching too much television. If they actually got off their backsides and engaged with the outside world more or even woe betide read a book (which will be made harder now with cuts to libraries) they might learn that their lives can be enriched by living in a diverse society. Yes, extremism exists, but not nearly on the sort of scale the mass media market would have you believe.

The only dangerous extremists on view today, were the racist thugs marching in Luton. Instead of condemning  their actions, Cameron's focussed on speaking out against what he sees as the threat of radical Muslim extremism. His timing couldn't have been worse and the likes of the EDL will no doubt see it as an endorsement of their views.

If proof were needed of this EDL founder Stephen Lennon has said today of Cameron's comments: "He's now saying what we're saying. He knows his base."

Maybe we shouldn't be surprised to hear the Tory leader espousing such views. Perhaps he's merely seeking to throw a bone to some of the party's neo-nazi Euro allies.

However, even from within his own party there have been warnings against casual anti-Islamic views becoming too socially acceptable. Conservative Chair Baroness Warsi recently raised concerns at  "fashionable Islamophobia" becoming rife amongst the dinner party chattering classes in an interview in the Observer. It seems the PM is failing to take such views seriously. Maybe it's because she's only a woman after all.

The thugs behind the St George's cross masks may have lack of education as an excuse but our educated political elite have no such excuses for pandering to such hateful ignorance.

If you want to find out more about this issue and how you can help campaign against fascism I'd suggest Hope Not Hate's website as a good starting point.

Top speakers call for tax justice

A really top class line up of speakers at PCS's 'Alternative to public sector cuts' meeting at Parliament today gave some fresh insights into the tax justice debate.

PCS general secretary Mark Serwotka kicked off proceedings praising campaign group UK Uncut for their direct action against major corporations responsible for billions in tax dodging. He called for a coordinated response to government cuts and stressed the need for the TUC organised national demonstration on 26 March to be as well supported as possible.

Frances O'Grady, everybody's favourite senior TUC spokesperson, highlighted a new Your chance to be Chancellor initiative launched on the Treasury's website today. 14 to 18 year olds have the opportunity to say how they'd tackle the deficit. Not surprisingly there isn't an option there for them to state they'd cut the tax gap although there is the chance to write your own message on there. Usually of course I would never condone pretending to be a teenager on-line (for very obvious reasons) but this might just be an excusable exception.

She went on to decry the false economy of cutting tax staff that bring in on average £650,000 in revenue every year and closing local HMRC offices in the name of deficit reduction.

A number of MPs were present at the meeting including Kelvin Hopkins who said what was needed was growth not cuts. Other MPs present included John McDonnell, Jeremy Corbyn, Anne Begg, Liz Kendall and Mark Durkan.

Speaking on behalf of the National Pensioners' Convention, Dot Gibson criticised successive government's privatisation of public services that had left carer services in turmoil. Referring to the tax debate she called for more transparency by opening the books of corporations so we can see they pay what they should. Alison Garnham of the Child Poverty Action Group said the cuts were hitting the youngest children the hardest and that it wasn't fair that the poorest were paying while bankers continued to escape paying their fair share.

War on Want speaker Ruth Tanner highlighted the staggering £250bn being lost to developing countries due to the tax dodging of international corporations. Referring to the forthcoming G20 she said the UK was key to creating a fair tax system and also applauded the campaigning efforts of UK Uncut saying that she was pleased George Osborne had been awarded the tax shirker prize because it showed people now understood the political significance.

No tax justice meeting would be complete without the tax guru himself, Richard Murphy. Apparently things are going well in the Channel Islands, he knows this because he's public enemy number one there, but the state of play elsewhere isn't as good as the likes of Dave Hartnett, the HMRC chief, or George Osborne would have you believe.

He was critical of the so-called 'tax information exchange' agreement we signed with Liechenstein to much fanfare from the government. He explained that British individuals with offshore accounts there had been told that if they disclosed these they would avoid prosecution. Not only would they avoid prosecution but they would only have to pay 10% of what they owed which incidentally is the minimum amount of what you'd be charged with if you had made an error your tax return. But these weren't people who had made genuine errors these were criminals. Yet they are treated with just the same leniency.

Murphy then exposed the fallacy of the deal struck by the UK government with Switzerland in November. The Swiss said to UK businesses with accounts there we'll let you keep your secrecy as long as you pay 35% tax to the UK (part of which is paid back to the Swiss for declaring it). Even if these companies do pay 35% that's still a lot less than they should be paying if they were to pay the top rate of tax in the UK.

The main message of his speech was that while the government is doing everything it can for wealthy individuals and corporations by creating "escape routes for the wealthy", ordinary people are expected to pay more through VAT, rising taxes and benefit cuts. He said that he feared for our communities warning, "It's amounting to a massive redistribution from the poorest and middle income in the community to the richest in our community."

Overall it was an inspiring meeting that left all those present in no doubt that we're not all in this together and that it's up to campaigners like us to deliver the fairness because the government certainly has no desire to. The time has come for those who can afford to pay to start doing so rather than forcing the burden on people that can't afford it.