New Labour hypocrisy

Haha. That’s what I have to say to New Labour. Haha. I mean talk about revealing yourselves at every turn. This time it’s Ruth Kelly who seems to delight in decrying the not in my backyarders but then turns out to be one herself:

Ruth Kelly faced fresh embarrassment as she was branded a hypocrite for denouncing Nimbyism while opposing a series of housing developments in her constituency.
Local planners said Ms Kelly, the new Secretary of State for Communities and Local Government, was a regular campaigner against new housing in her Bolton West constituency, despite saying she wanted to "root out" the not-in-my-backyard attitude of householders.

When New Labour lose a seat they say ”oh well, it was about local issues, we must do better” and in the next breath it’s all ”oh local issues, don’t be such a NIMBY”. What are they like eh?

There's an idea. The Little Red Book of New Labour Hypocrisy. Try and keep it under 600 pages.

England sinking? The Politics show to record meeting.

Updated ... see end of post.

From the CEP, which I received via mail last night, and also from the EDP

A public meeting is being held in the Rugby Club in Penrith, Cumberland, at 7.30 pm on Thursday 11th May 2006.

Christine Constable, our Vice Chairman, will be there representing the English Democrats.

Scilla Cullen, Secretary to the CEP, will also be there with a speech entitled

An English Parliament? - Objections and Solutions.

All welcome

For further information please contact Steve Gash at spg.cep [AT] btinternet.com

or Geoffrey Graham - gwgraham [AT] supanet.com

Have your say over at the BBC.

Kelly and equality

No. 10 backs Kelly on equalities. Oh, oh....she's finished.

Flaccid Prescott

Well, it looks like John Prescott's roll has been regionalised. He's managed to keep just the Deputy PM roll which basically means that he's the bouncer standing between Blair and Brown. They should both hit him and get on with the main bout.

No, he's a baby elephant

Let’s get this straight right from the start. Charles Clarke is not a proud man. A proud man does not attempt to impose ID cards on the general public. A proud man does not allow the release of dangerous criminals to impose their lawlessness without considering them for deportation. A proud man does not allow the police force to have the power of summary judgement. None of these are the actions of the proud. They are the actions of the arrogant.

A proud man would have resigned. Being pushed and then refusing kindness (a new ministerial position should not have been offered) is more akin to tantrum than it is to anything else.

By 1 vote

Sublime:

A former mayor of St Albans lost his council seat after an election tie was settled by getting the candidates to pick the longest pencil.

St Albans Tory councillor Keith Stammers lost out to Lib Dem Judith Shardlow after their votes were tied at 1131 each after three recounts.

Local election turnout

A quick word with some guy sitting outside of the polling station here returned a turn out so far of about 30%. They're hoping the after work voter rush will improve things.

Sun is shining, beer is calling.

The conservative message is not getting through

So, there I was this morning, sitting at the bottom of the stairs putting my shoes on when my good Lady suggested that I take my poling card with me to work so that I might vote on the way home. Good idea, so while we both hunted around for the cards we chatted about the moment of utter pointlessness that lay ahead.

”So who are you going to vote for?” she requested.

”Oh, for the first time I’m not 100% sure. It depends on who is standing really. If UKIP are there I’ll probably go for them, perhaps the EDP if someone is standing for them. I might even spoil my ballot with Guido had the right idea, What’s the fucking point or English Parliament! or some such. How about you?”

”Well, you know so much more than me about these things. I’ll probably just vote conservatory.”

How we laughed.

”You won’t put this up on your web site will you?”, she said.

Local thinking

Government minister David Miliband wants the electorate to ignore what's going on at Westminster and think local when it comes to voting in the council elections. I like to be helpful. Here are some local thoughts for you to think:

"Are any of the released murderers, rapists or child abusers in my local community?"

"I hope Prescott doesn't come round here to try and shag me."

A very British politician

I am not one for enjoying other people’s suffering, it’s not part of my character. However, I am one for enjoying the demise of the powerful, particularly when they themselves don’t seem to regard the feelings of others as particularly important. Obviously these two character traits sometimes come into conflict with each other and eventually one wins.

So, onto John Prescott then. You remember him, he’s the politician who thumps egg throwers in self defence. He’s the politician who sticks two fingers up at the press and does so on camera while walking into number 10. He’s the politician who baits and goads demonstrators while on Labour Party business. He’s the politician who asks the people if they want the regionalisation of their country and then ignores the answer because he thinks it’s the wrong one. He’s the politician who responds to criticism about that point by saying that he asked the people if they wanted elected regional assemblies and because they said no they will get un-elected ones. He’s the politician who wants to tax your garden patio.

And now it turns out that he’s the politician who has used arguments about moral values and sleaze as part of his platform but doesn’t himself believe in those arguments or values. Certainly not enough to prevent him becoming what he was apparently once morally against.

This is a British politician. Quiet, measured, eloquent, restrained, truthful? None of those things. Hurtful, vexatious, prejudiced, rude, adulterer. We’re getting warmer.

When the news finally breaks of his other misdemeanour, and if he survives that as a minister, then we should take solace in the fact that history will judge him as twat whose main achievement after years in power was to fuck just about everything that he came into contact with.

Too funny

Holy smokes!

I'm prepared to bet that once Fleet Street's dogs of war start trawling through the Labour Party, the National Union of Seamen and the darker corners of the corridors of power, this will prove not to have been the first time Two Jags has dipped his fingers in the typing pool.

V for Vote

There's a very interesting poll over at Guido's place that you might want to take part in. Don't miss the comments, particularly the one by the morningstar.

Are you a big game hunter?

Does anyone have an elephant gun? There's an elephant at the Home Office that's just about to bolt.........Public safety and all that.

Don't waste your vote....vote fringe!

From the Telegraph:

David Cameron threw down the gauntlet to Eurosceptic Tory MPs yesterday by declaring that anyone who advocated withdrawal from the European Union would not serve on his front bench.

One often comes across the phrase ”what a wasted vote” when discussing fringe politics with people over a drink or two. I’d just like to point out that wasted votes have been cast in the direction of the Tory party for years.

The Tory party is full of people alienated by its fruitcake leadership. Cameron confirms that this situation also extends to his parties own MPs.

(Via The Englishman).

This in The Times is worth reading.

Open letter to David Cameron

Here's a cracking open letter in the Observer addressed to David Cameron, leader of the Tory party and former conservative.

Sure, it's written by an unelected conservative Lord. But that doesn't make it any less true.

Via Bishop Hill.

UKIP backgound reading

Ever since the Camaron remarks on UKIP I have been keeping an eye on the UKIP forums to see what might be found. This very recent posting, which seems to be a copy of an article written by By Gerard Batten (MEP), fills in some details on Dr Sked (UKIP's first leader) and the reasons why he left the party:

Among David Cameron's recent insults levelled at UKIP was the allegation that, "Dr Sked (UKIP's first leader) left the party because he thought it had been infiltrated by the far right". Mr Cameron speaks from a position of ignorance. As one of UKIP's founding members, the first Party Secretary from 1993 to 1997, one of Dr Sked's closest associates and a participant in these events, I would like to put the record straight.

UKIP said it would also be parking a Saracen armoured car outside the Conservative spring conference in Manchester on Saturday, in a publicity stunt designed to show "that UKIP's tanks are firmly parked on David Cameron's lawn".

Britain’s water crisis worsens

Members of the public have expressed dismay over Britain’s worsening water crisis with 90% of voters saying they believe there's no longer enough clear blue water between the Tory party and New Labour.

Tories, what a funny lot

It's amusing really. A whole bunch of Conservatives defect from the Tory party to the UKIP only to be branded racists by the new Tory leader. This includes your host by the way who has been experimenting with UKIP voting in the hope that it would send some kind of message to the Tories. Well, message sent and response received. Nice.

I'm sure Peter Lilley MP will won't worry a jot about losing the votes of individuals such as myself, though I wish the Tory party would stop sending me all that information about local events, lunches, coffee mornings and dinner parties with posh after dinner speakers. I mean, why bother courting racists. I'd only turn up in my jack boots and start spouting nonsense that has no basis in fact and that's insulting to various groups of people. Hang on a minute, isn't that exactly the kind of behaviour that is being showcased by the New Tory leader?

Right then. I'm off to parliament to lobby to have my family sent back home to where they came from. I never did understand my mother; she talks funny and takes jobs from the locals.

Oh oh!

Toad flu!

Another conservative chased away

This makes me feel like joining the Conservative party again just so that I can quit in more style rather than in the way that I did. Sure, they phoned me to find out why but a well thought out letter is so much better.

Via Gareth who quotes the following from Chad's highly quotable letter:

"You cannot promise tax-cutting in Scotland whilst demanding “sharing the proceeds of growth” in England."

Lords and IDs

The more the present government and the House of Commons fall into disrepute, the more reasonable and worthy of respect the House of Lords seems to become. It’s astonishing until you realise it’s exactly the point.

My guess is that it's all likely to be in vain though. I hope that I am wrong but the Lords is no longer a serious barrier to the commons and there is a lot of money and some rather large contracts riding on the ID database and all its associated bits and bobs.

Indeed, one of my consultant friends now drives a brand new Jag paid for in cash.

Councillor in huff over his nations flag? Or perhaps it's just over women? Or over women and flags? We ask which it is.

Now here's a fascinating insight into the mind of a New Labour Councillor:

I would have thought a picture of a young blue-eyed, blonde woman wrapped in the Union Flag was the sort of thing one would expect on the Freedom Association (or worse, the BNP) site rather than a serious political blog.

Still, it could get worse:

Whatever next.. a young woman in a PVC cat suit carrying a whip in one hand and a cross of St George flag in the other? (no, no, not you Mrs T.) Perhaps someone could explain the reasoning.

Mirror, mirror on the wall

The people over at the Power Inquiry ask:

How can democracy survive when we feel politicians don’t listen?

Now that’s funny.

Look out! Toads!!!

There's little trust in politics and even less trust in politicians. That's one of the findings of the oddly incomplete Power Inquiry into political and democratic participation by the masses:

How can democracy survive when we feel politicians don’t listen?

Can Simon Hughes explain why only a few months ago he declared his support for an English Parliament, only to jettison this view once he declared his intention to lead the LibDems.

I thought politics was all about belief, passion and HONESTY - clearly I am mistaken.

Guess what, Simon said he’d always said he wanted EvoEM (English Votes on English Matters) – and he had always been up front about that…… Liar, liar, Hughes’ pants on fire….

Oh the humanity of it all.

Mile and Ounces castigate new style politics

David Mile, senior official at the Toadwatch Foundation, has written to the Toadish Policy Institute castigating Britain’s track record in modernising its politicians.

