10 year old boy Vs The World

This short film called warlord is an amusing critique of Western society using the medium of tribal mysticism and a 10 year old protagonist, whose outsider perspective provides an alternative view of the mundane modern world.


 

Sandwich special ops

-->

The biggest village in England bore witness to an unusual new phenomenon that signifies a significant landmark in the history of the cultural integration of and ideological submission to American fast food culture in England. On a rainy afternoon in Cranleigh, Sussex on the last day of April 2008 a SUBWAY sandwich shop was opened

I had nothing to do that day, and like most people in the world, am drawn to the promise of a free meal like a vulture to a carcass. It was in the manner of a vulture that I casually circled the newly built Subway in Cranleigh, waiting for its first opening when for one hour all customers would receive a free 6 inch sub and drink. My strolling past became less casual when I realised how many people were congregating outside the establishment, and suddenly my desire not to seem like a cheapskate, unemployed jackal hunting for scraps was replaced by a primitive instinct to get to the carcass before the other scavengers.

An old man was already arguing with 6 college kids in front of him, attempting to appeal to their sympathies, saying he was busy and needed to get the food quickly. He soon abandoned this angle and pulled rank with his age, furiously scathing the youths for their lack of respect,“a man of my age shouldn’t have to stand in the rain like this. It’s criminal!” The old lion, would have to wait his turn to feed. Younger and stronger rivals had beat him to the kill. The rain fell heavily but the crowd grew, undeterred by the weather, pushing and jostling to get closer. All worried that these other unworthy punters would get the free food that was rightfully and deservedly theirs!

I started to feel more and more ashamed. What was I doing standing shoulder to shoulder with these crazed villagers? it was like a queue for aid distribution in an impoverished third world nation. Suddenly this sleepy old fashioned English village had thrown rural manners and respect for personal space to the curb and was stamping on its face for a poor quality sandwich that would most likely give them the runs. A journalist from the local paper had come to document the spectacle. As he raised a camera to photograph the squealing swine crawling over one another, I covered my face in shame. Finally the doors were open and a mad rush of villagers of all ages, predominantly students from the nearby private school, all rushed forward salivating, their eyes rolling like those of cattle being forced into an abattoir. Finally I had my meatball sub, and like an ape with stolen fruit in hand I battled against the stampede to eat in the safety of my car, where none of the lunatics could get my food! As I left the building I saw a squad car pulling up to control the ever increasing crowd. I have never seen a gathering of any kind in a British village that was not communal in nature, but here the opening of a single fast food restaurant, with the promise of free food to the inhabitants of a relatively wealthy village reduced men to beasts in seconds.

Free giveaways and bargains have a tendency to bring out the beast in the British public, but this event indicated something slightly different. What occurs frequently in the culture of urban environments, occurred in a rural context immediately when an urban establishment was opened in the country. Had the local deli offered free sandwiches I doubt the police would have been called to control the crowds, perhaps the recognized brand name of subway was identified by the villagers in a different way, an impersonal way, in which the manners and customs they would normally uphold in the process of acquiring lunch were immediately discarded?

Mannequin chainsaw massacre

NICK PARK MEETS DAVID LYNCH!

David Firth is the twisted mind behind internet comic phenomena such as the peculiar 'salad fingers' animations and the amusing comedy adventures of young juvenile delinquent 'Devo' the chav. Firth created this artistic stop frame animation yesterday which indicates he may be taking his work in a more artistic direction. He maintains the dark and disorientating atmosphere of his previous videos, as well as the imagery of sex, mutilation and death with an underlying hint of childish humour. (watch in high quality)

Challenging the Media War on Chavez.

