Saturday, October 31, 2009

Shari'a called off due to lack of interest?

Well, looks like the Shari'a shindig is off for the moment.

Pro-Shari'a law march cancelled

A planned march by demonstrators calling for sharia law in Britain was cancelled today, police said.
Scotland Yard said it would now be contacting organisers of a wave of counter-protests in central London and Leeds, West Yorkshire, to inform them of the decision.
Anjem Choudary, leader of the radical Islamic sect Al Muhajiroun, said organisers Islam4UK had been forced to cancel the planned march from the House of Commons to Trafalgar Square because of security concerns.
But he added a meeting of supporters of sharia law would still take place at an undisclosed location later today.
A Scotland Yard spokesman said: "The MPS (Metropolitan Police Service) has been informed that today's planned march in central London has now been cancelled.
"Officers are now contacting organisers of planned counter protests to inform them."
Good, they weren't wanted, though obviously had the right to march, which if they managed to get power they'd no doubt deny to the rest of us. It would have been interesting seeing how the EDL and the anti-Shari'a Muslims got on though. I suspect that security concerns weren't at the heart of Choudhary's withdrawal though, I believe (and it's only a belief) that the numbers he believed would turn up were far more than were actually expected. In other words it would have looked a trifle silly and people like Choudhary can't abide being made to look silly. He expected thousands, but more likely would have got a hundred or less and that to a man like Choudhary would have been humiliating.

Still, at least it's put a smile on my face.

Friday, October 30, 2009

English Heroes #4

An occasional series recording English men and women who have done great things for themselves or others and reflected well on the country of their birth.

Simon Somerville is a remarkable, very brave man, who almost died defending kids under his care.

Youth bailed after 'hero' volunteer stabbed

A 16-year-old arrested on suspicion of stabbing a church volunteer was today released on bail, Scotland Yard said.
The victim, named in reports as Simon Somerville, was attacked outside an anti-crime seminar at a theatre in Deptford, south east London.
He was stabbed repeatedly when he confronted a rowdy gang outside a meeting for young Christians, and remains critically ill in hospital.
The 41-year-old's brother-in-law Eddie Hypolite told the London Evening Standard: "The gang had been making trouble outside the event and when Simon was leaving the building with a number of his kids, they were attacked.
"Simon stood between the gang members and his kids. He was protecting them. He was trying to be the peacemaker and one of the gang members just went at him with a knife.
"The children told us that if Simon had not stepped in, they could have been killed. Simon is a hero. He almost died because he protected the children in his care."
A second victim, a 16-year-old boy, suffered stab wounds to his lower body when he stepped in to help the man at around 9.15pm on Wednesday night, Scotland Yard said. He was treated and discharged.
Officers had already been alerted to a large group of youths causing trouble outside the event in Douglas Way shortly before 7pm.
The teenager who was arrested on suspicion of attempted murder was bailed until a later date.
Simon Somerville, this blog salutes you, this country needs more fine people like you who are prepared to defend the weak even at the risk of their own lives, you are a true Englishman.

You gotta pick a pocket or two

Incredible triumphalism from our overlords at the EU in wonderful wonderful Copenhagen today. They have agreed to rob us of our hard earned cash to hand out to other non EU countries so they can buy huge Limo's with air conditioning for their dictatorial leadership.
Never mind the fact that the UK is still the only first world nation in a recession, never mind the fact that not one of them thought to ask what the ordinary people really think about them extorting with menaces (yes that's what it is, you try not paying up and see what happens) This is just another naked grab for our money that we have come to know so well from the political elite that make up the fundamentally undemocratic EU.
The EU agreed climate change would need 100bn euros ($148bn; £90bn) a year by 2020, and would pay its "fair share", conditional on other nations.
UK PM Gordon Brown said the EU was leading the way with bold proposals.
Talks at the EU summit in Brussels had been deadlocked over how EU nations would share its costs.
A coalition of nine poorer EU nations had threatened to block a deal unless richer countries paid more.
I'm not going to get into the idiocy that is climate change, other do that far better than I do, nor the economics of having to find more money to give over to those who haven't earned it. What I do want to know is what's going to happen when the scales fall away from peoples eyes and the truth over this colossal waste of  time, effort and grand larceny that is the political wing of the lets use global warming to fleece the proles movement.
Will the money be paid back? (stop sniggering at the back there) Will the various agencies be disbanded? (Yeah right!) And will taxes go down to what they should be without the environmental levy paid out by an increasingly sceptical electorate? (The EU takes, it does not give)

I suspect the EU's days are numbered because of this, sooner or later one of the countries that make up that corrupt organisation is going to say enough is enough. I hope in this at least the UK leads the way back to a mutual trading block and not a political boondoggle for second rate politicians with Machiavellian tendencies.

Interesting to note that the Arch Enviroloons (aka Greenpeace) don't seem to think they've gone far enough into our pockets, which isn't surprising as it isn't coming out of their pockets.
Joris den Blanken of environmental group Greenpeace, said: "[The EU] failed to use this opportunity to put its money where its mouth is.
 Funny how it's the EU's money, they never seem to track back far enough to realise that it's our money and that some of us although being in favour of recycling and not polluting the environment are not in favour of handing over cash to third world dictators to fund their lifestyles (do you honestly believe that much if any of the cash will reach down to where it might make a difference?)

Where is the political party in the UK that will sort this out? The Tories won't, they can't, their hands are tied by EU legislation that binds them (another Labour legacy for our children) The public seems brainwashed into voting for either of the big 2 and both are pretty much the same on the EU and are totally out of step with what the UK public want over the EU.

It's time to leave, we know it, but they wont do it. So vote for someone who will.

Thursday, October 29, 2009

Ye Gods! What on earth can they be thinking/taking?

According to a YouGov poll, only a third of the electorate wan Tony Blair to be the president of the EU.

Fewer than one in three voters want Tony Blair to be the president of the European Union, an exclusive poll shows. 

The Daily Telegraph/YouGov poll comes amid signs that the former premier's bid for the new European job is set to end in failure.
At an EU summit in Brussels yesterday, Gordon Brown – who is now publicly campaigning for his predecessor – accepted that Mr Blair, once the overwhelming favourite, may lose out. “It may not happen,” Mr Brown said.
After all he's done, the lies, the deceit, Cherie Blair, the wars, the betrayals and not to mention the handing over to Brown the fate of the UK (did I mention that, damn) Cherie Blair, Doctor David Kelly, the corruption, Cherie Blair, spin doctors, the Al Yamamah arms deal, Bernie Ecclestone, Cherie Blair, cash-for-peerages, BAE's arms deal with Saudi Arabia, postal voting, asymmetric devolution, the making of the English second class citizens in their own country, multiculturalism, political correctness, oh and his Mrs. Cherie Blair too and still one third of the electorate would vote for him??????????????

I truly grieve for my country tonight.

Here we go again

Not satisfied at losing 25 million child benefit claimant details, nor having the details of 3 million candidates for the UK driving theory test go missing in the USA, Whitehall is warning us of more to come.
Cabinet Secretary Sir Gus O'Donnell said there were "one or two" leaks from areas dealing with national security.
However he said the leaks themselves did not concern national security.
There have been a series of breaches in recent years, including of the entire child benefit records, with the personal details of 25 million people.
Giving evidence to the Commons Public Administration Committee, Sir Gus said he was considering whether the breaches were serious enough to call in the police or the security services.
"There are other areas where there is still information going missing," he said.
Now data security is a hot topic, but it does seem that Whitehall and the civil service in general have a lackadaisical attitude towards the handling of and the access too such data. You might think that they actually have far too much personal data of ours with which to play around with and that it's interlinked in all sorts of ways that aren't strictly relevant to the needs of government.

And you'd be right.