The people of Seahaven have shown the way and that is embarrassing for a modern and forward looking nation like Britain.

We have a halfway system in this country where on the one hand we have sensible politicians who are hardworking and in tune with the demands of the Great British public and on the other we have politicians like Lord Kinnock.

Well, you have to admit Mr. Mile has a point. We have all kinds of politicians and dignitaries visiting this country and they don’t know from one minute to the next whether they will be dealing with a serious politician or a complete idiot. It’s awkward.

I am in full agreement with the Ounces. Many politicians seem to not only have lost their way in recent years they also seem to have lost their minds.

It’s like a bad dream. When we first went to live abroad we thought the way their politicians did things was actually funny. Italy was a hoot and Sweden was like some kind of surreal dream. We felt sorry for the ordinary people having to put up with all that nonsense from their elected representatives. Well, the blood simply drained from our faces when we came back. It’s all gone mental.

Well, you know, ummmmm.

This just in

Tory toad uses email to try and 'hack' web site figures. That in itself should exclude the toad from ever using the internet again. Surely there's a New Labour law that can be used to change this mans behaviour?

On the subject of the New Labour party the figures on MP responsiveness quoted in the article above is of no great surprise:

Overall, the writetothem website found that Conservatives recorded a 74% responsiveness rating, compared with 60% for Liberal Democrats and 58% for Labour.

In other news this particular Tory makes a great deal of sense:

Mr Hague said: "Anyone who thinks that we can carry on legislating for England in exactly the same way as we did before devolution is clearly living in the past.

"When even senior Labour backbenchers have begun to recognise this, so should Gordon."

Brown pants Brown

Most excellent. I'm not a LibDem supporter but I do not not support them to a greater degree than I do New Labour. If you get what I mean.

The Beeb report government ministers saying the loss was due to "local issues". "Really?" I thought, "they would say that woudn't they?". Then I read this:

The chancellor, who lives in Dunfermline and West Fife himself, had been active in the by-election campaign.

I smell a rat. Do you smell a rat? There's definitely something ratty in the air.

Let me get this straight. There are rumours of plans to suspend local democracy in England during 2007 so that us cash cows don’t have to be bothered to vote for local representatives who might end up representing us for only one year. Only one year because New Labour is planning a significant shake up in local democracy by, they hope, some time in that very same year. Hmmmm…..

The New Labour Minister for Communities, Mr Miliband, has this to say about the shake up and the discussions they are having with our locally elected representatives:

"The debate on local government reorganisation is gathering pace - we are having a mature discussion with local government - and we will make our position clear in the Local Government White Paper in the middle of this year."

My spider senses are tingling. Tingling because I would not put it past New Labour to end up suspending the local elections until after a delayed new law has been passed using some excuse like they were going to be suspended anyway due to the restructuring they were expecting to happen and that it is only a few more weeks or months for us voters to wait.

The picture I have painted above has got to be wrong hasn’t it? It’s got to be.

Oh no. They lied to me. Me of all people.

It just goes to show that politicians are not the only accomplished liars in the world:

George Galloway has said he was promised he could use Celebrity Big Brother show as a "soapbox" for his political views.

He had been surprised when he emerged from the house to discover his political statements had been blanked out with the sound of "birdsong".

And to think I never knew......

Apparently New Labour are a party of ordinary people doing extraordinary things.

Quite

Tom Utley in the Telegraph:

The Chancellor has had a very long wait for the keys to Number 10. It will serve him right if he takes possession of them at the very moment when the economy that he has abused for so long begins to collapse.

Drunk, vain and lazy

Wow, what a microcosm of the failings and self indulgent desires of the arse end of society our Parliamentary establishment is. The latest double tap comes in the guise of boozer Charles Kennedy MP and the Big Brother celebrity housemate George Galloway MP.

All coming on the same day that the FaxYourMP guys wrote to ask me if my MP had bothered to answer the last fax I sent him. Yeah, right. Like that was going to happen.

That was then, this is now

When the government suggests that this or that policy is desirable and the police service are in agreement our ministers insist that the mere fact that our police think the policy is desirable is an extremely good reason for that policy to pass unopposed through the two parliamentary houses. I wonder how well the government will listen to their tarmac pounding champions this time.

EDM 1184

I've just used this service to send a fax to my MP asking him to sign this Early Day Motion.

This is a change in direction for me as I was convinced that I would never write to another MP again. I have found that writing to my MP is much the same as signing an on line petition. Neither activity has actually produced any positive outcome in the past.

Am I coming in out of the cold? No, but I am throwing ice and snow through a slight crack in the door.

Via Gav.

Pull up the drawbridge and release the hounds

The Englishman does some excellent work on the subject of council tax inspectors and their mandate to enter your home. He then asks a simple question: so why the lies?

Might as well ask a monkey why it makes monkey noises.

Hydrocardigans?

John Prescott didn't reall say hydrocardigans did he? This must be some kind of joke, perhaps on Prescott's part?

Pffft, ten a penny

Get a load of this. Apparently I have one member of parliament, one county councillor, three district councillors and seven members of the European parliament.

Official statistics

Is this the first sign that New Labour thinks its going to lose the next general election?:

Chancellor Gordon Brown has announced that the Office for National Statistics will be made independent of government...

Questions, questions

The burning question on my mind at this very moment is could John Prescott pass the Turing test? I think not.

Have you chosen your song yet?

Have you chosen your Blair has gone song yet? I chose mine about two years ago and I am looking forward to putting up some of the lyrics on this blog and dancing around semi-naked and drunk when the Day of brief light arrives.

Then, no doubt, I will have to start hunting around for a New Labour has gone song which I hope to be playing, and singing, and dancing to sometime within the next decade or so.

But what then? Being out in the cold is great for music appreciation but does nothing for ones well being. Still, I have my principles. They'll have to do.

Is throwing a minister still an accurate measure of trust?

A policeman should be allowed, without intervention, to lobby his MP regarding any subject he feels is appropriate. The key test in the current brewing storm is not whether the police lobbied their MPs but whether they were asked or invited to do so by government.

If they were then not only is it an unacceptable situation but it is also further evidence that New Labour has failed to understand the right and proper place of government in our society.

I suspect that I could throw a minister a long way. It is no longer an accurate measure of how much I trust them.

Blair says MPs out of touch with public opinion

You could say the same thing about hanging, or prisons, or life meaning life or public opinion of MPs. Any argument in a storm I guess.

Dirty, dirty, toady

Oh dear, oh dear, oh dear.

Blair's blunder over MI5 demand to hold suspects for 90 days

Oh no, another inadvertent mistake by one of our 'leaders'. Of course, we really wouldn't know much about this if Blair was in his ascendancy. Expect to see more of this kind of revelation and confirmation in the future.

When the police ask for something that's in line with government thinking their opinions are seen as important and beyond reproach. When the police disagree with government thinking their opinions are seen as "their own views".

Blatant Liar

I agree with Guido here. I simply don't believe Stephen Byers. His apology to the House for providing "factually inaccurate" evidence to the transport select committee does nothing to change my opinion of him. It seems to me that the price for lying in public office these days is to have to stand up in front of your peers and say sorry. Sometimes. If you're caught.

It's a remarkable coincidence that an anagram of Stephen Byers is Blatant Liar.

Earlier I wrote that an anagram of Stephen Byers is Blatant Liar. This was incorrect and was an inadvertent error on my part. A proper anagram of Stephen Byers is Lying Tosser. Oooops, it happened again. Sorry.

Another one bites the dust

The New Labour party is like an excitable child with a new toy. They see a problem, get all excited, shout about what they are going to do, start spending our money, then a grown up comes along and tells them to calm down.

Already, most of my friends do not bother to vote

Dr. Gabb has his latest Free Life Commentary up. In it he discusses the shame of it all and the current political vacuum left by the failure of the Tory party. On the up are regulation, illiberal legislation, increased police powers, decreased individual liberty and responsibility and an increasing propensity for people to consider all politicians as pretty much the same. All from the same tribe with the tribe 'elders' showing over and over again an utter hatred of the English people and their ways. Dr. Gabb thinks that things may finally reach a breaking point:

England today is very similar to England in the 1630s, or to France before the Great Revolution, or to Central Europe before 1848. We have a ruling class that has carefully stifled all peaceful means of dissent. The result is a crust of placidity over a mile depth of superheated magma.

If Rebecca is right, the sandpaper on the skin will eventually begin to hurt. But the resulting convulsion will not be limited to the ejection of the Blair Government from office. The force of the convulsion will be proportionate to its previous containment. We are looking at an explosion of anger such as England has never seen.

When will this start? Perhaps tomorrow. Perhaps next year. Perhaps after one more failed placing of faith in a Conservative Government. What will be its immediate cause?

As with other revolutions, it will be some issue of such local significance that the more plodding historians will forever shake their heads over it in wonder. But unless some real party of conservatism can emerge in short order, and establish itself as a government in waiting, there will be a revolution.

Now, because I do not wish to become a victim of one of those new police state laws we were assured the Government needed to contain the threat of Islamic terrorism, I will say here that I do not advocate overthrowing the established order. I am certainly not the kind of person able to lead such an overthrow. Instead, I am only observing what seems to me an obvious truth. Because the rulers of this country will not read the letters and e-mails of respectable complaint, they will be forced one day to listen to the roar from the streets.

That is why Rebecca and I did not discuss who should be our choice to lead the Conservative Party. That is why I will not even raise the matter with Dr Tame. It seems now irrelevant who is to lead the Party of the Quisling Right. We may live at present in a political vacuum. Assuredly, though, some unstoppable force is about to fill it.

We live in comfortable times and although many people agree that all politicians are effectively the same they will generally remain comfortable with being comfortable.

Judgement is clouded by the local weather. By that I mean that what is close to your heart, what you are exposed to day in and day out, what you spend much of your time thinking about, all these things tend to lend an air of importance or significance to issues that don't register with most other people (at least not to the same degree). That doesn't mean these issues are not important, it may just mean that not many people know how important they are yet.

Take, for example, my own views on the deconstruction of the nation of England brought about by unfair devolution and the tendency for many in the political elite to consider England as a minor concern when stacked against the might of one minority or fantasy interest or another.

It's a big issue for me. The local weather is stormy. However, the further you move away the better the weather. It annoys my wife. Some of my friends have a clue. Some people shrug. Most don't know a thing about it.

If Dr. Gabb's revolution does come any time soon I doubt very much that it will come directly from the people. Most trust the police. Most have never been on the end of an illiberal policy. Most have not had their property taken away by the state. Most simply do not take an interest. CCTV rocks and ID cards, well, sounds good to me.