Hugo Chavez - President of Venezuela

I had been planning a trip to Venezuela for some time now, I’d been reading about the history of the country; power handed from one group to the next, the natives and imported negro slaves being reduced, like the land itself, to commodities to be exploited by Europeans. The country has fascinated me since childhood, when I read Arthur Conan Doyle’s The Lost World; conjuring up an image of Mount Roraima covered in luscious green Amazonian vegetation as far as the eye can see, rich with unusual and exotic animals. But this image of the country has been replaced in more recent years by that depicted by the media. I am filled with doubt and concern when I try to learn more about the reality of life in Venezuela under the rule of Hugo Chavez. There seem to be only two types of information distributed, both heavily coloured by emotional defence of deeply held ideological beliefs, whose assumptions are often so far apart, that it makes the work of a journalist attempting to fill in the gaps rather difficult.

So it was with a certain sense of optimism and hope that I stepped through the doors of the Venezuelan embassy in London on a pleasant April evening where his Excellency the Venezuelan ambassador Samuel Moncada was to give a speech. A speech in which I hoped the record would be set straight in regards to the relationship between Chavez and the people of Venezuela. I have no doubt that just as Chavez and Moncada say, the Western media is biased against his government. The night marked the 6th anniversary of the military coup that attempted to overthrow the government of President Hugo Chávez and to reverse Venezuela's social gains. Since then there have been ongoing attempts to isolate the Chávez government, including through the dissemination of misinformation. Sure enough, nearly all the news I have heard with regards to Venezuela has been negative; Student protests, widespread hunger, violation of the right to freedom of expression, exchanging insults with the king of Spain, dodgy oil deals with everyone from mayor of London Ken Livingston to President of Iran Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. Most of all - personal attacks on Chavez, who, if certain aspects of the media are to be believed, is taking away the rights of Venezuelans and destroying rival parties. I am assured by Samuel Moncada and the secretary and founder of the Venezuela Information Centre, Gordon Hutchinson, that this is all lies. Chavez, they say, is merely proposing a coalition of all the left wing parties, but opposition still exists and he allows free elections. The media say that Chavez has made a huge mistake allowing oil to be sold so cheaply in his country, and that many are starving, Mr. Moncada and Mr. Hutchinson say that social and economic progress has never been so advanced, and that the majority of their energy needs are met by hydro electric power, and that they are progressive in respect to investing in renewable energy technology.

Samuel Moncada - Venezuelan Ambassador

For every unsubstantiated claim made by Western journalists, both of liberal and conservative persuasions, there is a Venezuelan official or Chavez admiring socialist defender to call it lies and offer their own propaganda. To sort the truth from lies from half way across the world is virtually impossible for two reasons; firstly that the Western media is a propaganda tool obviously used as a means of perpetuating Western ideology and defending a global free market, secondly that some aspects of the media of Venezuela and many of the alternative sources of information such as the lecture of that evening, are merely a forum for socialist back-slapping and feeding the fires of anti capitalist conspiracy theories. The speakers at this evening's lecture were seemingly honest in that they acknowledged there are people in Venezuela, particularly middle class whites, who oppose Chavez, but they said as well as anti socialist students there are pro Chavez students. Their main concern was not just that the Western media makes up lies but more that it disproportionately reports political events in Venezuela with the intention of rallying Western support for deposing Chavez as a dictator despite the fact the vast majority of Venezuelans love him.

The evening ends with questions from the floor. Several people stand up to make vaguely relevant points about biased media broadcasts and socialist uprising in South America. There are also some contributions from bizarre individuals eager for any opportunity to shout their heads off about the evils of capitalism; none asks a proper question, which irritated me. I wanted to ask about speculations of Chavez being involved with the FARC and claims in the American media that evidence had been found on a laptop proving Chavez’ secret involvement with that Colombian terrorist organisation. Mr. Moncada doesn’t address this issue, but he makes it clear anyone who attempts to describe Colombia and Venezuela as being clearly defined separate nations with separate cultural traditions is misinformed; "they are as one" he exclaims, and many of the members of the Venezuelan government are Colombian or have Colombian ancestry. I walk away from the lecture even more confused than before. I respect Chavez’ government for making a stand against the Northern American superpower and raising the standard of living in Venezuela for those at the bottom of the pile but I have my suspicions that like in many Socialist countries, the voices of some citizens in Venezuela are being suppressed and the truth distorted amidst the barrage of lies being thrown back and forth by the government and their enemies, specifically European and North American media organisations.