Now I'm aware that the Government and its various departments do need some details of the people who come under their duty of care. However, why do they need so much and why do they keep on losing it? The areas concerned apparently deal with national security, however don't concern national security, so the first thought that runs across my mind is why have such data if it doesn't deal in national security. Is it personal data? Or are they simply reports from other departments?
It seems as if an "I don't care" ethos has spread throughout the civil service, where unencoded cd's with personal data are sent through the post. Laptops are left on trains and departments leak like sieves to MP's and the press. The old adage if you pay peanuts you get monkeys doesn't wash either, most people would take far better care of their personal stuff (although any look into a lost property office would amaze you) I know how to encrypt data, I know not to print out anything that's unnecessary and also how to clear the print cache too if necessary. Systems can be set up to be secure, but unless the whole ethos changes amongst those handling the data the system will fail.

Smaller government will help, dismantling of the database state will help, but most of all cultivating a care for data handling from bottom to top will stop yours and my personal details leaking out either through carelessness or sheer stupidity.

The government should also hang its head in shame for selling such data on to 3rd parties.

The catalogue of shame.

Wednesday, October 28, 2009

They never learn do they?

The problem with giving power to someone is that often enough they find new and interesting ways to abuse it. Take the RIPA (Regulatory (of) Investigative Powers Act) a recent rash of news stories exposed how councils nationwide have been using RIPA to monitor dog fouling and littering. Councils are supposed to use surveillance to check on  transgressions such as fly tipping and benefit fraud, but found it was possible to abuse it on school catchment applications.
So, seeing what a good idea that was, the Government come up with this idiotic idea

Councils get ‘Al Capone’ power to seize assets over minor offences

Draconian police powers designed to deprive crime barons of luxury lifestyles are being extended to councils, quangos and agencies to use against the public, The Times has learnt.
The right to search homes, seize cash, freeze bank accounts and confiscate property will be given to town hall officials and civilian investigators employed by organisations as diverse as Royal Mail, the Rural Payments Agency and Transport for London.
The measure, being pushed through by Alan Johnson, the Home Secretary, comes into force next week and will deploy some of the most powerful tools available to detectives against fare dodgers, families in arrears with council tax and other minor offenders.
My God can't they see just how wrong this could go? Draconian doesn't even begin to cover up the potential for abuse that the average council jobsworth who's convinced they are right and you are wrong about a council tax dispute you are involved with? People could be out of a house and home before they get an oops sorry, but we'll give you another house in a  local sink warzone by way of apology.
Even the plod think it's a bad idea.
Police Federation. Paul McKeever said that he was shocked to learn that the decision to hand over “intrusive powers” to people who were not police was made without consultation or debate.
The new rules will put the investigative powers in the hands of trained  internal financial investigators, not even lawyers. This is a classical scorched earth policy by Labour, taking their contempt for  traditional rights and twisting it into a potential nightmare for any poor sod who falls foul of an agent of the state. After all, they don't make mistakes now, do they?

As you would expect, none of this applies to Scotland.

Lets have a new Bank Holiday

Well, that's the suggestion, it certainly has merit, the UK has fewer bank holidays than most other European countries. Of course the cause is as usual naff, but it's still a good idea.

New bank holiday proposed

A new bank holiday should be introduced in 2012 to celebrate the Queen's Diamond Jubilee and the London Olympics and Paralympics, the Government was urged today.
A coalition of organisations including the TUC and a number of voluntary groups have called for a new Community Day bank holiday in late October to recognise and celebrate the nation's volunteering efforts and encourage people to take part in community events.
Most of the English of course want 23rd of April as it's St George's Day, it's also traditionally Shakespeare's Birthday too (and the day of his death) However that's not what's being proposed (par for the course whenever it's something the English want)
However, there are several more historic and memorable days in October far more worthy than a politically correct indulgence-fest.
October the 21st is of course the anniversary of The Battle of Trafalgar and it would get up the noses of both the French and the Spanish were we to celebrate that.
October the 25th is the anniversary of Agincourt, again an opportunity to remind the French just who the winners in history are. Agincourt is of course an English and Welsh victory.
(The Welsh longbow archer played a critical role in the battle of Agincourt. On 25 October 1415, English and Welsh longbow archers, many of them from Brecon, under King Henry V completely destroyed the French cavalry at Agincourt.)
For the Scots a separate day such as the 23rd of October could be chosen as the "Auld Alliance" treaty was signed between John Balliol, King of Scots, and Philippe IV of France.

So, why is it that we can't celebrate our past, but rather have some UK volunteering charity propose a community bank holiday that I truly believe wont capture the public's imagination (however boringly worthy it is) Is it just one more example of whitewashing the great past of this wonderful land of ours?

I believe it is.

Tuesday, October 27, 2009

You have to be joking, oh, you aren't.

 Bit late with this one, but here we go.
Transport Secretary Lord Adonis has said he wants to be able to answer MPs' questions in the House of Commons.
Current rules say peers who serve as ministers can face direct inquiries only in the House of Lords.
But Lord Adonis told BBC One's Politics Show he and Business Secretary Lord Mandelson would be "delighted" to face MPs in the Commons chamber.
He has written to the Speaker to suggest this, but said the Commons was not the "fastest-moving" institution.
The promotion of peers to cabinet rank means some of the leading figures in government cannot face questions from their own and opposition MPs in the Commons itself.

Whilst there are certain merits to the suggestion, it is the thin end of the wedge. If a peer is allowed to speak in the Commons as a minister then the obvious question is: why not allow them the other privileges of an MP? Why not allow MPs to speak in the Lords? It's a nonsense, and incredibly dangerous nonsense at that.

I think though we are witnessing the end of British Parliamentary government in this country. New Labour has treated the Commons with utter contempt - as some utter inconvenience and archaic irrelevance, a club which you just have to be elected to for some strange, outré reason in order that you can become a Cabinet minister within eighteen months of getting elected - and I doubt Call me Dave's mob 'get it' either.

Of course, the simple solution here would be: don't (as governments of all stripes have generally not done for many decades now) appoint peers to important ministries. Alas, our glorious Reichsfuhrer appears not to grasp such a possibility.

But there is no 'solution' needed, fundamentally.

The Transport department and the Business department both have MPs serving as Mandelson's and Adonis' direct deputies. Those MPs can (and do) answer questions on their department in the Commons. MPs can question ministers such as Sadiq Khan very effectively, and do. Those ministries have a more than adequate representation in the Commons.

So what this amounts to is 'lets wreck the constitution (yes I know it's not really a constitution) because Andrew Adonis and Peter Mandelson's egos are a little fragile about the suggestion that they are 'second-class' members of the government because they aren't elected, and consequently can't get into the part of Westminster which gets the better TV coverage.'

The fact that crap like this can even be proposed openly is a testament to how little regard for constitutional government there is at the moment.

Monday, October 26, 2009

Waxing and waning

The idiot that is David Miliband seems to believe that Britain's influence will wane should we not accept our new Lords and Masters aka the EU.

Miliband: Britain needs strong EU 

Britain's influence on the world will "wane" unless it takes a lead in developing European Union foreign policy, David Miliband has warned.
The foreign secretary said a strong EU should not be opposed on the grounds of "hubris, nostalgia or xenophobia".
In a speech in London, Mr Miliband said the alternative was to become an "irrelevance" in a world dominated by China and the United States.
"I think the choice for Britain is also simply stated. We can lead a strong European foreign policy or, lost in hubris nostalgia or xenophobia, watch our influence in the world wane."

  • 1) Britain's influence within the EU is waning simply because the number of EU members is increasing.
  • 2) EU policy decisions will be in the interest of the EU, not Britain.
  • 3) You don't have to be part of a large bloc to have influence way beyond your apparent size.
  • 4) Britain will never lead a strong European policy, France and Germany will see to that.
  • 5) America, or even China will need allies and markets and they may well choose to do business with a friendly Britain rather than a hostile and competitive EU.

