PR Referendum now doubtful

Momentum for a referendum on PR to be conducted at the same time as the next General Election has stalled after supporters failed to agree on how the referendum should be conducted.

Supporters of the status quo argued that voters should vote for the system they liked the most, and the voting system with the most support should be used for the following election. But advocates of PR retorted that this method could ensure the incumbent voting system won without a clear majority of the electorate supporting it, and might force more radical systems geeks into second-guessing the preferences of others and voting for a system they hated less than FPTP, instead of the one the liked the most.

Others said voting systems should be ranked in order of preference, with the top three used to elect separate candidates in supersized constituencies, giving voters a "real choice" of system "not just once, but every election."

But there were worries that without a system of open primaries to decide which systems went to the vote, a referendum could place too much power in the hands of intellectuals, who would limit the range of options from which the electorate could choose.

Tory leader David Cameron quickly announced he backed all the options, and would "strongly consider" them if elected.

Church divided on swine flu

The church has divided on the issue of who God is punishing by the imposition of swine flu on His creation.

A spokesperson from the Church of Hope and Grace In The Name Of He Who Sent His Unblemished Lamb As Lord and Saviour to Rescue Us From The Iniquity of Our Own Failings said it was "definitely the gays. Definitely."

LGBT Christian groups seized on this proclamation to suggest God is moving with the times, saying the relative scale of the disease, with only a handful of people dying and others recovering, showed God was not as pissed off with homosexual people as He used to be. But atheist groups labelled this a logical fallacy, saying it could just mean God's powers are on the wane.

Other Christian groups said the disease had nothing to do with homosexuality. A trendy vicar from Muswell Hill said "We run the risk of making everything about our preoccupation with homosexuality, rather than listening to God and seeing what He has to say to us. Clearly this global pandemic is a punishment for the war on Iraq."

The Vatican issued a brief statement commending God for learning from his mistakes, by bringing forth a disease that could not be prevented through contraception.

Competition Corner

The Provisional BBC will be awarding a prize of unspecified value for the best guess as to what the following person actually spends his money on. The excerpt is taken from the BBC's recent article where people earning over £100,000 pa complain about how they don't have enough money to live on and how they are not eligible for tax credits. Answers in the comments box, please.

Because my wife looks after the kids and hence does not currently work, she does not receive any tax free allowance and so we already are down to one allowance for the family. There is no married persons allowance any more to compensate for people in our situation and now it seems we are to lose the second allowance from next April, hitting us by what will amount to approx £300 a month.

We don't qualify for child tax credits either. We are not rich by any means, we live in a standard four bed house with a single garage on a housing estate in a normal town. Our kids go to the local comprehensive school. We don't have surplus money for expensive holidays and cars.

We know of several people with similar total family income to us that will continue to receive two tax free allowances because both of them work and individually their incomes are under the £100,000 amount. The system just does not seem fair at all. We are being penalized for having one of us stay home to look after the family.

£300 a month is going to be very difficult to find. We have never been hit so hard by a budget before. We probably won't be able to afford a holiday next year, plus will have to cut back in other ways.

Neither myself or my wife are from wealthy families, we've just worked hard to get where we are. It seems when you reach a point where things are improving you just get knocked back down.

Barack Obama wears clothes

Barack Obama has been spotted wearing clothes. The clothes were made by someone who makes clothes, and are thought to be worth an amount of money.

Other world leaders, including singer Carla Bruni's HAB Nicolas Sarkozy, were also spotted wearing clothes in a move bored journalists gleefully described as a "fashion challenge" to the US President. A spokesperson for Sarkozy denied the rumours, saying the wearing of clothes on state occasions was standard protocol.

"You can see that getting dressed is more than an official duty for Nicolas Sarkozy," said an annoying TV presenter. "Look at the way his shirt hugs every roll of flab - it just screams 'I want an international agreement on tax havens'."

But the leaders' decisions to wear clothes were criticised by campaigners, who said they should recognise ordinary people's hurt in this time of recession and go without.

In other news, the leaders also signed an historic agreement which could speed the end of the global recession by months.

Daily Mail could cause cancer

The Daily Mail newspaper is causing alarming changes in the brains of the easily influenced, according to a skint neuroscientist.

Columnists such as Melanie Phillips, Richard Littlejohn and Quentin Letts are said to stifle critical abilities, and make people more self-centred.

The claims will make disturbing reading for the millions who tuck into their feast of hatred, bigotry, class prejudice and lies every day. But leading journalists say they are well supported by evidence taken out of context.

'My fear is that this technology is infantilising the brain into the state of small children who are easily scared and misled, who have a small attention span and who live for the moment' said Professor Greedyfool, adding "It is a scientifically proven fact that I have no idea what I'm on about."

But a government spokesperson said the only thing less reliable than an editorial on the causes of cancer was a front page reporting a cure for it.

PM is very angry

Gordon Brown is "very angry" about proposed bank bonuses, according to his press team. He said executives should "think of the children" and reconsider whether they really wanted more money.

The Prime Minister's spokesperson warned Brown could get "even angrier" if executives do not heed his advice, and risks getting "monumentally peeved" if they award themselves higher bonuses than last year. It is not known at what point the Prime Minister might burst.

Brown said "We are leading the world in criticising the bankers, and in making them think very hard about the consequences of their actions." He refused to rule out putting bankers on the naughty step.

David Cameron denounced Brown for taking no real action, and said that Conservatives would have taken no action much earlier than Labour. He also suggested nationalising the top 100 UK companies and putting the banks in the hands of workers' communes. However, a report by the Daily Mirror later showed his butler was following him all day with his fingers crossed.

New minister changes job title

Recently promoted minister Phil Woolas insisted on a revised job title as a pre-condition to accepting the role, it was revealed last night. He will no longer be known as the Minister for Immigration, but as the Minister against Immigration.

Woolas said that the government would not allow the population to expand to an infinite total of people. "There just isn't enough room for an infinite number of people in a finite space," he confided in Frank Field.

Woolas believes a decreasing population is just the thing to get our economy to grow again, because if we're lucky it will create a demand for labour that will force wage-inflation higher than the government is prepared to recommend for public sector workers.

Former Minister Liam Berk is said to be angry that his reputation as a hard-right nut was being undermined, claiming the move was a cynical effort to supplant him as fifth-in-line-amongst-the-younger-generation-to-succeed-Gordon-Brown.

Friends of Woolas claimed that he is not really racist, and the strategy was part of an attempt to triangulate the BNP, citing previous electoral successes like the attempt to triangulate the Militant in 1983. "Forget the centre ground, the extreme fringes are where elections are won," he is reported to have said.

But the minister's comments raised concerns that the next time there was a reshuffle, there would be no-one more right-wing than Woolas to fill the role. "New Labour have a proud tradition of appointing successively more right-wing MPs to extend immigration restrictions," explained a former Home Secretary who wished to remain nameless because he thought that gave him more credibility. "Jack Straw was replaced by David Blunkett, who was replaced by me, who was replaced by John Reid, who oversaw Liam Byrne, who has now been replaced by Woolas. Where can we go from here? We might have to make David Coleman as a Lord."

Meanwhile, a succession of polls showed that the worse the economic crisis becomes, the more immigration slips down the list of public concerns.