“Come to Venezuela and see for yourself that the media are free and we have fully functional education and health care schemes” they say at the embassy. I intend to do just that.

(I travelled to Venezuela later that year)

Cable Cut Conspiracy

The series of mysterious undersea telecommunications cable cuts have sparked a frenzy of shady internet conspiracy theories. There is, as you’d expect, no proof America cut the cables, indeed there is evidence to suggest the cuts were all made accidentally or by natural causes - coincidentally in close proximity - and within a few days of each other. But the fact remains America had both the means and the motives to disrupt telecommunications in the Middle East. This is a list of the cuts along with a map showing their geographical proximity.

Cable Type: Location: Date

FLAG telecoms Persian Gulf, 23^rd JAN

SEA-ME-WE4 Marseilles to Egypt, 30^th JAN

FLAG telecom Alexandria, Egypt, 30th JAN

FLAG telecom Dubai, 1^st FEB

Suez canal-Sri Lanka, 1^st FEB

Qatar-UAE 3^rd FEB

Persian Gulf –Iran, 4^th FEB

SEA-ME-WE-4 Penang, Malaysia, 4^th FEB

It didn’t take long for people to notice that the cuts all happened around Islamic countries, so finger pointing to America was swiftly followed by stories of Islamic fundamentalist frog men and dolphins with lasers attached to their skulls. What an image! a blood thirsty religious freak with scimitar between his teeth, plunging to the depths of the ocean in the name of information restriction. That’s even less likely than cybernetic mutant marine mercenaries. The cuts have done little but slowed down phone and Internet services in the Middle East and South East Asia - the beauty of the internet is of course that the traffic will automatically be rerouted. That was the network’s original purpose when designed by the US military as Arpanet. If it’s supposed to be capable of surviving nuclear war, then a few anchors or mutant dolphins aren’t going to make a blind bit of difference to its global stability.

Mahesh Jaishanker, an executive director for Du, said, “The submarine cable cuts in FLAG Europe-Asia cable 8.3 km away from Alexandria, Egypt and SEA-ME-WE 4 affected at least 60 million users in India, 12 million in Pakistan, 6 million in Egypt and 4.7 million in Saudi Arabia.”

Before I focus on the likelihood of an American sabotage, I’ll give a run down of official statements attributed to each of the cuts. Omantel telecoms, the largest Oman telecom company blamed a tropical storm, DU.AI , the 2nd largest telecom co. in the UAE blamed ship anchors as did FLAG. The cause of the FLAG cable cut on 23rd January has been determined to be a ship’s anchor, reportedly found abandoned near the cable. However others remain a mystery, particularly those in the Persian Gulf, although there were reports of a small earthquake in the region measuring 4.9 on the Richter scale occurring at 09:03 on 3rd February which may have caused the cuts. A 2006 quake in Taiwan cut deep sea cables, although it was a damn sight larger. So I suppose the jury is still out on that one. As for the cuts in the Med near Egypt, the Egyptian authorities have surveillance footage of the area the cut occurred and have confirmed there were no boats whose anchors could have been responsible.

Looking at it from America’s point of view, the only country whose communications systems are worth attacking is Iran. Admittedly the main American allies in the region, Iraq and Israel, are unaffected. Slightly fishy, if you’ll excuse the pun, but Iran lost less than 20% of networks - not even in the top 10 nations affected. Internet conspiracies centred on the fact that one Iranian router was down which led to theories that the entire nation was down. In reality, only Iran’s Kish island was cut off. Which is a very significant occurrence, considering Kish Island is the location for the highly anticipated Iranian oil bourse.