Not the face of a man you could trust.

Besides why trust a set of politicians who ignore referenda, ignore manifesto commitments, fiddle their expenses, take bribes, lie, obfuscate, mislead, cheat, scheme and make the term morally bankrupt look positively mild when used as an adjective before their names?

No Referendum, No Vote!

Simple as that.

Sunday, October 25, 2009

Still not getting it.

According to the Independent in their frantic attempts to play down the impact (or lack of) Nick Griffin on Question Time.

The truth about immigration: Citizenships granted fall by 35,000 in a year

Contrary to claims that Britain is being 'swamped', the net number of incomers to the country has dropped sharply
Britain's immigration rate is decreasing and we are far from being "swamped", according to an official report presented to the Foreign Office last week. The new figures, obtained by The Independent on Sunday, suggest the Government is starting to get immigration under control. They undermine gloomy warnings of "overcrowding" made by pressure groups and parties including the British National Party.
Applications for British citizenship have also shown a marked decline in recent years, as economic turmoil and government shake-ups have had an impact on the numbers attempting to settle in the UK.
The figures undermine the claims of critics such as the BNP leader Nick Griffin (below), who last week told a BBC Question Time audience that "it's time to shut the door because this country is overcrowded".
The number of foreign nationals entering Britain fell from 460,000 in 2006 to 441,000 in 2008, while, during the same period, the total of foreigners leaving rose from 173,000 to 237,000. The number of citizenship applications granted fell by 35,000, to 130,000, in a single year up to 2008. 
Sounds brilliant, doesn't it? Well it might until you get the calculator out. 441,000 minus 237,000 still leaves  204,000 staying every year. Even if you take the citizenship alone, it's still going up by 130,000 a year. So at worst it will leave 4.75 million at best 2.6 million by 2030. This coupled with a natural increase of 5.6 million leaves 10.35 million (71.3 million in total) or at best 9.2 million (69.2 million in total)
(Figures taken from the BBC)

They really do think we're stupid don't they if they think that a population of 69 million is more desirable than 71 million. Plus coupled to the fact that this has been a deliberate Labour policy to encourage mass immigration to the UK to diversify us.
My anger at this current government just grows and grows as the truth behind their diabolical mismanagement and social engineering, what they wanted was a truly multicultural society, what they have ended up with is a more divided Britain than at any time in its history.

Cry God! For Harry, St George and England!

Saint Crispin's Day Speech
from Henry V by William Shakespeare

This day is called the feast of Crispian:
He that outlives this day, and comes safe home,
Will stand a tip-toe when the day is named,
And rouse him at the name of Crispian.
He that shall live this day, and see old age,
Will yearly on the vigil feast his neighbours,
And say 'To-morrow is Saint Crispian:'
Then will he strip his sleeve and show his scars.
And say 'These wounds I had on Crispin's day.'
Old men forget: yet all shall be forgot,
But he'll remember with advantages
What feats he did that day: then shall our names.
Familiar in his mouth as household words
Harry the king, Bedford and Exeter,
Warwick and Talbot, Salisbury and Gloucester,
Be in their flowing cups freshly remember'd.
This story shall the good man teach his son;
And Crispin Crispian shall ne'er go by,
From this day to the ending of the world,
But we in it shall be remember'd;
We few, we happy few, we band of brothers;
For he to-day that sheds his blood with me
Shall be my brother; be he ne'er so vile,
This day shall gentle his condition:
And gentlemen in England now a-bed
Shall think themselves accursed they were not here,
And hold their manhoods cheap whiles any speaks
That fought with us upon Saint Crispin's day.

Oh yes and it's also the anniversary of the Charge of the Light Brigade too.

When can their glory fade?
O the wild charge they made!
All the world wondered.
Honour the charge they made,
Honour the Light Brigade,
Noble six hundred.

— Alfred, Lord Tennyson

Friday, October 23, 2009

Things can only get better?

Sometimes I wonder.

Record recession for UK economy

The UK economy unexpectedly contracted by 0.4% between July and September, according to official figures, meaning the country is still in recession.
It is the first time UK gross domestic product (GDP) has contracted for six consecutive quarters, since quarterly figures were first recorded in 1955.
But the figures could still be revised up or down at a later date, because this figure is only the first estimate.
GDP measures the total amount of goods and services produced by a country.
The pound fell sharply after the figures were released, reflecting the fact that many observers had expected the UK to have grown during the quarter.
It was down 1.6% against the dollar, at $1.6339, and down 1.7% against the euro, at 1.0878 euros.
Quarterly growth of 0.2% had been expected in the figures from the Office for National Statistics (ONS), although expectations had been tempered by recent figures showing no growth in retail sales in September, and a 2.5% decline in industrial output in August.

Now I'm no expert on economics and there are bloggers out there who can run rings around me quite easily. But I do know how it affects me personally. This year I received  no pay rise, the company actually reconsolidated after a takeover and lost about £1,500,000. But fortunately will make a profit next year if pre orders are anything to go by, people were also laid off too. However my rent, council tax, fuel costs, motoring costs, food costs etc all went up anyway, so I have to now budget very carefully as although I live within my means, I don't until next year have a great deal of spare income. So yes I know how badly off I've become, though by no means poor and not yet having to cancel Christmas.

So, the economy might improve next year, about July (bad luck Labour) but again as they were saying the same thing this year I have my doubts, I'm more the deal with it when it happens type, a lot of engineers tend to be. Still I do believe that things will improve, though I doubt I'll forget who caused the mess and I'm thinking politicians, not bankers here. It would have been easy enough to put something away for a rainy day, but they didn't, but as they're protected with my money paying their bills I doubt they care much other than wondering who if anyone will re-elect them.

Still, things can only get better? Can't they?

A draws as good as a win

Well it was a hostile audience, hostile questioner and a very hostile panel.
No doubt, hostile reporting tomorrow too in the MSM.
And yet, Griffin kept his cool and made his points, though he was obviously nervous. This whole Question Time says a lot more about the bullying of the political establishment than about the BNP, 5 onto 1 is never pretty and Dimbleby was as hostile as he gets. Only in one place did Griffin slip up and that was self inflicted, a stupid comment over the "non violent" KKK. He did land a few good blows over the point of indigenous, with his comment on how no one would dare put it to Maoris that they weren't indigenous to New Zealand. He made the rest of the panellists look like bullies too as they constantly butted in and never let him finish. In the end it was amusing to see Griffin sitting back watching the panellists tie themselves in knots trying to look tough on immigration (and not succeeding very well either)

I do look forward to reading the reporting both in the MSM and especially the blogs, seeing how the perception of reality is more important that reality in the political process, look for the false memory of a terrible performance by N Griffin being placed in the public forum. (Yep Iain Dale got there first) Yet even Dale was somewhat sympathetic.

A draw was the best Griffin could hope for, and the panel and audience handed it to him on a plate.

None of them came out of this looking too good, but in Griffins case, he didn't need too.

Thursday, October 22, 2009

Pushing an agenda

The people pushing the global warming agenda really should give it a rest, if they aren't showing drowning dogs they're pushing polar bears in our face and telling us that there's only 50, 49, 48 47 days left to save the planet.
Some of their propaganda is getting really silly.

Britain's only polar bear moved north to combat climate change

Britain's only polar bear has been moved to a colder climate in the Highlands where it will be less likely to feel the effects of global warming.