There is a political vacuum sure enough, but it's one that the people are not in any hurry to have filled. Why? Because all politicians are the same. You see, the market is saturated. There's no demand these days.

Clowns to the Left of me jokers to the Right

I'm finding it increasingly difficult to define my place on the left/centre/right scale. You see growing up I was a big Thatcher supporter and, until recent times, always voted Tory. My friends and family always considered me somewhat to the right of Peter Hitchens and I always felt happy with this categorisation. After all I was more often than not right, and they were more often than not wrong. However times have changed:

The Right sees single mothers as immoral and slobby products of bad neighbourhoods.

Alice Miles makes some interesting points in her article but I simply can’t bring myself to engage with them.

She continues:

I prefer the Right’s look of embarrassment when they find I am a single mother to the Left’s smile of sympathy, but perhaps that’s because I don’t need their money. I want to tell them how much fun it is, and how easy, and how much easier and more fun it is for me than for many married couples, because raising children within a marriage often looks like hell.

Oh my God. I’m a lefty. Where’s the yoghurt?

Vincent Cable MP

Apparently Vincent Cable's roll could be cruicial to the LibDem party. Crucial it is, but not in a good way.

Of course, it won't bother him one little bit that he has offended a bunch of people he's never met just because they want equality. You see, it's the wrong kind of equality they are after.

A national what now?

What does it mean when a politician says that he will not modify government policy until there has been a national debate? No honestly, what does it mean?

Labour's Raging Bull

Via Neil Herron:

So many people are using the "Bill of Rights defence" to justify non-payment of automatic penalties - HM Customs has backed down more than once over refusal to pay surcharges for late VAT returns - that, according to Birmingham city council last week, Government lawyers are considering emergency legislation to override the Bill of Rights.

How about the rest of you little people?

This litterally is about the scales of justice:

When those Sunderland officials seized Mr Thoburn's scales in 2000, they can little have guessed what a constitutional can of worms they were about to open.

Petitions

Petitions, petitions. Here’s one that you might want to sign. If you win you get your own Parliament which means your country suddenly pops back into existence again. Bargain!

Here’s another. If you win this one it means that you loose a Parliament but get to keep your country. Wow!

Imagine if there’s a rollover next week!

I’m not a big fan of petitions myself but that’s only because I’ve signed a few and nothing ever comes of it. However, once they have been set up it can be quite important to get the number of signatories up as this removes the opportunity for the detractors to call the whole thing a failure.

So sign, sign, sign.

Vincent Cable MP (Liberal Democrat)

This post at the CEP has prompted me to mail Vincent Cable MP (Liberal Democrat - Shadow Chancellor) regarding his alleged quote in this article:

"The threat to harmonious social relations in Britain comes from those who insist that multiple identity is not possible: white supremacists, English nationalists, Islamic fundamentalists.

This is the opposition and they have to be confronted. An important element in that confrontation is the assertion of a sense of Britishness."

DumbJon comments:

Here, we have a group of people creating mayhem across the globe, and Vincent Cable classes them with people who support a solution to the West Lothian question he disagrees with ? But, of course! This is the world view of the modern Liberal in a nutshell, a childish tautology whereby the Right is evil, and everyone who's evil is on the Right.

Campaign falls at first hurdle

I tried to set up the following pledge at PlegdeBank:

"I will stick my fingers in my ears and go "la la la" whenever I hear a politician speak but only if 60,000,000 other people will too."

— John, traveller of the highway of disaffection

Deadline to sign up by: 10th October 2005

More details
Dear Lord, someone please make them stop.

Nailed like a cheap whore in a seedy motel

What Clarke fails to realise is that his is the dictum of "power before principles", which is what is turning people off politics. It is the reason why so many politicians are regarded with the utmost contempt. And it is exactly the reason why Clarke would make a disastrous leader of the Conservative Party - Richard at EU Referendum.

It's all about the Oiiillllll!!!

Wonko posts about the threatened fuel protests:

A treasury spokesman said cutting tax would not solve the problem of high oil prices. That is correct but about 4/5ths of the price of fuel is tax so you see, it's already started?

Do they honestly think we are that stupid? The problem for the consumer is high prices of fuel at the pumps and most of that price is taxation.

There are only two lines that the government can reasonably take on this issue to avoid calling us stupid. Firstly that a high price at the pump is a good thing because it reduces consumption and, therefore, will save the world from the day after tomorrow and/or will reserve stocks. Secondly that the government needs the tax revenue for public services.

These lines are mutually exclusive as a reduction in consumption will result in a reduction in tax revenue (though a balance can be struck I suppose).

Any minister that uses the high oil prices line in an attempt to explain why there is a threat of a protest either does not understand the grievances of the protesters or thinks we are simpletons.

Frankly I am pretty confident that the issue for the government is simply one of tax revenue. The argument will be that this money needs to come from somewhere and if fuel duty is reduced some other tax will need increasing. This reasonable proposition requires two other factors to be true before it can be seen as a truly successful argument. People must not feel over taxed and they must feel that what tax they pay is good value for money.

Bzzzzt, no and bzzzzt, no. You are the weakest link. Goodbye minister.

The treasury admits that:

"More than half the fuel used in the UK bears little or no fuel duty at all... so seeking to address the problem of high oil prices through road fuel duty alone would do nothing for the majority of consumers."

Also note the usual You are stupid! declaration via the use of the high OIL prices phrase.

Intelligent design versus evolution

The Scottish Parliament seems to be having trouble passing legislation:

A FORMER MSP today called for a radical overhaul of the parliamentary process at Holyrood, blaming the Scottish Parliament for passing confusing, contradictory and poor-quality laws.

Duncan Hamilton, now a lawyer but a Nationalist MSP in the first session of the parliament, argued that a new body should be set up to check the laws passed by the parliament before they are put on to the statute book.

The problem with competing with an evolved system is that the pressure to turn into that system increases over time.

Good luck chaps. At least it is a system of your own.

Quisling quality in steep decline

Ken Clarke isn't even very good at being the Quisling toad:

"I do not think there has ever been a time when the British could have joined with complete security and confidence. I doubt it is possible for 10 years or more."

Guido's competition - only 24 hours to enter

Guido is offering tickets to a contemporary play:

5/11 is a new play commissioned to mark the 400th anniversary of the Gunpowder Plot. It has obvious contemporary relevance - it is set in 1605 with a war on terror going badly. A group of young religious fanatics is plotting to... well, you get the idea.

No, no, no. It means this not that

Aha! told you so. Lord Falconer wants the independent judiciary to apply the correct interpretation to the convention on human rights.

I may or may not agree with the convention (I don't know because I've not read it) but this is simply sublime.

Now honestly, you don't really need to know about every little mistake we make

On the subject of high risk offenders walking about on government license it seems that there has been a failure in the governments tracking technology. The Home Office response to this issue was, allegedly, the following:

The Mirror said it had seen leaked documents suggesting ministers were advised the public should not be told.

Blimey, I'm buggered if I can see who would benefit from keeping this from the public. Oh, wait a minute.

Official - Prescott the mascot

Mary Ann Sieghart, in the Times, sticks the boot into John Prescott in an excellent follow-up article to my little outburst.

Toad exhibits toadish behaviour

Ken Clarke, according to the Guardian, is willing to ditch support for the Euro. When asked why he said*:

Look, I know I said I support the Euro and I still do. But what I am doing here is pretending to not support it anymore to see where that will get me.

* I made that quote up. But it's true nevertheless

The barometer of political health

Of course, you know what the real barometer of the political health of the various parties in the UK is? It’s nothing to do with grass roots membership, nothing to do with popular votes, nothing to do with the results from various focus groups or polls and nothing to do with the frequency at which opposition parties manage to scupper government plans. No, the real barometer of political health in this country is the continuing employment in government office of John Prescott.

His is a scalp that should have been taken many years ago. I mean, the man beats people up, swears at reporters, insults other MPs constituents, hates property rights and is hell bent on starting his own property development empire. And there’s much more where that came from.

In more healthy political times the man would not have lasted anywhere near as long and it is a damning indictment of the opposition parties that New Labour have managed to keep hold of their mascot.

Don’t expect any great things from the opposition until they have managed to dislodge Prescott.

...and not a drop to drink

No doubt Prescott will simply demand that it rains more. It has about as much chance of working as any of his other policies.

You do realise you are going to have to pay for all that?

The preasure mounts for a Welsh Parliament based upon the Edinburgh model. It seems very likely that at the very least the Welsh will have their assembly powers extended somewhat but my gut feeling is that, in the long run, they will eventually get the referendum that they are calling for. The one thing that may prevent this particular New Labour ball from rolling further out of central government control is the “English Problem”. Further devolution in Wales is likely to put the lack of proper English Parliamentary representation even further into the spotlight to the point where even the most English ambivalent of mainstream media outlets will find it impossible to continue to ignore the issue.

The only mantra that the New Labour Demolishers have in their hymn book against an English Parliament is that England is too big and too diverse for a Parliament of its own. But if this argument is to be applied at all (false as it is) it should also be applied to the current UK wide Parliament. It too must be at the very least as unrepresentative on the local level as they assume an English Parliament would be.

So, if the ball continues to roll we will have a Union in which both Wales and Scotland have their own Parliaments designed to represent the interests of the Nation of Wales and the Nation of Scotland and the English will be left with a UK Parliament that is unable to represent them properly (if one uses the argument of the New Labour Destroyers).

Let us not be mistaken here. The issue is about national representation, not local representation no matter what spin the New Labour Bull tries to put on the crashing crockery of British Union. Which Labour minister would look at a Scotsman and say ”if your country were bigger we would have denied you your Parliament. If there were more millions of your countrymen out there we would have been forced to decline your request.” Not one. Not a single one. Indeed, they would probably have used it to declare that it was because of this imaginary large Scotland that a Scottish Parliament was essential.

When the last piece of crockery, the last glass shelf and the last crystal vase has settled to the floor and the china shop is finally quiet the New Labour Bull will eventually have to leave through the front door and walk out into the street. There it will find millions of the English, arms folded across their chests, tapping their feet. ”Of course, you do realise you are going to have to pay for all that?”

The will of the what now?

You know, there is nothing quite like disaffection. That creeping realisation that, no matter what politicians and their buddies say, you actually don’t feel that they represent you very well at all. If life were an exam I would have started out marking their papers with a ludicrously high 6 out of 10 only to see the mark drop to 2 out of 10 a few years later. Where did they go so wrong? Too much time down the student bar? Got mixed up with the wrong sort? Do I dare mark them at a 1 out of 10 as I sometimes feel they deserve?

