April « 2011 « Labour Uncut

Archive for April, 2011

Put aside the Cleggphobia and then vote No to AV

19/04/2011, 08:07:12 AM

by Jim Murphy

I have stayed out of the debate about the AV referendum until now. I have surprised myself because instinctively I usually know where I stand on all the big issues, but on this I have found it easy to sit it out. There are so many other more pressing issues – a view that I know those involved in both campaigns share. I have waited in the expectation that the pro-AV campaign would make a convincing new argument. They haven’t, so when the referendum comes on May 5^th I have decided to vote No.

There are many people I know who are voting No simply to spite Nick Clegg, but I’m not one of them. This was a really important point that Ed Miliband rightly raised yesterday. To vote against AV to get back at Nick Clegg is a churlish way to conduct politics. A change in the electoral system could be permanent, but say whatever you want about Nick Clegg one thing for sure is that he is certainly temporary – this is probably his last job in frontline British politics. If last year’s post-election political gamble of switching to the Tories’ macro-economic policies turns out to be as bad economics as it is bad politics then it’s questionable whether he’ll even lead his Party into the next election.

So let’s put all the Cleggphobia to one side. My decision is based on the merits of the case. The main reason I have decided to vote ‘No’ is that the supporters of changing the system haven’t made a convincing enough case that this is the right kind of change. They have struggled to make a persuasive argument about why the country’s politics would be better with AV. It may seem unfair, but in all these constitutional debates most of the burden of persuasion falls upon those advocating change – that is certainly my experience with devolution. (more…)

Posted in Uncut | 12 Comments »

Spare a thought for the poor Tory MPs

18/04/2011, 10:02:00 AM

by John Woodcock

Will someone please spare a thought for those poor Conservative MPs? The Liberal Democrats have been so unruly over the last week that the Tories are looking positively collegiate in comparison.

Back when their coalition was formed, Conservative whips no doubt insisted that making nice with a party they despise was a small price to pay for getting the chance to implement a governing programme that remained unmistakably Tory.

And for a while, being civil was made easier by the sight of their new partners soaking up public outrage as the government got on with implementing cuts that “Thatcher only dreamed of”. Not only were the Liberal Democrats locked in the boot of the ministerial Jag (just imagine, if you can, opening a boot and finding an angry Sarah Teather and Julian Huppert inside), but Nick Clegg was gallantly offering to pose as the little statue on its bonnet.

So the vast majority of Tories – many of whom have been denied ministerial office to make way for a Liberal – have spent a whole year biting their tongues and trying to play nice with their new friends.

Then they pop off back to the constituency for the Easter recess and find that the agreement to keep mutual contempt under wraps has been unilaterally cast aside by their junior partners.

Make no mistake, Vince Cable’s open criticism of the prime minister went way beyond the boundary of what would normally be considered acceptable by someone bound by collective responsibility.

It is a statement of the bleeding obvious that Labour’s time in government was not always a model of harmony between ministers. Clare Short repeatedly acted up towards the end. The Eds, Balls and Miliband, are absolutely right to pledge never to go back to the madness of the Blair-Brown squabbles that regularly spilled over into the press.

But even at the height of the bad feeling, no minister openly defied the prime minister like Vince Cable did last week and kept their job. And he was not acting in isolatation. Cable’s salvo came just days after a Liberal assault on the government’s health policy that was triggered by Clegg himself.

It is unclear where the Liberal Democrats go from here, and even whether they will ultimately stick together as a party.

But one thing is clear: Conservative MPs on their return to Westminster are going to be less willing to play the role of happy, Scandinavian-style coalition builders.

If Tory MPs ensconced in their constituencies are prepared to tell the likes of me how fizzing they are about the way the Lib Dems are flouting the coalition agreement, their anger when they get back to the bosom of the 1922 committee will be something to behold.

There is a real danger that the disgruntled Tory right flank may well start demanding the imposition of even more true blue policies to make up for this misbehaviour. The consequences of that for families and businesses across the country could be grim.

John Woodcock is Labour and Cooperative MP for Barrow and Furness and a shadow transport minister.