Mercedes, a 27-year-old sow, has spent the last 25 years in a small enclosure at Edinburgh Zoo.
But she had now been moved to a new four-acre enclosure at the Highland Wildlife Park outside Kingussie - one of the coldest parts of the country.
The bear was brought to the UK after it was rescued in Canada where it was about to be shot for repeatedly roaming into a small town.
The name came from Mercedes Benz, which funded the large mammal’s flight to the UK in 1984, and the bear has since been one of the major visitor attractions at the zoo.
Despite the bear's popularity, animal rights campaigners repeatedly criticised its cramped living conditions at the zoo, where it regularly paced back and forward.
 The clue to why this has been done is the last sentence, nothing to do with global warming at all, simply animal welfare. But, the warmists agenda as supported by tax grasping governments everywhere are never ones to be subtle and global warming makes such good headlines, if only for the sceptics to pop out and debunk it.
Polar bears too are picturesque and since the Al Gore propaganda film have been associated with global warming despite the fact that their population is increasing and they can swim too so aren't in danger of drowning. They are also one of natures stone cold killers, they may look fluffy and cuddly to you, but you look like lunch to them.
So it's just another non story dressed up to appeal to those who think that something should be done about the planet warming up (it isn't but there's no convincing some people)  Still so long as the bears happy I'm not too bothered, other than to point out the hypocrisy in the storyline.

The other reason I opted for this is that I'm suffering from BNP burnout, the hysterical shrieking from the establishment and their brownshirts is just giving the whole Question Time thing way too much publicity. Freedom of speech should apply to all, not just those who you approve of.

Wednesday, October 21, 2009

No more please, we're full.

The UK population is set to rise from 61 million to 71 million by 2033.

Most of these will settle in England.

The population of the UK will rise from 61m to 71.6m by 2033 if current trends in growth continue, the Office for National Statistics (ONS) has said.
Just over two-thirds of the increase is likely to be related directly or indirectly to migration to the UK.
If the projected increase materialises, the population will have grown at its fastest rate in a century.
The latest figures show that if current trends continue:
  • The population will grow by more than 10m by 2029, less than half the time it took to rise from 50m to 60m between 1948 and 2005
  • The population of pensionable age will rise by 32% over the next 25 years to 15.6m, with the number aged over 85 more than doubling to 3.3m
  • In 2033, there will be 2.8 people of working age for every person of state pensionable age - a fall from 3.2 in 2008
  • By 2033, the population of England will be almost as large as the current populations of England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland combined.
This is unsustainable, we can't feed ourselves, our manufacturing is not economically productive compared to 3rd world nations so where are the jobs going to come from?
Granted these figures may change, governments will change policies, hell we might even get a decent border policy going, checking people out as well as in. But 71 million? The indigenous population already feels under siege, parties such as the BNP are on the rise and can you imagine the results if the immigrants don't assimilate or have a large percentage of radical Islamists? Civil war would appear to be a very likely outcome.

This has to be brought under control, England cannot possibly sustain any more immigration without some serious thought put into where we put them and what they are going to do? Will they be skilled migrants? Or will they simply be brought in to do the jobs the English wont do? If it's the first option fine, but the second? Well the next government will have to think long and hard as to whether or not those who can't/wont work get anything until they do the jobs that they currently spurn.

Innocent, yes, but don't expect to get your money back.

I wonder at times if Labour have a deathwish, and at other times I'm absolutely certain of it.

Innocent motorists face being left heavily out of pocket because of Government moves to cut its own legal bills. 

Drivers will fall victim to reforms which will see people who are acquitted by the courts expected to foot the majority of their own defence costs. It is thought some innocent motorists will plead guilty to reduce their costs.
Currently, somebody who is cleared of a motoring offence can expect to be reimbursed most, if not all, of the money they spend clearing their name.
They only receive legal aid in the most serious cases, where a conviction would result in imprisonment.
The changes, part of a package which has already seen £80 million cut from the cost of running the country's courts, has outraged lawyers and motoring groups.
A petition on the Downing Street website criticising the move has already attracted nearly 3,000 signatures, including support from 25 QCs.
According to the Ministry of Justice's own statistics, 24 per cent of 1.4 million motorists prosecuted in the courts in 2007 were cleared. It meant that nearly 380,000 motorists recouped about 80 per cent of their costs.
Under the new arrangements, which come into force next month, acquitted defendants will only get a fraction of their money back.
The reimbursement of lawyers' fees is being limited to the legal aid rate of £60 an hour – around a quarter of the what is normally charged.
Defending a speeding case can cost at least £2,000, so under the new system an acquitted driver would be reimbursed just £600.
Legal fees for a drink-driving case can run between £5,000 and £10,000, and the reforms will mean that a driver walking free from court could have to pay as much as £7,000 from their own pocket.

Seriously, just what the hell do they think they are playing at? One of the major supports of the legal system in this country is that if you manage to get yourself acquitted, you get back what it cost you in legal fees. What on earth makes motorists so different? Could it be that a quarter of motorists actually manage to win against the charges levelled at them? Well it's certainly a strong contender. So instead of fixing the the cameras and ensuring that innocents are unlikely to be charged, the government decides that even if they win, tough, you aren't getting your money back. This means that people like me of ordinary means, will swallow our pride and accept a guilty verdict, plus points, plus extra insurance costs simply because we would not dare challenge the accusation in court, because even if we won, we could not afford the cost and we'd be further out of pocket than had we simply accepted the accusation in the first place.

Just another reason not to vote Labour.

England expects that every man will do his duty

Trafalgar day today.


A willing foe and sea room. Aye and Damnation to the French!

Tuesday, October 20, 2009

Well I wouldn't like it done to me.............

Referring of course to the Wikileaks BNP list. (Usual BNP disclaimer, abhorrent, racist etc)

Now if I were a member of any political party, or indeed a member of anything (including my gym) I would not want stolen/hacked details of mine including my address posted on the internet.

There are idiots out there who are violently inclined and apt to take the law into their own hands.

Whoever did this assuming the list is genuine deserves to be caught and prosecuted.

So, who's making what up?

I'm a bit confused here, well a bit more than normal anyway, there was (apparently) a massive enquiry into sex trafficking in the UK and they failed to find a single trafficker.

Inquiry fails to find single trafficker who forced anybody into prostitution

The UK's biggest ever investigation of sex trafficking failed to find a single person who had forced anybody into prostitution in spite of hundreds of raids on sex workers in a six-month campaign by government departments, specialist agencies and every police force in the country.
The failure has been disclosed by a Guardian investigation which also suggests that the scale of and nature of sex trafficking into the UK has been exaggerated by politicians and media.
Current and former ministers have claimed that thousands of women have been imported into the UK and forced to work as sex slaves, but most of these statements were either based on distortions of quoted sources or fabrications without any source at all.
While some prosecutions have been made, the Guardian investigation suggests the number of people who have been brought into the UK and forced against their will into prostitution is much smaller than claimed; and that the problem of trafficking is one of a cluster of factors which expose sex workers to coercion and exploitation.
Now, even I know about an organisation called Poppy Project (fake charity) and I know it's a favourite of Harriet Harman. She even visited there last year, to highlight the changing attitudes to prostitution in the UK. Now if Harridan can find sex trafficked women why couldn't this inquiry find those who were trafficking them? Is it a scam? I have my doubts, though no proof of course, but it certainly does not seem to be as widespread as the scare stories in the MSM would have us believe.
 I wonder what Harridan Harperson will do now, she seemed to have a bee in her bonnet over the whole issue, yet it seems to be not so widespread or pervasive as she (or indeed many others) believed.

This highlights a growing problem in government and MSM credibility, they decide that "something must be done" and launch a myriad of enquiries only to discover that the problem either doesn't exist or isn't as widespread as they believed. This just adds to the belief of many that we're being lied too left right and centre, lead like sheep by conflicting reports and government ministers spouting ill informed facts supported by political/social dogma.
This lack of trust is now so ingrained into our society that any political party gaining power is facing a massive uphill battle simply to be believed by the ordinary person on the street. We just don't trust them any more, we might believe in abstract that there are honest politicians, but our gut feeling now is that there aren't, that they all lie and spin for their own or their parties ends.