So now the conspiracy theories suddenly seem a hell of a lot more plausible. The launch of the Iranian Oil Bourse, a marketplace for oil, gas and various petro-chemicals trading exclusively in non-dollars is a severe threat to the US economy. The bourse was scheduled for launch between 1-11 February 2008 on Kish Island, which was delayed when the area was cut off. The Bourse rescheduled for opening on 27th Feb. 08. The Bourse has the potential to take focus away from Western trading centres, but it requires access to internet and phones. Russia, Japan and China are among the big players who would certainly use the oil bourse to lower their enormous dollar reserves and diversify them with Euros, as protection from the depreciation of the dollar. The cuts may have scared this lot though, if they think trade with Iran is going to trigger an American special ops hissy fit, involving a nonsensical attack on global communications systems, maybe they won’t bother.

William Clark, an American security expert, predicted that if Iran threatened the hegemony of the U.S. dollar in the international oil market, the White House would immediately order a military attack. It may be a coincidence but is certainly still worth noting that Saddam Hussein threatened to value oil against the Euro instead of the dollar back in the early nineties. Things didn’t work out so well for him after that. Economic apocalyptic prophecies predict that the dollar is going to be as valuable as bog roll in the future, but there’s no way the US are going to let that happen without a fight. I wouldn’t hesitate to attribute the need to secure the international value of the dollar as a major motivation for going to war with Iraq.

“How the hell are the U.S supposed to stage an international underwater sabotage without being noticed?” I hear you cry, it sounds like something from James Bond, so it’s only right we should be sceptical, but evidence suggests such an operation is well within their means and has been for decades. Operation Ivy Bells used US technology from the 1970s - it was a pod designed to attach to underwater cables, tap information, and detach from the cable and fall to the sea bed when they were raised for maintenance. Submarines capable of using this technology include the USS Parche and USS Halibut both built in the 1960’s and the USS Jimmy Carter of the SEAWOLF Class is a submarine capable of cutting the cables and remaining undetected.

The U.S/Israeli alliance already have the USS San Jacinto, equipped with a missile system that could be deployed in the event of conflict between Iran and Israel, docked at Haifa Port. There is no doubt then that they have the technology and the motive to stage such sabotage, but why would the American military go to such lengths to damage a communications system that they developed and is widely used as a tool for distribution of American intellectual property?

The Pentagon’s Information Operation Roadmap states that the Internet’s potential for free speech is in direct opposition to their goals. It clearly states that the Internet needs to be dealt with as though it were an enemy “weapons system.” This seems insane, but it is exactly what is detailed in the Pentagon document, obtained through a freedom of information request. Much of the document is blacked out, god only knows what else they have in store, but quotes like the one below give us an idea of the lengths the Department of Defence will go to.

“We Must Fight the Net. DoD is building an information-centric force. Networks are increasingly the operational center of gravity, and the Department must be prepared to fight the net.”

Maybe America had this whole thing planned out. I doubt it, but even if they did, it doesn’t make much difference, because Iran will have their oil bourse another time. I don’t think it really matters whether the conspiracy theories are true (it wouldn’t surprise me if they were), but the point of this whole confusion is that it can be done, and in the future we may see the internet being made into a target, in an attempt to restrict the flow of information in and out of specific areas.

Youth Gone Wild - Violent Crime in the UK

You’ve probably seen the way the media have been crazy over youth crime for the past few months, but it’s hard to tell exactly what the deal is with young men in England being so prone to violent crime, what with the government telling us that crime is getting lower while public perception sees it is worse than ever.

This January’s headlines seem to have set the precedent for 2008, with 7 serious assaults committed by teenagers on victims whose ages ranged from 13 to 19 years.

•  1st January – Henry Bolombi, 17 of Wyldfield Gardens, Lower Edmonton was stabbed to death near his home in Edmonton north London.

•  14th January – a 16 year old girl was taken into an abandoned house in Tottenham by a gang of youths who raped her then burned her skin with caustic soda, police speculated this may have been an attempt to remove any DNA evidence. A 17 year old boy was charged in relation to the incident.
  