Posted in Uncut | 3 Comments »

Monday News Review

18/04/2011, 07:10:13 AM

Referendum campaign kicks on

In one of the more curious pairings of the modern political era, David Cameron will today share a platform with the Labour former cabinet heavyweight John Reid as the battle over electoral reform escalates and cuts across party lines. At the same time, the Liberal Democrat cabinet minister Vince Cable will be sitting alongside the Labour leader, Ed Miliband, to make the case for changing the voting system. With 17 days to go to the referendum, politicians are to intensify hostilities in a contest that is too close to call. Tensions within the Coalition – inflamed last week by Mr Cameron’s warning that high immigration had damaged some communities – have been exacerbated by the referendum campaign. The differences were underscored yesterday by rival television interviews by the Prime Minister and his deputy. Mr Cameron claimed that first-past-the-post was straightforward and popular around the world, while Nick Clegg countered that the alternative vote was fairer and more democratic. – the Independent

The nationwide referendum taking place on 5 May – the first for 36 years – is our chance to change politics for the better. Like most political contests, the choice is coming down to hope vs fear. The hopes that a Yes vote can bring better politics and the fears being peddled by the Conservatives who are spearheading the No campaign. Our politics needs change: the reputation of politics is at an all-time low, turnout at general elections has been declining and many people feel disconnected and alienated from Westminster. My own view is that the alternative vote (AV) isn’t a panacea. It’s not perfect. But I hope and believe it will help improve our politics. It will make politicians more accountable, as every MP will have to seek out more than 50 per cent of the vote. – Ed Miliband, the Independent

The big society “feels like an empty vessel”

The Big Society is this Government’s Big Idea. Part philosophy, part practical programme, it is the glue that holds together the Coalition’s efforts to reduce the size of the state and make it work much better for the citizen. For this reason, those at the heart of government will have taken very seriously the criticisms of Vincent Nichols, the Archbishop of Westminster, reported in The Sunday Telegraph yesterday. He argued that the Big Society is “lacking a cutting edge” and “has no teeth”, and he was right to do so. My think tank, Reform, has been holding a series of sell-out meetings on this subject. But the main reason for such interest is that, a year on, people are still trying to understand what it means. Ministers – including Oliver Letwin, who is in charge of the programme – have told us that the Big Society means more volunteering, stronger local government and, most importantly, new ways of delivering public services. We have spoken to organisations that exemplify all of these ambitions – from charities providing health and education to private companies organising their employees to help in the community. But in truth these were things they were doing long before this Government was elected. Far from being a powerful political project, the Big Society feels like an empty vessel. – the Telegraph

Official secrets slip up

Secret information from at least three separate government departments is available on the internet because of incompetent handling of sensitive material by Whitehall officials, The Daily Telegraph can disclose. The Ministry of Defence, the Department of Health and the Department for Communities and Local Government have published sensitive documents online, but then failed to properly “redact” classified information. As a result, information that is supposed to be hidden from public view can be read by anyone with access to a computer. The Daily Telegraph discovered the security breaches yesterday after the Ministry of Defence admitted that secrets about Britain’s nuclear submarines were obtainable from a government report online. A technical error meant blackedout parts of the report could be read by “copying and pasting” its contents into another document. Details included expert opinion on how well the fleet could cope with a catastrophic accident. It was replaced with a secure version of the document yesterday, but a review of other documents on government websites uncovered four similar examples across three separate Whitehall departments. – the Telegraph

Surgeons warning over cost-cutting

Growing numbers of patients are being wrongly denied a new hip, a weight loss operation or even cancer treatment because of NHS cost-cutting, the leaders of Britain’s surgeons have warned. Increasing rationing of operations is forcing patients to endure pain, injury or disability because NHS primary care trusts (PCTs) are ignoring evidence about the effectiveness of certain treatments simply to balance their books. The warning from the Federation of Surgical Specialty Associations (FSSA), which represents the nine major types of surgeon in the UK, is in an open letter passed to the Guardian. It accuses trusts of letting down needy patients by branding forms of elective surgery as of limited clinical value in order to help them cope with the NHS’s tough financial climate. The FSSA, which represents about 15,000 surgeons, says it is “concerned that lists of surgical procedures and interventions, deemed of low clinical effectiveness or of ‘lower value’, are being used by PCTs to limit access to certain procedures … Review of the lists reveals that there is little or no evidence to support the view that many of the procedures are of limited value to individual patients”.- the Guardian

Posted in Unbound | No Comments »

Balls scores shadow cabinet goal of the month

17/04/2011, 06:24:08 PM

Shadow chancellor takes 56% of the popular vote

In a runaway victory, Ed Balls received 56% of the votes cast in the inaugural shadow cabinet goal of the month competition for his Commons annihilation of Osborne lackey, Matthew Hancock.