You know when you’re there, in the camp with the rest of us tired and cynical travellers of that long road named “experience”, when you read something like this…

"For the political reality to be changed would create a significant upheaval in the present legislative programme and present constitutional settlement on which ultimately the will of the people, represented through the House of Commons, rests."

One day French wine will prostrate itself at the feet of English wine

Jacques Chirac:

"The only thing they [the British] have ever done for European agriculture is mad cow disease"

Outlined below are a few examples of research at these historic laboratories which has had a significant impact on food, farming or environmental practices over the past 30 years. These examples represent only a small sample of our research spectrum and impacts. In addition we have provided a crucial contribution to the training of future scientific expertise for the UK and the world.

Their house of cards

COMPULSORY voting at general elections should be introduced as a way of breathing new life into the political process, Geoff Hoon will say today. The Leader of the Commons is the first serving member of the Cabinet to endorse publicly such a radical change in Britain’s democracy. In a speech to the left-wing Institute for Public Policy Research think-tank in London, Mr Hoon will say that the measure is necessary to counter the low level of voter turnout.

Firstly it will lead to an increase in the number of people that are inclined to not vote. Forcing a man to do something he would, perhaps, have done anyway is likely to reap the kind of reward that the politicians are trying to prevent.

Secondly it will lead to an increase in spoiled ballots.

Thirdly it will lead to the end of anonymous voting OR the withdrawal of the forced voting scheme.

The suggestion is that if you do not vote you will be issued with a small fine.

All because …the spread of deliberate non-voting threatens “the long term legitimacy of our political system”. You bet your career it does and that is the point.

Here’s some advice. Don’t lie. Answer straight questions with straight answers. Stop trying to be seen to be doing something and actually do something instead. Attack the causes of crime rather than limiting the freedom of the law abiding. Generally try to keep out of peoples lives. Stop taking so much of our money in taxation (sack some government servants instead). Make individual votes count rather than trying to make people take part in a process that is often a waste of time. Tell the police to implement legislation rather than trying to make it. Give the English a parliament that represents them. Don’t do public consultations unless you intend to listen to the consulted public. Don’t say one thing then do another. Stop telling us how to live our lives and put your own house in order.

One man's equality is another man's complete disbelief

The following image come via the Campaign for an English Parliament blog:

It's real and says:

'To Donald - It was a struggle; it may always be hard; but it was worth it. Scotland and England together on equal terms!'

Thus far and no further - it's too late for that. Symetry in the Union and fairness requires the gaining of lost ground

This is good (Via the EDP):

By Garry Bushell – June 2005

England is in trouble. We can’t trust our politicians. Our democratic rights are being steadily eroded. Our culture and heritage are neglected and sneered at. Even the fundamental concept of England as a nation is under threat.

That’s why I am standing for the English Democrats in the Staffordshire South Delayed Parliamentary Election.

I want to highlight the problems facing the English people and offer a viable alternative.

First of all, we need an English parliament.

Why English as opposed to British? Because devolution has already changed the nature of our democracy and under the current set-up English tax-payers are being stiffed.

New Labour gave the Scots their own expensive parliament (and set up assemblies for the Welsh and Northern Ireland), but they’ve neglected the needs and interests of English voters.

Scottish MPs at Westminster can now vote on purely English affairs and force policies on English voters against our wishes, and yet English MPs have no say on purely Scottish affairs.

The UK parliament is heavily weighted in favour of the Scots because of something called the Barnett Formula.

Devised by Lord Barnett and introduced in 1978, this effectively means English tax-payers bankroll the rest of the UK. For example, the Barnett formula diverts about £8 billion of extra public expenditure to Scotland each year.

So the Scots enjoy a subsidy averaging £30 per person per week.

This has meant smaller class sizes in Scotland, higher pay for teachers, no top-up fees for students, shorter hospital waiting lists, and the availability of prescription drugs and surgical procedures which are unavailable in England on grounds of cost.

In 1999, government spending was £1,089 per head more in Scotland than England. Now, despite devolution, the gap will be £1,368.

Look at the differences in expenditure per head on essential services between England and Scotland. General public services, England: £90; Scotland: £175. Transport, England £297, Scotland £386. Agriculture, fisheries and forestry, England: £78, Scotland: £144. Housing and community amenities, England: £114, Scotland: £169. And so it goes on.

Even Lord Barnett has disowned the set-up, saying: “It is a great embarrassment to have my name attached to so unfair a system.”

New Labour’s answer came from John Prescott, a Welshman, who wanted to break England up into nine regions.

The North East referendum told Two Jags decisively where to go. The English don’t want to be split up into artificial regions. We have our own nation with a real historic identity and most of us have no wish to be robbed of it, no matter how convenient that would be for those Quisling politicians eager to feed us more quickly into the Euro-mincer.

Secondly, there is the question of Englishness.

Our political masters seem to think there is something wrong about being English. While Scottish patriotism is encouraged and rewarded, English patriotism is frowned at. Look at the last census. You could tick a box marked 'Scottish', there was also one for 'Irish' but you looked in vain for ‘English.’

Our pub landlords can’t even get extensions for St George’s Day.

As a people the English aren’t given to chest beating. Reserve and restraint are as much English qualities as inventiveness and enterprise. But most of us resent the way our heritage is sneered at by the chattering classes. Why shouldn’t we have one day a year when we can celebrate all that’s great about our culture?

English patriotism doesn’t mean hating other countries and other peoples. It’s about loving our own. OK, not many of us know more than the first two lines of There'll Always Be An England, but we do know that our country gave the world Shakespeare, Kipling, football, cricket, rugby, tennis, the Beatles, Elgar, Joe Strummer and Dickens.

As Ian Dury once sang: "There are jewels in the crown of England's glory, too numerous to mention, but a few."

For left-wing intellectuals though, the Cross of St George is tainted by memories of empire (even though the Royal Navy smashed the slave trade). It has been like this for decades. More than 50 years ago, George Orwell wrote that "England is perhaps the only great country whose intellectuals are ashamed of their nationality."

These out-of-touch fools don't even know the roots of their own radicalism. For every Francis Drake in English history there was a Wat Tyler. For every Wellington there was a Captain Swing.

Military achievement understandably shaped our self image. The stout Yeomen of England have been beating off invaders for centuries. We saw off Bonaparte and smashed the Spanish Armada. But England gave the world parliamentary democracy and the trade unions too.

And it’s the rights our fore-fathers fought for, that they paid for with their blood and sweat and sacrifice that are now at threat from this ‘Labour’ government and its Brussels masters.

The English are strong-willed people, rightly proud of our traditions of free speech and tolerance. Keith Waterhouse, one of the greatest living Englishmen, defined our national characteristic as "constructive bloody-mindedness", illustrated by the phrase "thus far and no further.”

I believe it is time to say that now, to draw a line in the sand and make a stand for the country we love.

I’m not European. I was born English and I will die English. And I am standing in this election to draw attention to the urgent need to reform the way England is governed.

I believe absolutely in the rights of the English people to rule ourselves and to celebrate our culture, history, and traditions including free speech, free assembly, habeas corpus and the right to trial by jury.

There’ll always be an England? I used to think that. But only the English people can ensure it.

We have to act now to safeguard our heritage and our democratic rights and carve out an independent English future.

END

It's completely predictable behaviour

I mean, that's what happens when a toad sees a bigger pond. He jumps.

Creative literary inspiration found in the Sunday Herald

Via Gareth we notice this astonishing bit of dunghackery* by Ian MacWhirter in the Sunday Herald (a paper apparently without an editor):

...a lot of senior Tories don’t warm to Davis, who is regarded as a bit of a big mouth, and a bully whose recent moderation doesn’t entirely suit him. He also had some hard-right political tendencies in the past, such as the campaign for an English parliament.

* Dunghackery - heh, just invented it (in the same way that MacWhirter invents things). Meaning: to write crap with the specific intent of discrediting something or someone by making up crap to write. See 'writing' and 'crap'. Also see dung.

Grasping, seeking, anything, any reason

Hey, quick, go and take a look at Councillor Bob Piper's 'destruction' of the USA as a civilising force in the world. Devastating is a word in the dictionary. It won't be needed today.

Scum and villainy

There are many things wrong with the following poster. I am sure that some of them will come to me in good time.

In court - the fox hunters commons invasion

Regarding the conviction of the pro hunters who invaded the floor of the house of commons, my feeling is that it was a fair judgement. However, I did find the following extraordinary:

Ex-Rural Affairs Minister Alun Michael gave evidence yesterday (Wednesday) and amazingly claimed that he did not know what the demonstration outside Parliament was about. A brief scan of the Hansard record of the debate, however, clearly shows that the Minister knew exactly what 15,000 people were protesting about in Parliament Square.

What's in it for them?

News just in:

The Queen is expected to unveil plans to increase the Welsh assembly's law-making powers at the State Opening of Parliament on Tuesday.

Welsh Secretary Peter Hain said it would be a "bumper Queen's Speech for Wales" with an "unprecedented" number of bills.

Somehow, and for some reason, the same privileges for the English are not yet seen as advantageous. One has to wonder why? It's almost as if the policy makers see the UK parliament as the English parliament or, perhaps, they think that the English see the UK parliament as the English parliament. Both views are clearly corrupt and contemptible and, in truth, only a fool would think either of these scenarios are the case.

Enter the fool:

Can you adam and eve it?? The new minister for constitutional affairs [Harriet Harman] said "What anomalies?" in response to Jo Nadler's (the writer on the panel) point about our asymmetric system. I nearly smashed my TV screen in anger. Harriet Harman looks like another ignorant fool that's in charge of our constitution. I'm fuming!

The Scottish Parliament exists, presumable, because it is seen by our representatives in the United Kingdom as a good thing for Scotland and a good thing for the UK. The same can be said for the Welsh assembly. Why can the same thing not be said about an English Parliament? Are the English so devoid of problems as a nation that they don't need one? I would suggest not.

So, to the decision makers who would deny us this equal representation in the Kingdom: In the absence of any enlightened argument based on equality rather than administrative issues what is the real barrier to proper representation for the majority? I am beginning to suspect that the real question should be what advantages do they get from denying the English? What's in it for them?

Chaos, you know, it's not all bad

Stephen thanks God that we don’t have proportional representation. I’m not convinced about the arguments for or against quite yet but I do fail to see the acuteness of the problem that Stephen has with it:

Thank God we don’t have PR – a result like this would have led to chaos.

So, I take on board what he says but can’t help feeling it actually helps the argument for PR.