Reports like this simply convince us that the lies go straight to the top and the fear on my part is that if or when a truly serious problem is unearthed, we simply will ignore it as just one more lie.

Monday, October 19, 2009

But you must give him a peerage.....he's from Glasgow!

Labour PPC Willie Bain being a bit of a silly bugger in the Glasgow North East by-election.
“I think it would have been a bit off if Michael Martin was not given that (his peerage), just because he comes from this part of Glasgow. 
This would be the same Gorbals Mick now known as Baron Martin of Springburn. The guy who fleeced the taxpayer with £400 a roll flock wallpaper, whose Mrs ran up an astonishing £4,280.20 taxi bill also at our expense plus £50,000 of taxpayers’ money on providing free air travel.
The same man who presided over the biggest scandal to hit parliament in decades whose reverberations are still being felt. Who spent hundreds of thousands of taxpayers money to try and cover it up. Who even allowed the police into parliament to search an MP's office and tried to shift the blame afterwards. Whose very name became a by-word for venality, cronyism and partisanship.
But, Willie Bain is not to be put off by such minor quibbles, oh no.
Lord Martin is a divisive figure among residents, with some proud that one of their own rose to one of the most prestigious positions in the land.
That would be those who would vote for a donkey if it had a red rosette attached.
Others are furious that he oversaw an expenses system that was so flagrantly abused.
That would be those who know a crook when they see one.

That Mick Martin was made a peer of the realm is nothing short of a disgrace and the reasons why he shouldn't have been made a peer have nothing to do with him being from Glasgow which is a superb place to visit and deserved a lot better than the man they elected to be their MP.

The Politics of Spite

Now I'm no fan of the BNP, however they do have over 1 million of them as well as 2 MEP's, a London Assembly member and over 100 councillors. So, they have democratic legitimacy, at least in my eyes and have to be treated with the respect due to their position (ie like every other politician in a similar job and fair game for criticism) However, that means you can no longer ignore them or keep them from the various institutions and privileges that other politicians enjoy. If you do, this just backfires and stokes up their martyr complex, it also gets noticed by the public, bloggers and the like and gets publicity way beyond the original intent.

Take Kerry McCarthy (please)

No parliamentary pass for fascists

For the past few days we've been trying to get a bit of business through at the end of the day entitled "Access to Parliament (United Kingdom Members of the European Parliament)". It amends the current law which allows all MEPs parliamentary passes, on the grounds of 'growing pressure on parliamentary facilities' (according to the explanatory memo) and the absence of similar arrangements for other elected representatives, e.g. members of the devolved assemblies.Of course this would have the entirely desirable side-effect of preventing Nick Griffin from strutting his stuff through the corridors of Westminster at will.This type of business goes through on the nod, unless someone shouts 'object', in which case it gets deferred to the next day. Christopher Chope, the Conservative MP, has been making a special point of coming into the Chamber each night, just to shout 'object'. It's really about time he explained why.
Now, the explanation may be fair enough, though I somehow doubt if the SWP had managed to get 2 people elected Kerry McCarthy would be trying the same silly game. No, the clue is in the title piece, it's to keep the BNP from soiling Parliament with their presence, though with the stench of corruption already pervading the place I doubt the addition of 2 MEP's occasionally using the facilities would be noticed too much.
This is the equivalent of running off with the football because you're losing.
Now, as far as I'm aware, Parliament represents everyone in the UK, including the people who vote Sinn Fein whose MP's don't turn up (yet claim the max in expenses) this means that if Ms McCarthy does manage to amend the law then sure as the sun rises in the East it will be the first of many amendments, probably right down to banning anyone who opposes climate change legislation, opposes multiculturalism, wants an English Parliament, hell anyone who wants to expose dodgy MP's, it's called in the military "mission creep" and is a good candidate for the law of unintended consequences.

Instead of trying to ban people Ms McCarthy should really be trying to find a way to open up Parliament more for those who see themselves as disenfranchised as well as for the Assembly members who occasionally have to come to Westminster. If the people who vote BNP did not see themselves as abandoned by mainstream politicians then the BNP would not be a problem nor an issue. All Ms McCarthy is doing is feeding the sense of alienation for those who vote BNP and don't think for one second that the BNP wont exploit this.

I suspect Christopher Chope already knows this and this is why he objects to this petty spiteful amendment. Or he may just enjoy winding up Kerry McCarthy.

Addendum, I see Peter Hain is still playing silly buggers with free speech and the BNP's appearance on Question Time. Apparently the BNP are now an unlawful body, at least until they change their membership policy, so this makes them ineligible to face the public. The BBC thinks different, however it does not seem to faze Hain, but then again he's just another UAF shill so his actions are not too surprising.

Sooner or later the general public are going to wonder (if they haven't already) just what the political establishment is hiding. Why don't they want the BNP getting airtime, after all, the establishment has made it plain just what the BNP are. Could it be that they are afraid the BNP will come across as reasonable (unlikely I know) or is it that the BNP will force them to face the issues that have lead to the rise of the BNP? I suspect the political class don't want to face difficult questions on multiculturalism, immigration or even the EU and bringing the BNP on Question Time will open the can of worms. The fear for Labour of course is that people might notice that apart from racism and wanting to get out of the EU, the BNP look just like them.

The BNP are an abiding legacy of 12 years of labour misrule, failed social experimentation, broken manifesto promises and economic mismanagement. This is something I will find very difficult to forgive or forget.

Sunday, October 18, 2009

A good day to be an Englishman #3

Jenson Button sealed the drivers' championship with a superb recovery drive at a dramatic Brazilian Grand Prix won by Red Bull's Mark Webber.

Brawn's English driver started from 14th but executed a series of spectacular early overtaking moves before finishing the race fifth.
His main title threat, team-mate Rubens Barrichello, suffered a late puncture which dropped him down to eighth place.
Well done that man.

Weather or not

One of the things that has always mystified me about government (and believe you me it's a hell of a long list) is why the Met Office is part of the Ministry for Defence. Now in the far past I could see a point for some control to be levied on giving away just what the weather expectations might be for the country if we were likely to be invaded or bombed from the air. The Met Office themselves played a crucial role in the D-Day landings by predicting the weather lull between storms that allowed the landings to go ahead.
However in peacetime? With satellite technology too? I can't see any need for weather forecasting to be under the aegis of the civil service.

Apparently the Tories have similar thoughts.
A Conservative government would consider privatising the Met Office, shadow defence secretary Liam Fox has suggested to the BBC.
The Tories are committed to reducing Ministry of Defence costs by a quarter and this could include selling assets such as the Met Office.
Mr Fox told BBC One's Andrew Marr Show there was a "very strong case" for looking at offloading MoD assets.
He disputed suggestions that 22,000 MoD jobs could go as costs are cut.
Mr Fox said the Conservatives' policy had to be "about giving things to the front line", adding: "We can't afford to have 16% of the whole civil service in the MoD."
The Conservatives have asked civil servants to draw up plans to cut MoD costs by 25% without reducing front-line troops.
Now this is fine in so far as it goes, though I doubt it goes far enough, unless they sort out the perennial equipment shortages and manpower problems too. Labours rebuff is as predictable as it is inane.
But Labour ministers have accused the Conservatives of undermining the morale of troops in Afghanistan by raising questions about funding.
Now I doubt troop morale is going to be affected by losing civil servants, hell some of the troops would probably volunteer to shoot them personally. Especially as the Tories have said that front-line troops will be spared any cuts (yes I know the caveat about trusting politicians)
So, is this a smart move, in all likelihood yes.