Douglas Alexander was in second place with 14% of the vote for his despatch box humiliation of William Hague with Jon Healey third on 12% for his story on £1bn of cuts to health budgets. Yvette Cooper and Jim Murphy were tied in fourth on 9% each for their respective nominations on police cuts and Commons urgent questions to the MoD.

The face-off went out live just before 2pm on the 24th March but with a tiny audience. Before featuring in the Uncut goal of the month competition, Balls’ exchange with Hancock had been a hit in the Westminster village.

A senior Tory public affairs operator remarked that Balls “dishing Hancock” had even generated “a lot of online buzz” in Conservative circles, where Hancock is viewed as promising but inexperienced and prone to arrogance.

For those in the country who managed to see it on the Parliamentary channel, the reaction was immediate. Posting in the comments section of the Uncut piece, Mark Allen, a constituent of Hancock’s in West Suffolk, recalled,

“Remember watching it live and had to rewind the skybox and the wife in to watch…Car crash TV for the Tories”

The impact on Hancock was revealed the day after his mauling. In an unusual move, he was driven to comment on his website to try to have the last word on what had initially been a minor parliamentary intervention on shadow chancellor.

But it was notable that he didn’t directly deny any of Balls’ string of charges.

Victory in the goal of the month competition caps a weekend of football related success for Ed Balls. His beloved Norwich City beat Nottingham Forest to move within one point of automatic promotion from the Championship.

Its progress he will be hoping to replicate in his brief as he continues to take the fight to the Tories.

Posted in Inside | 2 Comments »

Libya is in danger of turning into a Carry On film

17/04/2011, 10:46:28 AM

by Dan McCurry

David Cameron and Nicolas Sarkozy have adopted their very own belligerent Arab city, along with several belligerent Arab towns. In total, the entire population of eastern Libya. Whether they like it or not, if they walk away from the situation now, they will be responsible for every act of the regime’s retribution, every arrest made and every life taken.

For Britain and France, to walk away now would be the equivalent of a parent who refuses their baby food, or a doctor refusing their patient treatment. When a politician starts a war, they are responsible for those on the ground who will suffer the consequences of the military action.

If this were a movie, the tragic-comic premise would be the central characters stuck in a situation of their own making. Unable to negotiate a truce between Tripoli and Benghazi, and unwilling to lose face, their only option is to carry on bombing. Perhaps Sid James would play Sarkozy and Hattie Jakes would play Cameron as Matron.

They are publicly angered with the Nato partners who have not been pulling their weight. It is not the provision of jets that is at the forefront of their concerns, but the laying off of responsibilities, the sharing of the burden and the consequent reduction of their own embarrassment.

Cameron and Sarkozy are telling everyone that, “we’re all in this together”, while desperately trying to play down who led the way in this inadvisable adventure. They want Italy to share the blame of a war gone wrong. (more…)

Posted in Grassroots | 3 Comments »

Sunday News Review

17/04/2011, 06:49:31 AM

Are Vince’s Coalition days numbered?

The Liberal Democrat Cabinet Minister is joining forces with Mr Miliband in a bid to win the May 5 referendum on changing Britain’s voting system. They will line up together at a Press conference in London, where they will issue a joint plea to scrap the first-past-the-post voting system to ‘make politics fairer’. The double act comes days after Business Secretary Mr Cable accused Mr Cameron of ‘inflammatory’ remarks over immigration, prompting calls for disciplinary action by some Tory MPs. And it is bound to lead to further claims that Mr Cable, who once worked for former Labour leader John Smith, has more in common with Labour than his Conservative colleagues in the Coalition. – Daily Mail

Business Secretary, Vince Cable, was “very unwise” and risked “inflaming” extremism. To listen to his detractors, you would think that Cameron was the Mr Benn of Westminster: on Monday, he was dressed up as Malcolm X; by Thursday, he had changed into the robes and pillow case of the Ku Klux Klan (Bullingdon branch). One hears him compared with Clare Short, a diminished figure who is better inside the tent than outside it, a novice at government who should be denied the martyrdom that part of him so obviously craves. All this, I think, reflects a cavalier approach to Cabinet collective responsibility and a failure to recognise its absolute necessity – especially in a Coalition government. – the Telegraph

Paddy hits out at the no campaign?

