Labour's Royal Wedding Snub Bleatings

Here's a wonderful example of absolutely manufactured and completely unconvincing ersatz rage from the modern Labour Party:

St James's Palace has dismissed any suggestion of a "snub" towards Mr Blair and Mr Brown, but shadow justice minister Chris Bryant said he was unhappy with their exclusion.

"I really don't want to rain on anybody's parade because I really wish the happy couple a lovely day on Friday," he said. "I just think they've been let down by their advisers, or by Number 10, because I'm sure this list will have been passed through Number 10.

"I think the same same proprieties should have been followed as for Charles and Diana's wedding and that was that all former prime ministers should be invited."

Mr Bryant added: "I think it shows a bit of vindictiveness from Number 10."

First up, quite why anyone would care what Chris Byrant thinks is beyond me. But the whole tone of the protest from the Labour party follows a particular pattern. Firstly, find a perceived snub against the Labour party. Second, find a way - no matter how unlikely - that the Prime Minister or his team was somehow involved in that snub. Thirdly, use a tone of hurt indignation. Finally, studiously ignore any facts that might impact on your fabricated bit of pointless outrage.

For example, some Labourites have made much of the fact that Margaret Thatcher and John Major have been invited to the wedding, while Blair and Brown haven't. This handily ignores that fact that the rather frail Thatcher effectively retired from public life a long time ago, and was always unlikely to be able to accept an invite to the wedding. Plus, to snub a frail old lady right at the end of her life would have provoked far more general, and real, outrage from people than not inviting two wealthy men who are proactively pursuing lucrative careers for themselves. And on John Major - my understanding is that he is guardian to both William and his brother Harry. Seems a natural person to be invited to the wedding, then. Then there's the whole Knights of the Garter thingy, which is best summarised as Thatcher and Major are, Brown and Blair aren't.

Then there's the fact that the Royal Household probably have a veto over who No. 10 wants to be invited to this bloody wedding. If they wanted Blair and Brown to be there, then they could have made it happen. I almost suspect that they didn't, and who can blame them? One dragged this country into a brutal, unnecessary war that has made it more vulnerable to terrorism, while the other did his level best to bankrupt the fucking country. I can understand why the future king might not want those two at his wedding...

And to close of this post, I'd just like to note how far the Labour party has drifted from its socialist roots if now it can have its MPs bemoaning the exclusion of its wealthy former Prime Ministers from an occasion of privileged extravagance at a time of national austerity. At times like this, I do wonder "what would Nye Bevan have said?" It would be memorable, but not positive...