And a hunting they went

This is excellent news:

Vote OK put people in the following 29 constituencies where anti-hunting MPs were defeated by pro-hunting or neutral candidates – Braintree, Weston-super-Mare, Monmouth, Lancaster & Wyre, Kettering, Northampton South, Welwyn Hatfield, Shipley, Milton Keynes North East, Hornchurch, Hammersmith & Fulham, Forest of Dean, Wellingborough, Newbury, Rugby & Kenilworth, Harwich, Peterborough, Shrewsbury & Atcham, Scarborough & Whitby, Preseli Pembrokeshire, Putney, Hemel Hempstead, The Wrekin, Croydon Central, Wimbledon, St Albans, Gravesham, Reading East, and Enfield Southgate.

Untold story

Richard provides this analysis of the effect UKIP and Veritas had on the Tory chances in this general election.

In all, this translates to 16 seats which would have been lost to Labour and nine to the Lib-Dems, potentially reducing Blair’s overall majority to 25 – an entirely unworkable majority.

Engwho?

Via Stuart we see that the Tories won the popular vote in England:

ENGLISH ONLY update
8,014,418 conservative
7,978,582 labour
5,140,532 liberal

Now, of course, the argument we hear again and again is well, that's the system we have - why add another level of political machinery to it? It only complicates things. You're only bleating.

Well, the figures speak for themselves. That is exactly why the English need proper democratic representation in the form of a parliament and an executive. Say what you will; when a nation is governed by people who do not have the popular vote it is deeply disappointing. When that nation also does not have proper parliamentary representation it is deeply, deeply disturbing.

Can you hear the drums? Download the soundtrack.

It's the little things

I awoke this morning to just another groundhog day. Make tea, coffee and hot chocolate. Brush teeth. Shower. Iron shirt (yes, I am a modern man). Then I remembered that there was an election on and that most of the results should be in by now. Meh.

I was disappointed in the total lack of excitement. Should I finish ironing the shirt before moving the 6 feet needed to turn the TV on or not? I decided that my ’63 bikini beach babe tour shirt demanded my undivided attention.

When I finally got round to looking up the scores I was content with most of what I saw at first. The big news of the day is the dramatic drop in the Labour majority which is a good thing for everybody, hard core Labour supporters (conservative or not) included. “Good for democracy” I thought. But then one has to consider this in the context of the number of people who voted Labour against the number who didn’t. Some figure around 36% of the vote for a government is not good for democracy. So it’s 1-1 with no extra time to play.

The Tories made some progress this time round a fact for which I have mixed feelings. They helped reduce the Labour vote and for that they deserve thanks. However, they need to change to a party of small government with a rather more aggressive outlook towards EU integration before I can joyfully support them again. Their progress in this election will not encourage them down that path and that is the biggest feeling of loss that I have this morning.

UKIP who? Did they win a seat? I’ve not been able to find out yet but I somehow doubt it. The hope that I have is that they did cost the Tory party two or three seats and that the Tory party noticed. At least that would be something.

I think the biggest story for me that has yet to be fully answered is what affect the aggressive campaigning of the fox hunters has had on rural Labour seats. Drake over at The Edge of England’s Sword notes:

…here's a piece of wonderful news: Peter Bradley, PPS to Countryside Minister Alun Michael and a man who was unafraid to dismiss the Countryside Alliance as 'the last hurrah of the feudal system' when they pointed out how much of his seat was rural, just lost The Wrekin.

This is what the Telegraph had to say about Bradley earlier this year:

Until last autumn Mr Bradley was the largely unknown Labour MP for The Wrekin, a small constituency in the heart of Shropshire. Then, as parliamentary private secretary to Alun Michael, the rural affairs minister, Mr Bradley propelled himself into the spotlight when he wrote a controversial article in The Telegraph about hunting. He said: "We ought at last to own up to it: the struggle over the Bill was not just about animal welfare and personal freedom, it was class war."

Welcome to my website! I want my constituents – and anyone else who's interested – to know what I am doing, in Westminster, in The Wrekin and elsewhere.

Former Labour MP for Wrekin, The

The beautiful people

When the BBC says "Voters go to the Polls" take a look at who they actually mean.

Prescott opens mouth

A hunting girl:

As he got back in his bus, he picked up a loud speaker and, addressing Miss Sluman and her colleagues, said: "Thank you very much for turning out Countryside Alliance. Thank you for coming out, lovely people, Right to Roam, Vote Labour."

Honestly, why do they let him out?

BBC UKIP have your say

Haha! I've got another comment up on one of those BBC have your say things. Can you guess which one it is?

Do they need to get a room?

Tom and Mike are heading up an Electoral Commission campaign to get people to take an interest in politics and get out and vote. Apparently these two chums want to point out that when talking politics is off their social agenda their conversation quickly dries up. I can’t imagine a pair less typical of your average social group who seem to get by rather well without touching on politics at all.

This leads me to suspect that these two have little in common so one has to wonder why they continue to hang out together? What are they thinking during their extended pregnant pauses? What possible agenda draws the two down to their local haunt late at night?

Do you ever get the feeling...

...that the big men, the ones in charge, have absolutely no idea how the little people are actually feeling? If you need proof then look no further than this little snippet from the Labour manifesto (via the CEP):

In our first term, we devolved power to Scotland and Wales and restored city-wide government to London. Britain is stronger as a result.

The language they use in that particular region of fantasy seems to be specifically designed to undermine faith and confidence in the Union. Just look at the heading they use: The nations and regions of the UK. Those of us who have taken an interest in this issue know exactly what they mean by this. We know who they are looking at when they say nations and we know who they are looking at when they say regions.

That kind of language, that kind of phraseology, simply cannot be designed to build faith in the Union. Just look at it!

Here's the thing. Consider a class of political spin doctors and government speech writers. You are in charge and you give them the following requirement:

Hello all. We need to be seen as the party that is building a stronger Britain. I want you to come up with a strategy and some phraseology to frame this idea firmly in the minds of the voters.

Two weeks later they come back to you with the following offering:

Here you go boss. From now on we will refer to Scotland and Wales as nations and to England as regions. Our suggested phraseology is The nations and regions of the UK. What do you think?

You'd look at them, mouth open, not knowing where to begin. I mean, they didn't even use the word Britain.

The inescapable conclusion is that building a stronger Britain is not actually their intention. With language like that coming out from a professional political organisation how could it be?

Who should I vote for?

This seems to be doing the rounds so I thought I'd have a go.

Labour -6
	Conservative 41
Liberal Democrat -39
	UKIP 34
	Green 2

You should vote: Conservative

Take the test at Who Should You Vote For

Of course there is no real surprise there and as soon as a conservative party comes along I will be sure to vote for them.

Blunkett's Bang

Hello, my name is David Blunkett. I used to run a government department called the Home Office. That, I think, makes me uniquely qualified as an expert in the area of infidelity.

You know, the main problem with the fight against infidelity is that we don’t know which people are giving each other one.

I’d like to see an end to that.

National biometric ID cards are an important step in solving this problem. After all you need to be able to tell people apart before you can work out which people are at it. You know, like rabbits.

Yes, ID cards are an essential tool for any modern government. They are the Cillit Bang of crime prevention. Crime rhymes with grime and although infidelity is not yet a crime making it one will be given the highest priority during our next term in government.

Trust me like an uncle. ID cards are the solution to everything.

Pollard in the Times

This article in the times by blogger Stephen Pollard (who obviously writes for other outlets too) requires linkage. It concerns the hosting of an event by Labour life peer Lord Ahmed for a man going by the name of Israel Shamir. “Israel Shamir” is, in fact, a Swedish-domiciled anti-Semite also known as Jöran Jermas.

We don't vote for toads

I’m going to vote at this general election. Almost certainly anyway. Now that I’ve got that out of the way I’d just like to add that not voting is a valid action and it is also an action that has consequences. It is not a nothing. It is not a wasted vote. It certainly sends a message and if you think that message is of the “I am not interested in democracy or in the sacrifices people made to get me the vote” then you are not listening carefully enough. A vote is never as cheap as one cast for an undeserving recipient.

Can I imagine a viable government which taxes my wages at source, then taxes my wages to pay for local government services, then taxes my wages whenever I buy a consumer product or private industry service and then taxes what little wage I can invest for my future when that government has a mandate from only 20% of the eligible population. No, I can’t and neither should you. The message in not voting is “must try harder – must do better”. The threat in not voting is not an idle one. It is the ruination of the conspiracy of the toads.

Pie in the sky? Yes, of course. But ask yourself why? Is it because the no-voters suddenly become aware of their ephemeral responsibilities and start taking notice of politics again or is it because the politicians suddenly start noticing that people aren’t voting and do something about it?

The Cleaner

Today Blair will ask the Queen to make like a 4 in 1 powerball tablet and dissolve parliament. Yes Mrs. Muscle, put on the rubber gloves, get out your scrubber and wipe away the scum, grime and cloud-making lime scale that clings to this beautiful land of ours. At least temporarily because, like all putrification, it comes back eventually.

Still, let us not be downhearted. For one brief moment in time our once dusty recipe books of legislation will once again gather a few grains of detritus.

For the next few weeks this current parliament, which has been such a sticky stain on our inherited and cherished tabletop of freedom, will have been wiped away.

Yay for us! Yay for The Cleaner!

Well, that's nice

I've just this minute got off the phone. The Tory party phoned me up asking why I'd let my membership lapse and, more importantly, asking if they could rely on my vote in the election. I told the very nice young lady that I let my membership lapse deliberately this year and that this would be the first election in which I would not be supporting the Tories.

She enquired why, naturally, and I said that it was because of the Tories unconvincing stance on Europe and their support for ID cards.

I also told her that I am looking forward to the day when I might once again give my support and that this would be when the Tory party started being conservatives again.

I also put in a quick jibe about the current leader being an issue but she failed to ask me why so I didn't offer any further information.

A lost Tory vote. I meant it when I said it.

The name deserves more

This just goes to show how badly the Tory Party have damaged themselves with all their quisling conservatism. Just as I feel the Tories no longer represent true conservatism they start insisting that people refer to them as The Conservative Party. They say it's to prevent confusion at the ballot box but trust me, that's not where the confusion begins. It begins with their lies about their plans to 'wrestle back' powers from an ever expanding EU and ends with their stated support in principle for ID cards.

Who are the other two?

Apparently eight out of 10 voters do not trust politicians to tell the truth. I suspect the other 2 are on the take.

Double decker

Members of the Campaign for an English Parliament, unlike most politicians, are determined to take the bus to work. The only problem is that the cost of taking this form of transport is now far higher than the two and a half pence that I used to pay when I last caught a bus so they would appreciate a little help. Let's see if we can get three of them to come along at once or, failing that, one to come along on time.

It must be so disappointing for them

Watching this government tangling with the house of Lords is like watching England playing Germany at football. It's heart in the mouth stuff.