There is not a politician in the country who won’t tell you they want to improve politics. But as the conduct of the current referendum on adopting the alternative vote shows, judge them by their actions, not their words. I will be voting yes because I believe that changing to AV will substantially improve our democracy. I disagree with those advocating sticking to the current first-past-the-post system, but respect their right to their point of view. What I am perplexed and deeply disturbed by is that those running the no campaign haven’t once put forward a positive case for the current system and instead have spent their time lying about AV. I have seen principle-free machine politics in action many times and it is never a pretty sight. But this time really is different. – the Observer

Former Liberal Democrat leader Lord Ashdown has accused George Osborne of trying to “frighten” voters off changing the voting system. He said the chancellor and Conservative colleagues had resorted to “bizarre” and “tawdry” tactics. Voters will go to the polls in just under three weeks in a referendum on the Alternative Vote (AV) system. It comes as a survey suggests a significant hardening of public opinion against the switch. Mr Osborne sparked anger last week when he said it “stinks” that the main backer of the pro-AV camp was the Electoral Reform Society – whose commercial arm Electoral Reform Services Ltd (ERSL) runs election services. He claimed that it stood to benefit financially from a switch, something ERSL has denied. – BBC News

A very Royal conundrum

The Deputy Prime Minister said yesterday that the rules of royal succession could appear “a little old-fashioned” to most people and a change to the current arrangements was worth considering. But Nick Clegg stressed it would be a complex process that needed careful thought, with other Commonwealth countries on board, and that it could not be done overnight. He said the Prime Minister and himself were “sympathetic” to change and that it was worth looking again at the rules which dictate that the first-born son and not a daughter inherits the throne. The current arrangement means that if William and Kate were to have a daughter, followed by a son, the son would be in line to become king. – the Scotsman

Britain’s Government says it has begun the process of reviewing the ancient, discriminatory rules of royal succession, so that if Prince William and Kate Middleton’s first child was a baby girl she would eventually become queen. The current rule that puts boys ahead of their sisters “would strike most people as a little old-fashioned,” Deputy Prime Minister Nick Clegg said overnight. It is just two weeks until the prince and Middleton get married at London’s Westminster Abbey, and Mr Clegg said many people may agree that the rules should be changed so that if the couple’s first child was a girl, she would eventually inherit the throne – even if she had a younger brother. “I think most people in this day and age would think it’s worth considering whether we change the rules so that baby girl could become the future monarch,” he said. “I think that would be in keeping with the changes that are happening with society as a whole.” – Fox News Australia

Lib Dems regrets

More than a third of people who voted Liberal Democrat in last year’s general election wish they had chosen differently, an Independent on Sunday poll shows. The finding underscores Nick Clegg’s unpopularity and alarm among his party’s grass roots at the political direction he has taken in the Tory-led coalition. While 54 per cent of Lib Dems are happy with their choice at the ballot box, 37 per cent, a significant proportion, have deserted Mr Clegg. In a local election campaign speech in Newcastle yesterday, Ed Miliband seized on the Deputy Prime Minister’s woes by appealing to Lib Dem voters to switch to Labour after a year of “broken promises” on the tuition fees, the NHS and VAT. – the Independent

Posted in Unbound | No Comments »

Social Mobility – the Coalition’s great leap back

16/04/2011, 04:32:17 PM

by Dan Johnson

The question ‘how many black people go to Oxford?’ sounds like the beginning of a very bad joke, unfortunately that joke is our education system and no-one is laughing.

Oxford isn’t racist, I don’t think it’s sexist, I don’t think it still has the same attitude to class that many perceive it to have. The problem isn’t the universities, it’s the government. Universities can only accept people who get the grades, and the grades of everyone in state schools depends on the funding going in to the schools, the teachers, the headteacher and their parents at home.

I should declare an interest; I’m a governor at both a further education college and an academy in my hometown of Thornaby, they are both great institutions that do a great job with the tools they are given. Unfortunately there are going to be fewer tools in future.

SureStart closures will affect those who can’t afford anywhere else, and will also remove valuable training opportunities from young mothers.