Still doesn't mean I'm going to vote for them though, not unless I'm promised a referendum on the EU.

Saturday, October 17, 2009

Freedom of speech? Only when it suits.

Bloggers and Twitterers were quite proud of themselves (rightly so) when they went into overdrive over the Carter Ruck/Trafigura-Grauniad scandal. Eventually those who opposed freedom of speech were forced into a humiliating climbdown. All was good in the world and a warm glow was felt in all those who championed the right to hear what was said even if the party involved didn't like it.
Well the halo slipped quite a bit over the last few days. Jan Moirs article in the Daily Mail sent several Twitterers and bloggers into overdrive because she said something they didn't like, pointing out some details over the death of Stephen Gately and the possibility that his relationship was anything but natural.
Well there's apparently a heavy price to be paid for crossing the Pink Mafia and their politically correct chums, Marks and Spencer don't want their ads shown with the article in question and no doubt they are not alone. A massive twitter campaign lead by Steven Fry and Derren Brown (who have thousands of followers) has caused thousands of complaints of homophobia to be sent to the Press complaints committee. All this for a woman who had the temerity to point out that Gately and partner got legless, picked up some guy, took him home, Gately was so drunk he put on his pyjamas and slept on a couch whilst partner and stranger went up to their bed. She's being castigated for pointing out that in a normal marriage this would not be seen as normal behaviour (save in a few open relationships)

Harry's Place sums it up succinctly on their blog banner "Liberty if it means anything, is the right to tell people what they don't want to hear."

The sheer hypocrisy of this campaign against Moir offends me, not because I agree with what she has to say (though she made a few damned good points) but because certain pressure groups have decided to shut her up for saying it. A couple of days ago the blogs were full of articles describing how ‘Twitter’ was used against Carter-Ruck to defend free speech, today from my point of view, ‘Twitter’ is being used to silence free speech.

Fine, attack Moir over what she said, but don't ever move to have her silenced, that is a very slippery slope, one which we're already far too far down.

Friday, October 16, 2009

Educating well.

A group of experts believe that kids should start school at 6, drop sats and have a very narrow curriculum.

As reported in the Grauniad.
Schoolchildren should not start formal lessons until they turn six, and Sats should be scrapped to relieve the damaging pressure England's young pupils face, the biggest inquiry into primary education for 40 years concludes today.
In a damning indictment of Labour's education record since 1997, the Cambridge University-led review accuses the government of introducing an educational diet "even narrower than that of the Victorian elementary".
It claims that successive Labour ministers have intervened in England's classrooms on an unprecedented scale, controlling every detail of how teachers teach in a system that has "Stalinist overtones". It says they have exaggerated progress, narrowed the curriculum by squeezing out space for history, music and arts, and left children stressed-out by the testing and league table system.
The review is the biggest independent inquiry into primary education in four decades, based on 28 research surveys, 1,052 written submissions and 250 focus groups. It was undertaken by 14 authors, 66 research consultants and a 20-strong advisory committee at Cambridge University, led by Professor Robin Alexander, one of the most experienced educational academics in the country.
Last night the review's conclusions were backed by every education union in England, but rejected by ministers, who were immediately accused of rejecting independent rigorous research.
This actually makes a great deal of sense, which is probably why Ministers have rejected it. It wont affect nursery education either, though a trend of getting kids to learn to read and write as well as learn a few numbers wouldn't hurt at that level. Concentrating on the basics, particularly in the formative years will eventually produce a generation of kids who are very literate and who know just how to research properly if they need to find the answers.
Part of the problem they have of course is that education is the only toy left to politicians in which they have any real power as they've signed everything else over to the EU and merely remain in place to rubber stamp the decisions of Brussels. So meddling in education is what Labour do and I'm fairly sure they don't see a generation of ill educated drones as a major problem, after all if they are going to vote, they'll probably vote Labour.
So, a generation of well educated kids is probably the last thing the political classes want, they want their kids well educated for sure, after all where will the next generation of "leaders" come from, but as for the proles? Well they definitely don't like them getting ideas above their station, after all they may see that there is no need for a class of political drones who believe that people should do as they are told and not as the political class do.

Thursday, October 15, 2009

Distorting the facts

People often distort historical fact to suit their beliefs. Often mixing legend into fact as well as glossing over certain unpalatable happenstances.

The political class often mix and match historical fact with modern nuances to look their best in the eyes of the public.
Leading historians said politicians, public relations companies and even the Royal Family were guilty of peddling “historical myths” to promote campaigns.
Academics from leading universities including Oxford, Cambridge, Manchester and Nottingham warned that misrepresenting the past could blur public understanding of important events.
Professor Pat Thane, from the Centre for Contemporary British History, at the University of London, also warned that “bad history can lead to bad policy analysis and bad policy”.
Writing in Times Higher Education magazine on Thursday, historians criticised a series of claims made in recent years, including those from the Prince of Wales that Henry VIII “instigated the very first piece of green legislation in this country”.
In a recent lecture, the Prince said: “What was instinctively understood by many in King Henry’s time was the importance of working with the grain of nature to maintain balance between keeping the Earth’s natural capital intact and sustaining humanity on its renewable income.”
But Dr John Langton, research fellow in geography at St John’s College, Oxford, said it was a “very partisan account”.
He acknowledged that the King created a 10,000 acre forest at Hampton Court in 1539 but insisted it was just so he could hunt deer. Regular laws were passed in medieval times to protect forests for hunting, but “none could be described as green legislation”, he said.
Historians also criticised recent pronouncements by politicians on subjects including social mobility in the 1950s and 60s, the spread of democracy in the Middle East, the importance of marriage in the 19th and early 20th centuries and the creation of a Conservative “star chamber” to vet ministerial spending.
Part of the problem is the way history is/was taught to us, there's an awful lot of it so it tends to be compacted to almost uselessness in the eyes of kids, particularly if the concentration is on the boring bits of social change.

In my days as far as I can remember it went like this.

Cavemen, mostly to do with hunting for skins and cave painting, oh and flint.
Morphing into people who built artificial islands on lakes (Don't ask)
Morphing into Roman Britain, slight mention of Boadicea and the Roman Wall, but that's about it.
Morphing into Vikings sacking Lindisfarne, but little mention of the Viking Kingdoms, nor oddly enough of Alfred the Great, or Cnut.
Morphing into 1066 when the French last mounted a successful invasion (They didn't, the Normans were a Viking Kingdom)
Massive leap forward to Tudor times (I remember echoes of the Burghers of Calais, but little else)
Dissolution of the Monasteries, followed by Elizabethan times and the Spanish Armada, Drake, Raleigh, etc.
Stuart times, bit about a war and Cromwell, young prince and an oak tree. Nothing about Ireland nor the Commonwealth, bit about Puritans going abroad.
We also learned a bit about medicine and grave robbing.
After this I got to secondary school and went into a "Social and Economic History of Britain" the infamous book that does not mention Napoleon, nor Wellington, but does mention the Corn Laws and social deprivation. Oh it did mention the Chartists and the Enclosure acts too. It did mention slavery and Wilberforce, but failed to mention that Britain outlawed it during a fight for its survival.

Thus is interest in history killed off in the UK. This is how they distort the truth, manipulate us by our past and get away with it. Yes there are some of us out there who have a passion for history, who have taken the time to escape the trap to study what really happened and discovered to our joy what a wonderful land we live in and how rich our history is.

This is what is denied to us by those who use our history to justify a certain belief, to prove how the past justifies the present, history needs to be taught in an interesting way (thank God for Horrible Histories) but it also needs to be taught in a truthful way with regard to context. Trying to put modern sensibilities over a 17th century civil war regarding religion simply does not work, nor can it be compared to the Arab Israel hostilities as one of my teachers tried to do.