There are government victories, but I would never venture to put any serious money on the outcome.

Very magnanimous of them

From the Times:

THE Conservatives are to seduce Scottish voters by offering them their share of £4 billion in tax cuts while reassuring them that they would not scrap the controversial Barnett formula.

The pledge means that if the party wins power, it would be willing to risk fuelling English resentment by keeping the Treasury mechanism that results in Scots receiving £1,000 per head more in public spending than voters in England.

West Lothian what?

Via Laban Tall we have this posting over at Third Avenue on the West Lothian question and how it is still possible for English MPs to legislate on Scottish issues:

There is a convention [my emphasis] that the UK Parliament does not legislate on Scottish affairs, but there is no rule, no legal bar to prevent Westminster from doing whatever it likes in Scotland.

Third Avenue is particularly unhappy about the Tory plans to prevent Scottish MPs from voting on English issues:

What Howard proposes, by contrast, makes the establishment of the Scottish Parliament appear completely trivial. He wishes specifically to deprive UK MPs of the right to vote on bills that the UK parliament is discussing.

In the meantime we can wonder why no convention exists in the UK parliament that favours English MPs when the vote is on English only matters. Would this framing be more palatable if it were the Tory plan?

Dribbling and giggling right up to the end

David Trimble’s former political advisor, Dr King has much to say on the subject of proper political representation for the nation of England:

It is time MPs from this part of the world who are not nationalists started to campaign for an English Parliament before the Union they cherish crumbles before their eyes.

Here's a thing. The way the Union used to be was somehow flawed. That is the undeniable belief and admission of this New Labour government. It would not have brought in unfractured devolution for Scotland and Wales if it did not believe this to be the case. Certainly before this fix the Union was asymmetrical but the fact that hardly a peep could be heard about it in your average English castle was a testament to the tuning of the balance. Now, looking back at the fix, what honest politician [sic] can sit back and say "there, that's better"? None can. Even Prescott's loony tunes attempt to break England up into regions was a part way admission that, in all likelihood, the English would notice which end of the stick they were on.

Well, it was noticed. It was also noticed that the English Regions were just smaller versions of the same stick with the English end still as unpalatable as before.

New Labour decided there was a problem with the Union. They took the largest hammer they could find and bashed away at it like a dribbling, giggling baby might bash at a shape puzzle and, eventually, they managed to get their cylinder to fit in the square hole. The toddler's happy but there's something decidedly amok with both the cylinder and the square and the circular hole is left wondering what on earth is wrong with it.

As Gareth said:

'English devolution' was, for a long time, Labour Party parlance for the balkanisation of England - 'England sacrificed at the altar of Unionism' as Michael Knowles so strikingly put it - but here Dr King talks of English devolution as true devolution from Westminster, as was offered to the other nations of the UK. It's quite shameful that these things are articulated better by an Ulster politician, rather than an English one, and that they should be brought to our attention by an Irish blogger, but there we are.....such is life.

Dum, dum, dum. Ayeea.

There it is. A shimmer. Right there. You catch it out of the corner of your eye as you hurry along doing whatever it is that busy and useful people do. The Conspiracy of the Toads briefly reveals itself again:

I rang his [Alan Milburn's] office to find exactly what being a Chancellor of a County actually entails. The creep on the other end of the line rather condescendingly told me that Chancellors of Lancaster don’t actually do any ‘chancelling’ in Lancashire – or anywhere else for that matter. Apparently, it’s just a way of getting no-talent, brown nosed toady mates back into positions of power.

POWER report in how interested we are in politicians?

The CEP point to this form through which you can provide 'evidence' to the POWER report into Britain's Democracy.

I've filled it in and thought the whole thing read like a "the politicians are not feeling loved any more" bleat. My answers mostly confirmed that tone.

That question on the media had me sniggering. They asked:

3. Some people claim the media breeds cynicism about politics and politicians which discourages political interest and involvement. Is this true? If so, how can the media play a positive role in encouraging political involvement?

The media have been behaving like a political party in recent years. They should step away and concentrate on factual information and pure entertainment. Currently they are turning people off by being clearly politically biased either towards the right, or as is more common with the BBC, towards the left.

Why not have a go? Oh. I see. You're not interested. Figures.

Nothing to look back to

U.K.Future on Mark Steele, a recent guest on BBC TV's Question Time:

But it was Mark Steele who really riled me. Not only is the guy not funny, the normal duty of a supposed comedian, but he helped enshrine my conservatism that little bit further (I bet that was not his aim.) He suffers from what I personally dub "chip on the shoulder syndrome." He was bittter about more or less everything - Labour, Conservatives, the miner’s strike – the guy was like a relic, a stuck record from the days when Arthur Scargill had a supporter, rather than none.

From one crisis to the next

The government’s anti-terror plans have passed through the House of Commons with a reduced majority of 14 and will now proceed to the House of Lords. If, as is expected, the Lords throws the legislation back into the Commons for consideration and the process continues in this manner with the legislation remaining in its current form then the government is left with no choice but to force it through the Lords using the parliament act.

What? Excuse me?

Well why not? If the Commons continues to pass through the legislation then it is clearly the will of our great democracy. No second chamber has the right to treat this great and fair process that so encapsulates the will of the majority of the public of our great group of nations.

Of course, I think that what I have written above is completely untrue in as much as I believe that the House of Lords provides an invaluable service to all of us and should be held in high regard.

I also believe that when arguments have been made and principles have been established, over and over again, on the floor, in the papers, on the radio, on the news, then these principles should be followed or thrown out for the ragged bag of spin and lies that they so obviously were.

The ban on fox hunting was simply a bill, as is the government’s anti-terror plans. It was forced through using the parliament act, with a large commons majority, to the detriment of the processes that have evolved to prevent poor legislation from becoming legislative acts that bind once free people to the will of a larger group of people. The fact that the Lords exists at all recognises and attempts to reduce the effects of one of the weaker aspects of democracy.

The current issue can be described as less divisive due to the lower margins of doubt in the Commons but that is not strictly relevant with respect to the accepted processes and the functioning of this democracy. If the houses are not treated as black boxes with either yay or nay results then the process is impossible to explicitly describe and enshrine in law.

It may not come to this. The government may change the bill so that it becomes acceptable. They may give up on it. What they cannot do is leave it as it is and continue to hand it to the House of Lords without then forcing it through using the parliament act.

Anything else would compound the prejudice shown by this government to a minority group and would be utterly damnable.

I forgot about this. There has to be a delay of 1-2 years before the parliament act can be used:

The Parliament Act 1949 further reduced the delaying power of the Lords, so the position now is that the Lords can only delay a Bill for about two years. In some circumstances, the Commons can present a Bill for Royal Assent after one year, even if the Lords object.

Please don't suggest the introduction of a new act, the Parliament Act 2005, to reduce the delay time of the Lords to a day or so. Or a few minutes. This, though perhaps attractive to New Labour on the surface, would be subjected to the same 1-2 year delay in the Lords so it wouldn't help their immediate problem.

Oh, how utterly perfect. Anoneumouse, from the Anglo Saxon Chronicle emails with this gem:

No, they don't need to go through the rigmarole of attaining a new Parliament Act. All they have to do, is declare that this is an "emergency" and then force the Bill through by invoking the provisions within the Civil Contingency Act 2004.

The new face of the law

I know but what are you looking for, balance?

Minister, minister, care for your children

Plans to detain terror suspects under house arrest without trial are vital because of the continuing threat to UK interests, the home secretary has said. The new powers would apply to British as well as foreign terror suspects. It would be the home secretary, not judges, who decided to impose control orders. Tony Blair, who strongly supports the Home Secretaries scheme, said:There is no greater civil liberty than to live free from terrorist attack but the feeling from much of the British blogosphere is that Blair's words were nothing more than a cheap sound bite, failing both in the measure of sincerity and in accuracy. One blogger remarked Blair's wrong. A greater civil liberty is being able to think and say what you like. Blair's problem is that he equates safety with liberty. He doesn't really understand what liberty means and that will ultimately be his nemesis.

Hat tip, Marillion.

Sean Gabb on British conservatism

Sean Gabb's speech at the Royal Society of Arts on what is wrong with British conservatism is available as an mp3 here. He argues that conservatism is in rude health in Britain, driving the agenda of the day, and all that it lacks is a proper conservative party. What we have instead is the Quisling Right.

Ken refuses to say sorry

So does Newt Boy Ken look principled or does he look like a Jew hater? Frankly I think he looks like neither. What I can tell you is that I think he looks like a twat with a vendetta against a newspaper group.

So this is where we are. One politician currently in office against one newspaper group, currently in a huddle.

My prediction? Twat on toast.

Conservatives cut into Labour's lead

This poll seems to have been pretty insightful:

The poll also shows London Mayor Ken Livingstone, deputy leader John Prescott and Labour's election chief, Mr Milburn, are regarded by voters as liabilities.

Who is this?

FACT: I am a politician.
FACT: I cannot say to you words I do not believe in my heart (Ed: stop giggling at the back).
FACT: I am the victim of a 24 year hate campaign.

Yes it’s Ken Livingstone, Mayor of London, refusing to apologise to the Jewish newspaper reporter who he accused of being a German war criminal. Hey, he only said it to indicate the level of loathing and disgust for the racism they [the papers] have perpetuated and the bigotry they have encouraged for over 100 years.

A 100 years. A long time. I’m sure some of the company that Ken keeps can improve upon that.

mySociety.org

The people at mySociety.org deserve our thanks. I have made a great deal of use of their Fax Your MP service in the past and their They Work for You initiative is also very useful. They have now annouced the Beta test of the successor to Fax Your MP, called Write to Them:

WriteToThem lets people write to any of their elected representatives: MPs, MSPs, MEPs, Welsh or London assembly members, and last (but certainly not least) their local councillors.

What's up with Ken?

I mean when he opens his mouth:

On tape the mayor is heard asking Oliver Finegold [Evening Standard journalist] if he is a "German war criminal".

Mr Finegold replies: "No, I'm Jewish, I wasn't a German war criminal. I'm quite offended by that."

The mayor then says: "Ah right, well you might be, but actually you are just like a concentration camp guard, you are just doing it because you are paid to, aren't you?"

Also in today's news Anti-Semitic crime 'reaches high':

Nearly 60% of anti-Semitic incidents - 311 - took place in the Greater London area...

Here is how the conversation apparently went:

Shortly before 9pm, as Ken Livingstone left City Hall, Finegold asked the Mayor about the party. The conversation was recorded on a tape recorder which Finegold held out in front of him:

Mr Livingstone [talking to photographer Nigel Howard]: You've got one [picture] already.