EMA has been removed from those whose family earns above the free school meal threshold (£16,190), so if you have two working parents who are both on the minimum wage you won’t get a penny, how’s that for targeting? It now emerges that the new rate won’t be £38 a week: it’ll be £30; it seems Nick Clegg thought that state schools were like private schools and only have lessons for 31 weeks of the year.

The ‘pupil premium’ will take money away from poor pupils in poor areas and give it to poor pupils in well-off areas, and that’s before you factor in an increase in the number of pupils.

The Tory answer to social mobility is to bring back grammar schools. We can see first-hand how grammar schools work, just look to Northern Ireland. The most able pupils do marginally better but the least able to significantly worse. Thankfully the government is resisting the call, but it is still creating a two-tier state system with the introduction of free schools and the roll-out of academy status to top-performing schools.

We need a well-balanced work force in the future and that requires better schools and a better start in life for many children. I don’t really care that Nick Clegg had an internship with a Finnish bank (he may need the contacts in 2015), what I care about is the scorched earth policy this government is leaving to the next generation.

Dan Johnson is the Labour party candidate in Stainsby Hill, Thornaby in the local elections this year.

Posted in Grassroots | 2 Comments »

The week Uncut

16/04/2011, 10:30:53 AM

In case you missed them, these were the best read pieces on Uncut in the last seven days:

Atul Hatwal presents the shadow cabinet goal of the month competition

Dan Hodges thinks blue Labour needs a spinner

Tom Watson says Rebekah Brooks should resign

Michael Dugher reports back from Leicester South

Stella Creasy says private debt is this government’s public injustice

Nick Keehan reports on Cameron’s immigration speech

Sunder Katwala says Nick Cohen is wrong on religion

Posted in Home | No Comments »

Saturday News Review

16/04/2011, 06:54:54 AM

Labour Lord accuses party of lying over immigration

Lord Glasman, who was made a peer by the Labour leader in the New Year honours list, also claimed that Gordon Brown’s ministers had acted in a “high-handed way” by failing to discuss the issue. He claimed that working class men were unable to talk about the matters important to them at Labour Party meetings without being labelled sexist or racist. Lord Glasman, an academic, is one of the architects of the Blue Labour movement, which argues that the party should reconnect with working class issues such as the family, patriotism and communities rather than focusing on the state. – the Telegraph

A close ally of Ed Miliband has attacked Labour for ‘lying’ about immigration. Lord Glasman – a leading academic and personal friend of the Labour leader – said that the previous Labour government had used mass immigration to control wages. In an article for Progress magazine, the Labour peer wrote: ‘Labour lied to people about the extent of immigration … and there’s been a massive rupture of trust.’ Labour let in 2.2million migrants during its 13 years in power – more than twice the population of Birmingham. Maurice Glasman was promoted to the House of Lords by Mr Miliband earlier this year. He has been dubbed the Labour leader’s ‘de facto chief of staff’ by party insiders and has written speeches for him. – Daily Mail

Soft on crime or honest reformer?

The rate of jail sentencing is “financially unsustainable”, the justice secretary, Kenneth Clarke, has said, delivering a defiant riposte to critics within his own party and the tabloid press who have suggested that his plans to overhaul the penal system are soft on crime. Clarke last year unveiled a green paper on sentencing as part of government plans to cut the £4bn prison and probation budget by 20% over four years, promising to end a Victorian-style “bang ’em up” culture and reduce high reoffending rates by tackling the root causes. But after facing sustained criticism, he used an interview with The Times to dismiss characterisation of him as a minister who is “soft on crime.” He is preparing to publish a bill next month which will include proposals to allow for large sentence discounts in return for early guilty pleas and diverting the mentally ill away from jail. The goal is a 3,000 cut in the record 85,000 jail population in England and Wales in four years. – the Guardian

Ken Clarke today warns that expanding prison places is unsustainable and a waste of taxpayers’ money. The Justice Secretary also denies being politically isolated over plans to reduce prisoner numbers, insisting his stance has the full support of David Cameron and Cabinet colleagues. ‘I have never said anything on crime and punishment which is not the collective policy of the entire Government from top to bottom,’ he said. Mr Clarke stated he will not be moved from his view that prison is a waste of money which fails to effectively tackle re offending. He said: ‘It is financially unsustainable. That is not my principal motivation but it is pointless and very bad value for taxpayers’ money.’ Mr Clarke said that ‘warehousing’ prisoners fails to turn them away from a life of crime and is not the best way of dealing with drug addicts who might go straight if their habits were dealt with. – Daily Mail

