Era of Change

There are just 10 days until President-elect Barack Obama takes office.

Tickets have been sold for a parade too. 5,000 of them.

Obama tickets 'sell in a minute'

Obama already faces an economic crisis and foreign policy challenges

Reserved seats for the US presidential inauguration parade have sold out within one minute of being put on sale, the ticket company has said.

More than 90% of the 5,000 seats available along the parade route in Washington were sold online.

The tickets cost $25 (£16) each - but some went on to reappear on internet sites at much higher prices.

Two million people are expected to crowd the National Mall as Barack Obama takes the oath of office on 20 January.

Most of the seats for the swearing-in ceremony are set aside for lawmakers, VIPs and diplomats.

The tickets that went on sale on Friday were for stands that line the route Mr Obama and his vice-president, Joe Biden, will take between the US Capitol and the White House.

Sales began at 1300 (1800 GMT) and went "blazingly fast", Albert Lopez, a spokesman for sales company Ticketmaster, said.

Linda Douglass, the chief spokeswoman for the inaugural committee, said the selling time was startling.

Work is already well underway for the event, set to draw huge crowds

"You just have to assume there must have been people sitting there at their computers ready to go when the clock struck one," she said.

Inauguration officials strongly disapproved of anyone seeking to profit from the sale of the ticket, she said - as tickets appeared at 10 times their original price on auction site eBay.

The committee says it wants to make Barack Obama's inauguration one of the most accessible in US history.

---

All I can say is.... Gone in Sixty Seconds. I'm sure the inaugural address is live on television, I'll post more when I find it. :)

'Baby P' scandal rumbles on

The Baby P scandal rumbles on.

The head of children's services at the council at the centre of the Baby P controversy has been fired without pay.

Haringey Council said Sharon Shoesmith, who had defended her department over the death of the 17-month-old baby, had been dismissed with immediate effect.

The boy, who was on the council's "at-risk" register, died in 2007 with major injuries, including a broken back.

His mother admitted causing or allowing his death. Her boyfriend and Jason Owen were convicted of the same offence.

Reports the BBC

It has been well documented the Baby P case, causing rows in Parliament. Most shockingly is trhe injuries the baby suffered that the mother and boyfriend got away with:

April 2007: Baby P is admitted to North Middlesex hospital with bruises, two black eyes and swelling on the left side of his head.

May 2007: After seeing marks on the boy's face, a social
worker sends Baby P to the North Middlesex where 12 areas of bruises
and scratches are found. The mother is re-arrested.

30 July 2007: Injuries to Baby P's face and hands are
missed by a social worker after the boy is deliberately smeared with
chocolate to hide them.

This is just a few of the key events in the timeline

So what is there to be done? And exactly who takes the blame? Is it the Labour government, who since 1997 have decentralised government and given more power to local authorities - and in this shocking case, a local authority that failed to protect the welfare of a child. The responsibility of the child rests firmly on the mother I beleive but also government has a right and a duty to make sure that the wellbeing of the child is protected.

It would be perhaps, too extreme to wish the mother be sterilised for her negligence of her own baby - that would be taking it too far. And it seems that the amount of incidents that social services saw happen to Baby P meant that they should have acted.

There is a saying - Post Hoc ergo Propter Hoc - after it therefore because of it. Baby P did not die because Labour decentralised government and the local authorities failed to act in the best interest of the child. It is not Labour's fault. But it did, indeed happen on Labour and Brown's watch.

Right, left and centre I beleive Labour are vulnerable with scandals like these and the effects of the credit crunch that we are having to deal with. The 'era of change' is something that will be translated to British Politics come the next general election. It does not help that the council in the case was forced to admit earlier this month that it had spent
£19,000 on media training for high-profile employees involved in the
Baby P case. The last thing this country needs is spin, it requires action.

The sacking of the official will help, but the sooner the Labour government can complete their inquiries, the sooner Labour can focus on the good things that they have done for the country in the last 11 years, in education and the welfare system and reducing crime. Yes its not perfect but things never will be.

Baby P, the economic crisis and the foreign policy of the UK are the major attacking points and weaknesses of Labour. It is not a time to dwell on past mistakes, scandals or tragedies, it is time to put things right. And that is what is happening here in the Baby P case with the sacking of the Sharon Shoesmith. So when you think about who you are voting for in the next General Election, vote Labour. It's the best of the worst. Brown isn't the most charismatic of Prime Ministers, but at least he's not lightweight like Cameron.