Finegold: Mr Livingstone, Evening Standard. How did tonight go?

Livingstone: How awful for you. Have you thought of having treatment?

Finegold: How did tonight go?

Mr Livingstone: Have you thought of having treatment?

Finegold: Was it a good party? What does it mean for you?

Mr Livingstone: What did you do before? Were you a German war criminal?

Finegold: No, I'm Jewish, I wasn't a German war criminal and I'm actually quite offended by that. So, how did tonight go?

Mr Livingstone: Arr right, well you might be [Jewish], but actually you are just like a concentration camp guard, you are just doing it because you are paid to, aren't you?

Finegold: Great, I have you on record for that. So, how was tonight?

Mr Livingstone: It's nothing to do with you because your paper is a load of scumbags and reactionary bigots.

Finegold: I'm a journalist and I'm doing my job. I'm only asking for a comment.

Mr Livingstone: Well, work for a paper that doesn't have a record of supporting fascism.

At this stage, Mr Livingstone refused to comment further and Mr Finegold ended the exchange as the Mayor walked off.

On Archer

Guido Fawkes on the Jeffery Archer question:

Is Guido the only one who thinks it odd that Liam Fox says he would welcomed back into the Tory party and Michael Howard thinks he should still be in jail without remission?

Blimey Limey

LimeyPundit is thinking the unthinkable, but thinking about it, is it?

Personally I still think so. New Labour are not instinctively pro-freedom even though Blair has been exceptional when it has come to the war on terror.

I support the war on terror, but I do not support ID cards. I am completely unconvinced by them and will not give the Labour party a pass card because I agree with their leader on the important issue of the day.

I support the war on terror, but I do not support New Labour's EU ambitions and their plans to formalise the regionalisation of England.

I support the war on terror, but I do not support New Labour's big state and their almost worn out ban stick.

Blair will not be around much longer but his big state party will and I can't bring myself to have anything to do with it.

The state is only rarely rolled back. Further EU entanglement is unthinkable. Individualism and non-PC minority interests are being destroyed. One head of the hydra is undoubtedly right, but that does not excuse the rest of the beast from spitting and shitting on anything that moves.

This way, that way, whatever

Wow. The story on the BBC web site has completely changed flavour since I originally linked to it. It previously started off by saying that Labour party researches had found that many voters were attracted to the Tory line on immigration and, consequently, Labour were formulating their own similar policies in an attempt to head the Tories off at the pass.

That inspired my graphic above.

Prescott has job

They've found John Prescott a new job. Instead of trying to legitimise England's toadish regional assemblies he's going to go down the micro-management route:

John Prescott has unveiled a five year plan that he hopes will see more people getting involved in their communities.

The deputy prime minister hopes involving voters in local "democratic life" will help drive deprived areas out of poverty.

He's going to spend five million quid on guides to help local people and their councils spend resources more effectively. Presumably point one of the guide would be something along the lines of don't waste 10 million pounds pushing personal agendas like Mr. Prescott did recently in the North East England referendum hoo-haa.

Prescott says:

"We want people to help share the local public services they receive and we want them to become more involved in the democratic life of their community."

"In this way, local people, working with local councillors, can play their part in creating sustainable communities."

Welsh assembly could help the Welsh

In an apparent piece of shocking political chicanery Lord Elis Thomas, the Welsh Assembly's presiding officer, said that it could be possible for the Welsh to amend the part of the Hunting Bill that list exceptions to allow Welsh dogs to be used to flush foxes residing in Wales from inaccessible areas like Welsh forests so that they can be safely shot.

English dogs are expected to support their Welsh counterparts but one dog, Rufus of West Sussex, remarked:

I expect a few foxes to cross the border from Wales into England if the Assembly actually acts on this. I mean cripes. If this ever gets out, you know, that England is a soft touch on vermin well, where will it end? Cats, squirrels, rats, hand in hand, streaming into the Shires. I'm not speciesist, but honestly, who's representing us honest working English dogs these days? Poppy, she's my bitch, is livid.

Melting....melting.......

The glue that is:

A Welsh football club which answered an advert by an English businessman offering free shirts was turned down because Wales "is a foreign country".

UK ended when the Labour government made Wales independent.

...

"For the state of the union ask the Labour government - they created your assembly three years ago [the assembly was actually set up in 1999].

Making it up as they go along

Some politicians are so out of touch with reality that you have to wonder whether they are still in possession of all their faculties. The way they see things and they way that they interpret what goes on around them differs so vastly from the reality of the situation that you are left little choice but to doubt their very sanity.

Take Newt Boy, Ken Livingstone for instance.

What's all this then?

From The Guardian:

The Conservatives have dealt a blow to Labour in the east London stronghold that saw Tony Blair's baptism into the party.

Of possibly ominous significance to Labour in east London is the fact that the 291 votes polled in Queensbridge by rebel MP George Galloway's Respect Unity Coalition easily exceeds the Tory majority.

Unsuitable for the Tory party

Citizen Stuart follows up the story of Ex-Conservative PPC Robert Oulds who has been dismissed for having his picture taken with a variety of sporting equipment. His dismissal has something to do with the fact that the equipment or his relationship with it is inherently evil or a danger to public safety. Or, perhaps, that owners of such equipment are considered unsuitable material for such active membership of the Tory party. Or, perhaps, even people that touch such equipment are not good enough. Or, perhaps, something to do with the Internet and photographs. Who knows.

Anyhow, it turns out that Robert Oulds is the director of the anti-EU Bruges group. I hereby accuse the Tory party of deliberately expelling Mr. Oulds on the basis that his anti-EU line is not compatible with the softer Tory line on European integration.

Hey, what do you mean I'm full of crap? It makes more sense than any other reason I've read about.

If I were still a member of the party I would cut my card in half and return it to head office with a covering letter saying that I admit that I have a picture of myself holding a firearm and, consequently, am expelling myself from the party as unsuitable material.

I might join again just to do that.

The busiest lobby group in the World ever

Excellent idea:

A lobbying group that will "name and shame" MPs who say one thing and vote for another was launched in London yesterday.

Prescott Pollarded

Stephen Pollard throws eggs at John Prescott, the deputy Prime Minister:

In policy matters, he is simply incompetent.

Down to Earth is not how I would describe Prescott. Subterranean would be more accurate. Positively troglodyte in appearance and action. Am I the only one who sees the scales? He's up there with spiders, cauliflowers and cats. Unnatural. Simply not of this world.

Further informed and insightful political commentary may follow.

A word too far

Tories to axe Prescott ministry.

I have the POWER!

Every glue needs its solvent and Eric Joyce MP (Falkirk, Scotland) is just the kind of solvent the glue of British Union is looking for.

Sean Gabb to speak on the Conservative Party

This just made its way to one of my in-boxes:

Mon 15 Feb, 6.45pm.
WHAT'S WRONG WITH BRITISH CONSERVATISM?

While American conservatism is in such apparently rude health,
its English cousin appears terminally ill. The British
Conservative party used to be the biggest political party in the
West, but is now a shadow of its former self - the average age
of its members is 62. What happened to the social base of the
British Conservative party, and what can be done to renew it?
As it moves towards another general election, can the British
Conservative Party learn any lessons from
America - or would it do best to plough its own furrow?

Boris Johnson, MP for Henley and editor of The Spectator; Dr
Irwin Stelzer, Director of Economic Policy Studies, The Hudson
Institute, and editor of Neoconservatism; Paul Whiteley,
Professor of Government at the University of Essex and co-author
of Political Choice in Britain and Citizenship in Britain; Sean
Gabb, Director of Communications at the Libertarian Alliance.
Chair: Samuel Brittan, Financial Times commentator and author of
Against The Flow.

£8, £7 Concs, £6 ICA Members
Cinema 1

James Harkin
Director of Talks
The ICA
The Mall
London SW1Y 5AH
http:www.ica.org.uk

The emergence of the super citizen

On the subject of ID cards we see how it is possible to increase your political power by choosing the right career:

Mr Clarke said: “It is clearly the opinion of the police and all the other security services that this Bill will make the identification of people easier and that is why we support it.”

The Tory party is leaking

The Tory party is leaking conservatives like there is no tomorrow:

Five officers: Quentin Peck, Dorothy Smith, Mike Burden, John Stanley and William Harrell; were disqualified after their alleged involvement in distributing a video sympathetic to the rival party UKIP.

Class

Have you noticed that class seems to be more on the minds of our politicians these days than on the minds of the people they sometimes represent?

Well David did go. So some of you got your wish fulfilled.

Personally I am sorry. British politics has an ever decreasing number of people from backgrounds like David's and frankly we need more of them.

It is interesting that a majority of you thought he should go, yet on the doorstep there is great support for him in our traditional working class areas. I think there is a class aspect to this. David certainly offended many middle class liberals and I understand why. I am not dismissing such arguments. They are important. But David talked the language of those who live in the high crime areas and they respond to him.

Also, class has nothing to do with objections to his policy decisions. For instance, I think that his ASBO initiative has been well received in the increasingly inaccurately described middle classes.

What does make the difference between those that agree with Blunkett's policies and those that do not is an idea. The idea that liberty is something to be valued and protected, and not something that you should be allowed to limit by degrees without very good and abundantly available reason and then only on a very temporary basis and only after that good reason is presented in crystal clear and undeniable terms to the country.

No one has a monopoly on ideas and no one has a monopoly on being a victim of crime and I'm becoming increasingly of the opinion that the true class divide is between the politicians and everyone else.

Rebalancing the constitution

Being, as I am, inclined to lift things directly from the blog of the Campaign for an English Parliament I bring you the following:

Paul Linford has had an article published in the Newcastle Journal and the Lincoln Echo calling for an English Parliament.

As I wrote in the aftermath of the "no" vote, the idea of an English Parliament ought now to be given serious consideration as a means of addressing the imbalances in the constitution.

London would remain the centre of UK Government, in control of foreign policy, defence, homeland security, and overall taxation and spending - with a new centre of English governance in control of everything else.

The exact location - Manchester, York, Birmingham, even Derby - would not matter, so long as it was anywhere north of Watford Gap.

It would not merely help to re-balance the constitution - but more importantly in the longer-term, to rebalance the economy too.

Wassup Robert?

Things looking bleak? Farms failing? Economy sliding down the bog? Wassup Robert, losing too many needed people?:

HARARE (Reuters) - President Robert Mugabe's government has said it will unconditionally welcome back all Zimbabweans who fled to Britain claiming political persecution by his ruling party, a state-owned daily is reporting.

Sheesh, keep spelling losing wrong. No need to email in again, dear spelling corrector. I have changed the post.