The problem is that the truth may be out there, but the lies are in peoples heads, because they've been encouraged not to ask nor check for themselves.

Wednesday, October 14, 2009

Too little, too late

It's always fascinating watching a Labour government unravel at the seams when the pot runs dry and they realise that all the "special interest" groups that they've supported in the face of the majority aren't going to be enough get them re-elected.
Still, they can find the odd £12 million to throw at their former supporters in a desperate attempt to buy back their votes from the BNP (a far more socialist party than New Labour)

Alienating the white working class will corrode communities and cause tensions to boil over, the Government warned.

John Denham, the Communities Secretary, admitted fast social change, including large flows of immigration, has led to resentment in some neighbourhoods that have also been hit hard by the recession.
It comes a day after academics warned the "traditional" white working class have been left behind and isolated in a changing Britain.
Mr Denham announced a £12 million programme to target such communities and make them feel more connected.
He also said the Government needs to be more ambitious and quicker in it's reaction to easing pressures caused by sudden influxes of migrants and foreign workers.
The programme has been announced amid concerns the sense of alienation is driving some in to the hands of extremist and far right groups such as the British National Party.
However, Mr Denham stressed it was not about combating the BNP, which he said was a matter for political parties, but about "addressing the legitimate fears and concerns, which, neglected, can prove fertile territory for extremism and those who would divide our communities".
He told an audience in London: "It is not entirely surprising that the may question whether they are being fairly treated and to worry that others are, unfairly, doing better.
"Not entirely surprising, that feeling unfairly treated can lead to resentment or worse."
This by the way is the same John Denham who had a go at the working class EDL over the rioting in Harrow despite the fact that the EDL weren't even involved. Bit of a blindspot has John where it comes to troublemakers, he no doubt feels that the UAF are the champions of liberty and free speech in the UK at the moment.
However this is only £12 million, I know it sounds a lot in real terms and it is being focussed on areas of deprivation. However lets look at it in real terms and assume that bureaucratic costs don't swallow up a large chunk of it (I know, I know, but work with me here, ok)

The Equality and Human Rights Commission. gets £80 million, granted it works countrywide, but it does fund these groups.
  • Bath & North East Somerset Racial Equality Council
  • Black & Minority Ethnic Carers Support Service 
  • Camden & Westminster Refugee Training Partnership (C&WRTP)
  • Consortium of Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual and Transgender voluntary and Community Organisations
  • Gypsy/Travel Education & Information Project North East (GTEIP)
  • MOSAIC Black & Mixed Parentage Family Group
  • National Council for One Parent Families|Gingerbread
  • North Yorkshire Black and Minority Ethnic Strategy Board
  • Pakistan Community Association and Multicultural Advice Centre
Now why hasn't the government also been funding something similar for the white working class? Answer seems to be that they looked at them as voting fodder and that they could be safely ignored for more appreciative "victim groups" such as immigrants, gays and feminists..
I suppose you could make a case for the EHRC, though for the life of me I cannot see them ever getting to the stage where they'd be redundant, it's after all not in their interests for things to be equal.

So we could look at some other Quangos.

Can you imagine what we could do with the £170 billion we'd save from removing Quangos from the body politic?
Imagine the improvements to healthcare you'd get by stopping the (estimated) £55 million spent in translation services by the NHS.
How about leaving the EU and spending the money (£106K per minute) on the UK rather than Brussels?

So, £12 million is essentially chickenfeed, it's a bribe to stop the Labour supporting base from electing another socialist party aka the BNP.
Mr Denham can stress all he likes about this not being about combating the BNP, this is all it's about and nothing else.

Tuesday, October 13, 2009

Leave us the hell alone!

Nice the government's expert advisory body on medical treatment (a most contradictory acronym if ever there was one) Is up to it's bansturbating authoritarian best today.

The government's expert advisory body on medical treatment is recommending imposing minimum prices on alcohol as a means of combating "hazardous and harmful drinking".
Draft proposals put out for consultation by the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (Nice) today put it on a political collision course with the Department of Health.
The recommendation, hidden away on page 16 of a 78-page advisory document on public health, will stir up public controversy over the issue, adding to the growing list of doctors and politicians in favour of price controls.
Earlier this year, the chief medical officer, Sir Liam Donaldson, backed a minimum price of 50p per unit of alcohol to combat binge drinking. He vowed to pursue the initiative despite Gordon Brown rejecting it. The British Medical Association endorsed the proposal last month, saying it would be one of the most effective ways of stopping young people drinking excessively and damaging their bodies. The Conservative party backed the move at their conference this month, promising to target cheap super-strength beers, cider and alcopops. The Scottish government is already investigating how to introduce a blanket minimum pricing control on all alcohol.
1)  The safe drinking units were just plucked out of the air, made up, and are a pack of lies foisted upon us by so called experts.
2)  It's none of their business how much anyone should choose to drink, it's not a crime...................yet.
3)  Those of us who choose to drink and don't commit crimes do not like bastards like Nice telling us that we should pay more because some people do get violent. We after all are supposed to have laws and a police force for such matters.
4)  You make one drug prohibitively expensive people will start using another, life's like that.
5)  The BMA, Nice, The Tories and Labour should not meddle with ordinary people so much, we don't like to be told what to eat, drink, smoke, run, don't run etc. It gives us thoughts about stringing up jobsworths and public servants.
6)  Go away and die in excruciating agony the lot of you meddling, sanctimonious, bansturbating, holier than thou, smug, unsmiling, joyless nobodies and don't ever come up with such crap again.

The law of unintended consequences.

I would never have heard of Trafigura, nor would I have thought it such a big deal, I might have even skimmed over the report not even noticing it was there. But thanks to Carter Ruck and an attempt to gag the Grauniad, but who forgot the political reporting  blogs. This is the question the Guardian was gagged from reporting:
Paul Farrelly (Newcastle-under-Lyme): To ask the Secretary of State for Justice, what assessment he has made of the effectiveness of legislation to protect (a) whistleblowers and (b) press freedom following the injunctions obtained in the High Court by (i) Barclays and Freshfields solicitors on 19 March 2009 on the publication of internal Barclays reports documenting alleged tax avoidance schemes and (ii) Trafigura and Carter-Ruck solicitors on 11 September 2009 on the publication of the Minton report on the alleged dumping of toxic waste in the Ivory Coast, commissioned by Trafigura.
Most people I suspect would not have been even remotely interested (save in certain specialist fields) but the minute you attempt to gag someone, people automatically want to know why. So when Trafigura look at the bill from Carter Ruck I suspect it's going to be sliced and diced to check for value for money. After all, the 'Streisand Effect' is very well known.
Mind you Carter Ruck do have form in banning orders, it's something they specialise in have they've become expert at pressing certain legal buttons and the failure of some  judges to understand the nature of this affront to democracy and press freedom in this country is the underlying problem.
In March media specialists Carter-Ruck obtained a legal injunction to protect pop star Lily Allen from harassment by Big Pictures and rival agency Matrix Photos. Carter-Ruck also obtained an injunction "restraining further harassment" by other paparazzi photographers in a case which was presented to the high court by barrister David Sherborne, who also represented Winehouse.
Still it's nice to know that as yet they can't get around the freedom of the internet, but I'm sure they're still looking at it.

Monday, October 12, 2009

Support Vaclav Klaus petition

H/T Mark Wadsworth

Sign here.


Breaking news on the BBC Gordon Brown is to pay back £12,415 in expenses.

So, turns out our glorious Reichsfuhrer did have his hand in the till too, along with whatsisname the  Lib Dem guy, the leader, the one who people can never remember who has to pay back  £910 and Call me Dave has been asked for more details over his mortgage.