•  16th January – A 13 year old girl suffered injuries to her leg and chest after being attacked with a craft knife. Her assailant, a 14 year old boy, had taken the knife from the art department at the sacred heart Roman Catholic school in Camberwell, London.
• 21st January – 14 year old Jessica Knight was left fighting for her life in Manchester children’s hospital after she was found with multiple stab wounds by a passer by in Astley Park, in Chorley, Lancashire.
•  21st January – 18 year old Louis Boduka, a student who was studying art and design at Southgate college was stabbed to death and another seriously injured outside shops in silver street, Edmonton. Detectives are investigating the possibility that the attack was connected to the murder of Henry Bolombi. Three youths aged 20, 16 and 14 were bailed to return in February, following their arrest and questioning at North London police stations.
• 24th January – Alvin Cutts, 16, was seriously injured when a group of six teenagers attacked him, smashing his face with an iron bar, in Tewkesbury, Gloucestershire.
• 26th January – Fuad Buraleh, 19 from Hayes, Middlesex, died from head wounds after an assault with a blunt instrument, in Ealing, West London.

The tabloids have been wallowing in the horror of these incidents, spitting their misdirected hatred and confusion at whatever scapegoats come to mind. The home office statistics show that the perception of crime is out of step with the reality but even they have had to acknowledge the fact that gun and knife related violent crimes are becoming more common place, and after all, these are the only crimes that really matter. Who gives a shit if the police are getting better at catching speeding motorists and shop lifters, when the streets are so unsafe that even Home Secretary Jacqui Smith was forced to admit (damaging the carefully spun web of New Labour lies) that she is afraid to walk the streets alone at night in parts of London. Fortunately for her, they managed to re-spin it later with a transparent statement about Smith visiting a kebab shop in Peckham.

A quarter of all gun crimes last year were committed by under 18’s according to a channel 4 documentary last month which also claimed that in Glasgow, children as young as five are joining gangs. The British Crime Survey statistics for 2006/7 showed that young men aged 16-24 were most at risk, with 13.8% experiencing a violent crime. I know from experience that being a young male makes you a target for gang violence as well as police oppression, but despite the fact that the media are demonising the youth of Britain, the BCS stats show that the majority of the British public (75%), are not confident that the criminal justice system treats young offenders fairly.

So we all know that young men are the most likely victims of gang violence, and also of the misguided police procedures and reactionary media responses that arise from it, but it is also the case that young men are the most likely cause of this phenomenon. An issue that prevents the problem being addressed effectively is that the most outspoken people on the matter are those who have the least understanding of it. Misinformation is widespread and figures are often taken out of context. In 2005 a survey carried out by MORI for the youth justice board, found that 32% of children said they had carried a knife in the last 12 months, but 85% of those said they did so only for protection. The fact is, that carrying a knife, despite police warnings, is a form of protection, more often than an assault weapon. As a youth I was myself challenged by a gang on an occasion I happened to be carrying a blade so I whipped it out and saw them off. Without it I have no doubt I would have been beaten and mugged, possibly worse. However, those found carrying weapons are thought to be aggressors when usually they are nothing more than scared children.

The use of the word gang is dangerous and inappropriate in most cases. If I had a son, I would be far happier he was out with a group of friends than alone, because in a group they are far less vulnerable. Young men who take initiative to protect themselves from changes in society that are beyond their control (rising crime and immigration) are being made to carry the cross for legislative mistakes made before they were even born. Roger Grimshaw, research director at the Centre for Crime and Justice Studies at King's College London, agrees. "What we might be talking about is a few friends or acquaintances getting into a conflict," he says. "It's talking it up to say 'gang'."

Identifying the source of this change is a politically loaded subject that should be approached with caution. The right wing press point the finger to immigration, break down of the family unit, rap music and video games. There is a lot of truth in these arguments, but the fact that all these have been about for decades does not explain the more recent acceleration in violent crime committed by teenagers. The liberal press and politicians blame the legal system and the police for victimising young men, following the idea that if you give a dog a bad name it will live up to it.