Clegg to rally Lib Dems ahead of local elections

Lib Dem councils in England are doing a better job of protecting services than Labour and Conservative ones, Nick Clegg will argue as he rallies party candidates ahead of local elections. The deputy prime minister will say no Lib Dem-controlled council is closing a children’s centre or a library. He will accuse Labour town halls of “slash and burn” tactics and Tory councils of “mistakes” locally. – BBC News

Nick Clegg will tell Liberal Democrat activists to “take the fight” to the Conservatives in the battle for next month’s council elections in England. Campaigning in Sheffield today, he will say that the Liberal Democrats should attack the record of Tory-run authorities when they have implemented spending cuts such as closing libraries and children’s centres. He will claim that no Liberal Democrat-controlled council had shut a library or Sure Start centre, even though Labour and Tory authorities had done so. The Deputy Prime Minister’s remarks will be seen as another attempt to put light between the two Coalition parties ahead of the 5 May elections, when they will go head-to-head in many parts of the south, where Labour is weak. – the Independent

Calls for a recall grow

David Cameron last night faced demands for a recall of the Commons amid claims the UK was now pursuing an overt policy of regime change in Libya. Senior Conservative and Labour MPs said the Government had gone beyond the mandate given in last month’s Commons vote to protect civilians. The calls followed the publication of a joint article, by Mr Cameron, Barack Obama and Nicolas Sarkozy yesterday, which said that it would be an “unconscionable betrayal” if dictator Muammar Gaddafi was allowed to remain in power. Three Tory backbenchers and two Labour members said that MPs – currently on their Easter break – should now return to Westminster to have their say on the latest developments. – Daily Herald

Conservative and Labour members said that the Prime Minister’s statement – made jointly with Barack Obama and Nicolas Sarkozy – showed that the Libyan mission had moved from its original humanitarian purpose and was now about regime change. The Commons began its Easter recess last week and is not due to return until April 26. MPs said Parliament should be recalled to debate the apparent shift in strategy. John Baron, a Conservative MP, said: “I feel that mission in Libya has changed quite significantly.” David Davis, a former shadow home secretary, said Mr Cameron needed MPs’ approval for the new Libyan mission. “Parliament did not authorise the next phase. To go to the next phase he has to get parliamentary authority,” he said. – the Telegraph

Boris gets one over on Brian

The veteran peace campaigner Brian Haw faces eviction from an area of grass in Parliament Square Gardens after losing an attempt to launch a legal challenge against a possession order granted to the mayor of London. Haw’s longstanding presence on the pavement on the east side of Parliament Square is not, however, threatened by the order, which relates to his encroachment on to a small adjoining part of the gardens where he has pitched a tent. Haw has come under pressure to quit his decade-old protest just metres from Westminster Abbey as the royal wedding approaches. After the appeal attempt was lost, co-campaigner Barbara Tucker said she did not believe the eviction had anything to do with clearing the area for the royal wedding – “it is about getting rid of our peace campaign”. Last month, the mayor, Boris Johnson, won a high court possession order to evict Haw and Tucker. – the Guardian

Posted in Unbound | No Comments »

Cameron understands that immigration is a class issue

15/04/2011, 03:30:13 PM

by Nick Keehan

Language is important when it comes to integration and community cohesion. Successive governments have therefore sought to make it compulsory for all ministers delivering speeches on immigration to learn how to speak in clichés. If a prime minister or home secretary comes over here and is not even able to use simple phrases such as “open debate”, “impression that their concerns were racist”, “huge contribution to Britain”, “real pressure on communities” and “massive back-log of asylum cases”, there is a real risk to cohesion up and down this country.

And cohesion is important when it comes to immigration. A lack of government cohesion, for example, can lead to mixed messages, and this only undermines sensible and reasoned debate. As the prime minister said in his speech yesterday:

“The last government … actually helped to inflame the debate. On the one hand, there were Labour ministers who closed down discussion, giving the impression that concerns about immigration were somehow racist. On the other, there were ministers hell-bent on burnishing their hard-line credentials by talking tough”.

(more…)

Posted in Uncut | 6 Comments »