Prime Minister Gordon Brown will repay £12,415 after an independent audit of all MPs' expenses claims since 2004.
Downing Street confirmed he would repay the amount which is believed to include claims for cleaning costs.
It was within the rules but auditor Sir Thomas Legg has set retrospective annual limits on what he thinks should have been claimed for some services.
Lib Dem leader Nick Clegg is to repay £910 of the £3,900 he claimed for gardening between 2006 and 2009.
Sir Thomas believes £1,000 a year is sufficient to cover gardening.
All MPs are getting letters about their expenses claims from Sir Thomas.
The former civil servant was asked to scrutinise all MPs' claims after details of what they had been claiming under their second homes allowance and others were leaked and published by the Daily Telegraph in May.
'No quibbling'
The BBC understands he has set retrospective limits for some items and annual limits on what he believes they should have claimed - including £1,000 a year for gardening and £2,000 for cleaning.
Some MPs will be told their expenses presented no issues, others will be asked for more information and many are expected to be asked to repay money.
Earlier Mr Clegg told the BBC MPs should pay up if asked to do so: "The last thing MPs should be doing ... is quibbling, questioning, trying to drag their heels.

Paying it back though is just the start, apologies are not enough, if I did this at my place of work I would be sacked and charges brought. These people are thieves, they are corrupt, they've tried to hide the evidence, they've even sought to prevent the public going to court to get compensation.
This Parliament should be dissolved and any MP who has had to pay back their ill gotten gains prevented from ever standing for public office again, if we can't trust you to be honest with our money then we can't trust you to run the country.

I've no doubt "Call me Dave" will try to get elected on a new broom agenda, however I'm sick of the mainstream political parties and their hegemonic grasp on the levers of power, it is time, well past time for change and that has to start with getting rid of the "Big Three" from power. People should look to independent parties see what's out there, look to change the face of UK politics forever. The "Big Three" just don't care anymore, have become too used to the trappings of power.

It's time for change and no-one in this current Parliament is prepared to deliver it, so the only way we'll get change is for them all to go.

Sunday, October 11, 2009

So the squealing begins

Well, there's a surprise, faced with being forced to pay back their ill gotten gains our thieving MP's have decided to challenge the authority of the independent auditor.

MPs today began to challenge openly the authority of the independent auditor charged with investigating expenses abuses at Westminster amid claims that the civil servant's inquiry had strayed beyond its remit.
John Mann, the MP who has led calls for a thorough overhaul of the allowances system, raised concern that Sir Thomas Legg's audit of expenses had become too broad, and warned that this might trigger lawsuits that could drag on through the "entirety of the next parliament".
The MP for Bassetlaw, who has been publishing his own expenses in full since 2004, warned that many MPs – faced with paying back sums of up to £200,000 – may "go to ground" rather than pay immediately, and then challenge the legality of the repayment demands.
In early July, Legg initially set out to examine cases where MPs used parliamentary expenses to improve their second homes in order to make a profit rather than just maintaining them, as rules allow. However, he has also looked at exploitation of loopholes which amounted to breaches in the spirit of the law, as well as the actual law.

They still don't get it do they? Even if they force the auditor to back down, even if they manage to get it rescinded as they didn't break the rules they are still going to be viewed as crooks, thieves, corrupted and unfit to govern us. This money is not theirs, it's ours, they even managed to throw out the The Constitutional Reform and Governance Bill preventing the public from bringing a class action case against them as recommended by the Civil Justice Council in short, they've managed to weasel out of being tried by the courts for their various misdeeds. But it still doesn't matter, they can kid themselves that they are honourable members, but to the public they are nothing more than troughing pigs and always will be. These men and women have tarnished both the reputation and the name of the Mother of Parliaments.

Cromwell put it so well
'You are no parliament! Some of you are drunkards '—bending a stern eye upon Mr. Chaloner; 'some of you are whoremasters ,' a word expressive of a worse immorality, and he looked here at Henry Marten and Sir Peter Wentworth —'living in open contempt of God's commandments. Some of you are corrupt, unjust persons—how can you be a parliament for God's people? Depart, I say, and let us have done with you. Go!'

They think they can carry on, they think we'll forget, some may even hope for forgiveness by being re-elected. But some of us will remember, we have the names and we have the internet. The record will stand of these thieves in public office and we will be a thorn in their sides naming, harassing and reminding any who will read our blogs just what a disgusting, corrupt and iniquitous Parliament we to our shame elected.

Will the next government be any better?

Edit, thanks to Anna Raccoon I've corrected the passage regarding the Constitutional Reform and Governance Bill. Seems they didn't just remove a clause, they threw back the entire thing.

Quashing free speech

Not too surprising, Peter Hain is to make a formal complaint to the BBC Trust over the appearance of the British National Party leader, Nick Griffin, on BBC1's Question Time next week.

Hain to complain to BBC over BNP on 'Question Time'

Peter Hain is to make a formal complaint to the BBC Trust over the appearance of the British National Party leader, Nick Griffin, on BBC1's Question Time next week. This follows what insiders described as a "robust" meeting between the Secretary of State for Wales and the show's executive producer, Ric Bailey, during the Labour Party conference.
Mr Hain said yesterday: "I fundamentally disagree with the BBC's decision. I fully understand why colleagues feel they have to appear, but I certainly wouldn't appear with a racist, fascist representative – I think it gives them legitimacy."
But Peter Sissons, a former chairman of Question Time, attacked the Labour minister yesterday: "Instead of bleating to the BBC Trust, why doesn't the great campaigner offer to go on the programme and dismantle the BNP's policies himself?"
Separately, a recent broadcast in which two senior BNP activists were deemed to have been given an easy ride by Radio 1's Newsbeat programme has already attracted 100 complaints, says the Mail on Sunday. Mark Collett and Joseph Barber were introduced only as "Mark and Joey", and went on to claim that the England footballer Ashley Cole "was not ethnically British".
The location of the Question Time recording will be kept secret, due to security concerns, with audience members being screened in an attempt to weed out anti-fascist protesters and BNP supporters.
The broadcasting union Bectu, meanwhile, is threatening to strike if the BBC attempts to film the programme at Television Centre in London. "If they try to compel any of our members to work on the programme then, bluntly, there'll be trouble up to and including industrial action," said Luke Crawley, Bectu's assistant general secretary.

Now I don't agree with what the BNP have to say, I think their left wing economics and their authoritarian racist beliefs are abhorrent, however I don't agree with any attempt to gag them. That's a socialist trick and like most aspects of socialism will backfire as it just gives the BNP more publicity, adds to their martyrdom complex and makes people vote for them as they tend to see the utter failure Labour have made of the last 12 years and can't bring themselves to vote Tory.

So, what Hain is doing (and Labour just can't seem to help themselves) is giving the BNP free publicity just before Question Time and probably making it the most watched this year (at least) I suspect Labours biggest fear is that the BNP come over as fairly ordinary or even normal and leave people wondering just what all the fuss is about. For too long politicians of the authoritarian left have been pointing the finger and screaming racist or fascist at the BNP and now their greatest fear will be that the BNP just come across as "The Labour your parents would have voted for" Yes there will be the accusations of racism, but compared to the mess that Labour have made of unlimited immigration I doubt that that criticism is going to wash anymore. People are genuinely worried about what is going to happen to their country and their lives and they know who to blame, who supports minority rights over the majority, who wrecked the economy, and most important, who the liars are.

Labours world is falling apart, their brownshirt thugs (the UAF) try to stifle legitimate worries and protests and the BNP are getting over 1 million votes in the EU elections from ex Labour voters mostly. I think the retribution at the next general election is going to hit them very badly, perhaps they'll never recover, but they only have themselves to blame.