Despite the questionable intentions of the press and politicians I believe there may be elements of truth to these arguments, but they are by no means an explanation. There are, however, some people like psychologist and doctor, Leonard Sax, who have identified what I believe is the first hurdle at which young men fall and turn to gang violence, 21st century British education. Dr.Sax made this statement to The Times.

“The message that boys are getting from the age of 5 is that doing what the teacher wants is un-masculine. Let boys tap the table; let them jump up from their seat when asked to spell a word. It won’t disturb the boy next to them, Girls are bothered by extraneous noise levels 10 to 40 times lower than the levels that bother men.”

The educational system is clearly biased toward female learning, the competitive instinct is being suppressed and young men are being thrown out of school so that schools can meet targets for examination grades. It's better from the governor’s perspective to “ask them to leave” than be the school who has students achieving low marks which reflect badly on their teaching abilities. There is of course no reason for everyone to be an academic, but what with many retail and manual labour occupations being taken up by eager foreign workers, usually willing to work for less, the prospects for those entering the world of employment without skills or qualifications are grim.

Working class white boys are the worst achievers in modern education with the exception of gypsies. The reason for this is hard to determine, but we can be certain a large number of young men are being forced to leave school without any qualifications and little hope of employment, feeling nothing but resentment for a society that pushes them around like animals, labels them scum, kicks them out of school, takes their DNA on record and gives them ASBO’s for hanging out with their mates.

I certainly don't think new measures like the proposed metal detector gates in schools will do anything to alleviate feelings of victimisation in the minds of Britain's young men.

Shaun Bailey - the Tory tough guy

Shaun Bailey - the Tory tough guy

The fog on the Thames hung over Hammersmith as if from a Dickensian scene. I was out freezing my fingers to the bone, waiting for Shaun Bailey, prospective Conservative MP for North Kensington, who was meeting a mainstream men’s fashion magazine for an interview about his clothing. When, exactly, politicians became associated with style, I don’t know, but that, it seems, is the world we live in now. I took this opportunity during my internship to ask Mr. Bailey a few more pressing questions in an effort to get some insight in to what direction Mr. Cameron was taking the party.

Shaun Bailey is by no means your average Tory. He is a heavy set, bald headed black man, who was brought up by a single Mum in his constituency of North Kensington. He’s is proud to represent the community he grew up in, saying, “I understand it better than I do a community of pig farmers in Berkshire!” Perhaps having a dig at me, A Berkshire country boy, hijacking this photo-shoot for my own unsolicited and unauthorised interview. He claims he avoided the perils of an impoverished black community - drugs and violent crime - by getting involved in the army cadets, which taught him discipline and gave him what he describes as an appreciation for British culture.

I don’t doubt Mr. Bailey when he says he cares about his community; he has worked for years as a social worker and running charities to help people from disadvantaged backgrounds in Britain. Despite his admirable CV, his views come as a surprise on some issues. He says that Labour is ripping off the working class of Britain by making them dependent on the state. In his words, “we’re born with only one instinct, to suck.” I can see where he is coming from, but I wonder what alternatives he could propose to the welfare system.

Youth crime is a major issue to Bailey. He says he was stabbed, that crime is a problem and he blames things like MTV, which he says subjects impressionable young men to graphic sexual imagery, and glamorised violence which encourages dissidence and anti social behaviour. Despite this, he admits to being a fan of MTV bass and challenged me to watch the channel without feeling horny. I think I’ll pass. This struck me as somewhat ironic; I am not keen on MTV myself, and modern society is undoubtedly somewhat desensitised to sexual imagery in the media, but if he hates media institutions that broadcast sexual imagery so much ,what’s he doing on a shoot for a magazine whose front covers are often plastered with the greased up, spread legs of pop stars and actresses?

He has no time for liberal policy on crime, “The liberal democrats are ludicrous!” he says referring to the rival party's policies on crime. Clearly Bailey isn’t a supporter of the softly softly approach on young offenders, but I was unable to pin him down on exactly what measures he would like to see taken to reduce crime. Maybe something along the lines of the military discipline he experienced in his youth? After all, Cameron is calling for a return to conscription.

Race is clearly going to be an issue for a man like Bailey; he just doesn’t fit into the stereotype of a Conservative MP candidate. Race aside, he has an obvious London accent, and an easy-going humorous nature. He says his black mates see him on TV and are amused by his extensive vocabulary and tuxedos, although he admits, he only dresses very smartly when his party require him to, saying “you have to be a team player.” He feels that race is still an issue that needs to be resolved in Britain, supporting the notion of a public apology for the "atrocities of racism", which he believes would not only resolve feelings of victimisation amongst black communities but also would relieve middle class white guilt, which he identifies as being a source of a lot of problems in the nation. But how would yet more grovelling and apology relieve the issue of white guilt?

The photographer had asked him to bring some items with him that he liked, he brought an RC car, a CD of Martin Luther King speeches and most interestingly from my perspective, Frank Miller’s version of Batman “The Dark Knight Returns.” I couldn’t resist asking him about comic books, being a fan myself. His comic book fascination started for him, as with most, as a child. He got a job at a comic book shop on Portobello road (weirdly, so did I), which he said was the best job he could have imagined having (although his Mum was pretty pissed off when his boss used to pay him in comics). I said I was surprised he was a Batman fan, what with Batman being the rich kid of the superhero world; he didn’t seem bothered by this, saying that it was only Miller’s batman that intrigued him, on the grounds that the heroes he prefers are the ones who really "fuck up the villain". It seems you have to be cut throat in modern politics. His favourites in childhood were Hulk and Thor, and he admits that they had two major effects on him; firstly that he did a lot of weights to get beefed up like the toned bodies of his illustrated idols and secondly the idea that those who are strong should protect the weak.

So, is Shaun Bailey a super hero for Black British citizens? His intentions seem sincere, he is well respected within his constituency (several passing joggers and cyclists stop to pay their respects to him, one even asking how he could make a donation to the party, another bursting into a round of applause after overhearing his passionate speech to me and the stylist on the shoot). But I am ever the sceptic, whilst it is refreshing to hear some common sense being spoken from a politician, I get the feeling Cameron is assembling a team of faces that look good as opposed to a team of people regardless of race and gender who are best for the job.

Bailey stresses a difference from his beliefs and that of the Conservative party of the 80's. A Thatcherite he aint. He believes the NHS is a symbol of Britain and is appalled at how the Labour government have constructed a system of targets that are set by people with no real understanding of hospitals. He suggests giving power to the hospitals to run themselves; I inquire whether he supports any system of privatisation of the health service which, to my relief, he denies.

He is an outspoken euro-sceptic, saying that New Labour have put us so far in debt that even the French with their spiralling national debt are warning us,

“When the French say you're in too much debt, you’re in trouble!”

 He doesn’t go in to much detail about his mistrust of Europe, but makes it clear he thinks that European authorities and New Labour are ripping off the British public, and I could see he was pretty angry about that. He say that it is easier to jump onto a band wagon late than to jump from a sinking ship.

One issue which we touched on really intrigued me - getting back onto the subject of crime and the streets, I ask him about the new proposals for stop and search. Although these proposals are being made by Labour, its obvious the Tories will lap them up like a bat at blood. I realise that Bailey is likely to have a far better understanding of the realities of police oppression than me so I was surprised when he said he supported restoring police power for searching.
“You don’t seriously support a return to the suss laws do you?” I asked. His reply was difficult for me to argue with, “We’re the ones who get stopped and searched yeah?” referring to black men,
“but we’re also the ones who get shot and stabbed. I’ve been stabbed, It’s not fun!”