Guido on Howard's dream

Guido Fawkes on the loss of Tory identity:

Howard gave a speech in the City in February about his "British Dream", it was trailed as his libertarian vision. When he said "the people should be big and the state should be small.... " and to follow the British "...dream wherever it takes you." He apparently meant you had to take your ID card with you. When he said his vision "means government should let people grow and be wary of taking control away from people..." he meant so long as they had a compulsory state enforced ID card recording their biometric details on a central state register.

Sometimes we have to stop for espresso and Panettone mid flow just to keep from fainting.

Custom file not found

I have created and installed a custom file not found page on theenglandproject.net. Anyone requesting a resource that does not exist will be presented with this topical message: English Parliament not found.

No cause is worth its salt unless it has its own custom 404 message.

Blunkett4Justice

Great Britons 2004 awards

Via the Campaign for an English Parliament we see that Neil Herron has received the most nominations in the campaigning category of the Great Britons 2004 awards:

For campaigning, the most nominations have been received on behalf of Neil Herron, a former market trader from Sunderland who was a key figure in defeating John Prescott's plans for a North-East regional assembly. One supporter said: "He stood up for the idea that governments govern only with the consent of the people." Another said: "He epitomises the bulldog spirit."

For those that do not yet know, Neil Herron's campaign blog is here.

Politics is everywhere. Everywhere!

Anyone else out there wondering why a government that ran TV ads informing us that politics is everywhere has refused to get involved in the Zimbabwe cricket tour debacle?

I'm not saying that they should, just pointing out that they spent our money on a campaign that is incompatible with the message keep politics out of sport.

Woof!

Hah! Andrew, over at Non-Trivial Solutions has some advice for the Tories. Oh, and woe betide anyone who doesn't have the stomach for it:

Do not assume the media battle is lost. I sense that the people at CCO have no faith in their ability to control the media message. Don't wanna take on the New Labour media machine? Get out, you're fired. We want a big dog in this fight, not a bitch.

Hodge handcuffed

I don't know, I guess you have to feel sorry for the Children's minister:

A Fathers 4 Justice campaigner handcuffed himself to children's minister Margaret Hodge at a family law conference in Manchester.

Jolly Stanesby, who was handcuffed to the minister for 40 minutes, said he had made "a citizens arrest".

Police were called to the hotel and Mrs Hodge was released unharmed.

A spokesman for Fathers 4 Justice said the protest was the first of a planned "Christmas of chaos", with "super-hero santas" staging more stunts.

Bogeywoman

From the radio on the way home this evening, a listener said:

I hope that the man is unhurt but what I really don't understand is why it took the police so long to release him.

Heh.

Unelected East of England Regional Assembly decides to build 80,000 homes on most densly populated county in England

From the herts Advertiser:

A FURIOUS response has greeted a Regional Assembly decision which will lead to thousands of new homes being built in Herts.

On Friday the unelected East of England Regional Assembly (EERA) agreed a housing strategy which will result in nearly 80,000 additional homes being built in the county by 2021, of which 7,000 will need to be constructed in the St Albans district.

Livingstone under investigation

It's about time:

Ken Livingstone's woes pile up with the news that the London Assembly is to formally investigate his links with the 'controversial' Muslim cleric Dr Yusuf al-Qaradawi.

after a dossier of al-Qaradawi's alleged comments and views was compiled by a coalition of Jews, Sikhs, Hindus, Muslims and gays.

You AND your 'ideas'

But if devolution was right and necessary on Thursday morning, it was still right and necessary on Friday afternoon. And I cannot pretend otherwise. What is more, I do not believe that the north-east is opposed to regional assemblies. It did not vote against devolution. It expressed its distaste for politics and politicians.

The EU-Serf lays in to the author of the above Guardian article, Roy Hattersley, as one might lay into a pot noodle after a heavy night down the pub with the rest of us peasants.

What Hattersley fails to grasp is the sophistication of the voters in the North East of England. They not only voted against regional devolution but also and at exactly the same time expressed their distaste for politics and politicians.

Multitasking peasants Hattersley. You and your kind are doomed!

The conspiracy of the toads

The North East has voted NO to a regional assembly, the pet project of the deputy prime minister John Prescott. One has to wonder why the government has been so keen to see this devolution of various parts of England take shape. What’s in it for them? What’s in it for the people of the various regions that the government will quite probably still want to see devolved? The government states that this whole idea is for the benefit of local areas allowing the people to make strategic decisions in economic development, transport, planning, housing and culture and tourism.An assembly would:

give a voice to regions distant from Westminster and return power to local people from the non-elected bodies that oversee many services.

Regional assemblies will give a voice to the people of England who happen to be distant from London. The governments own words. To me this sounds like an astonishing admission; areas of England that are a few hundred miles away from central London have no voice. Their concerns and their desires have no representation in parliament. Yes, it is clearly a falsehood. What are MPs for other than to represent the concerns and needs of their constituents wherever in the country they happen to be?

This whole notion that distance from Westminster is somehow a disadvantage to the people of England is bunkum. The same government that has been pressing this point is also pressing for further entanglement of this country of ours in the European project, the parliament for which is so far away as to be completely invisible from each and every single city, town, village, field, house and public lavatory in the whole of the British Isles. Yes they say, but your MEPs will give you a voice in that parliament. One might think that at least one of these completely different and inconsistent opinions of government must be wrong. I’ve not mentioned this apparent divergence to my MP but I’m sure that it will solicit a politely worded diatribe about flavours, brotherhood, harmonisation and tidying up. Gov-speak in other words and we’re fed up of it.

So we might ask what is it about regionalisation that has the government so excited? I’m not sure that’s the right question. I would suggest we ask what is in it for the professional politician? Things are a whole lot clearer when expressed in that way because it is far easier to imagine what might be playing on the minds of a power hungry megalomaniac than it is to imagine what a complex system of government might be looking for. I also think we are more likely to get to the truth of the matter.

I’m a believer in the conspiracy of the toads. The name of this conspiracy is brand new and I know this because I have just invented it. Checkout google. You won’t find it (unless it points here). This conspiracy is all about the darkest fear of the professional politician; losing office. Democracy sucks on many levels if you happen to be a politician, and one of those levels just so happens to be that every once and a while you need to go back to the electorate to get your membership of whatever club you belong to renewed. It is a process fraught with danger.

The dangers can be lessened by increasing the number of clubs that a politician can be a member of. More opportunity. More options. Longevity.

And even better, all these clubs need support staff and get this; support staff don’t need to be elected. There will always be at least one form of membership that a toad can successfully claim.

The attraction of a massive European parliament overseeing many state parliaments lording it over countless regional ‘parliaments’ which dish out what’s left of our money to club secretaries across the continent must be almost irresistible.

To a toad anyway.

The people of the North East of England have spoken and their answer is no, we don’t want a regional assembly. It remains to be seen how spiteful the deputy prime minister will be to them now that he, once again, has egg on his face.

NB:
(So where does this leave me? I believe that England should have a parliament of its own; isn’t this consistent with the conspiracy of the toads? Won’t it add another level of government? Well, yes. It will certainly create more toadish opportunities but there is a difference between adding more tiers of government and giving parliamentary representation to a nation that currently doesn’t have one. If toads are necessary I’d rather that some of them were officially mine and mine alone (Touchwood seems a suitable name). You ask any minister who has the responsibility to work solely for the interests of the English nation and you will get a gov-speak answer that can eventually be deconstructed into no-one. Then ask him why England should not have such parliamentary representation and you will get a reply liberally littered with words such as elephant and cuckoo’s nest. All obfuscation, but that’s what they are good at.)

Some comments from the site of Neil Herron, leader of one of the NO campaigns:

To Neil and all your helpers - THANK YOU!! We're down here in East Anglia and we are SO GRATEFUL to you. You are now a folk hero for the whole of England. We, the ordinary, working class people of England owe you a great debt for saving us all from fake devolution, a chopped up country of competing tin pot regions.
You've made the difference. We cried with relief when we heard the result. THANK YOU AGAIN!

Hi Neil,
England owes a debt of gratitude to you and your team and all those who campaigned for this wonderful result. I know how hard you have all worked to get this result so thank you from the bottom of my heart for all of your efforts on behalf of the people of England.

Congratulations and thanks, Neil - you're a hero! Those who voted "no" were speaking on behalf of the great majority of the people of England, but their massive rejection of "regionalism" will resound across Europe.

So, Kerry...

...why the long face?

My regions, they trouble me so

I've just received a pointer to this in my email. It's an answer given by
Nick Raynsford when asked about the government plans for regional assemblies in England; Are you not then going to end up with a constitutional mess with different levels of power devolved to Scotland, Wales, Northern Ireland, London and the other English regions? Would it not be easier to give them all equivalent powers?:

Scotland is a country which has its own parliament. No one has suggested other than people who want an English parliament, which is not a very sensible suggestion, that there should be parliaments with legislative powers in the English regions.

The London assembly doesn't have legislative powers and as I said, the powers for the North East assembly will be broadly comparable to those in London. So all the English regions will have the opportunity of an assembly with powers relating to economic development and quality of life issues, including some of those that I have described. Those will be comparable to other English regions.

Yes the position is different in Scotland because Scotland is a nation in its own right and similarly Wales.

There is a logic behind these proposals that relate to the nature of the United Kingdom, which is a grouping of four nations, of which England is one and within England there will be devolved regional bodies with broadly comparable powers.

I am a software engineer by trade; I deal in logic. His comments mean that
England is a nation but not in its own right. He has been drinking; something
French I suspect.

I need to think upon this a while. Perhaps try to change my frame of reference so it is something akin to his. I will have a drink or two or three, something new world I think, and then see if his comments make any more sense.

What? Eh? Pardon?

Reading this story about Kilroy-Silk leaving the UKIP parliamentary party in Strasbourg (though not yet UKIP it seems) I couldn’t help but gawk at the following:

Earlier, Mr Kilroy-Silk caused uproar as MEPs discussed the controversy about the proposed appointment of Rocco Buttiglione as a European commissioner.
Laughing, he shouted: "Point of order. Oi! Point of order."

Socialist group leader Martin Schulz accused him of being a hooligan and of "behaving like a spoilt child".

In a point of order, Mr Kilroy-Silk said the European Parliament should not have waited when commission president, Jose Manuel Barroso, arrived late for a hearing on Tuesday.

He wants a vote of no confidence in Mr Barroso, who he argues has treated the parliament with further disdain by producing no proposals on Wednesday.

Ahhhh, politics - that most corrupting of vices

So, the House of Lords has voted to amend the bill to ban hunting so that it may continue under license. No real surprise there then and, I might add, good for them.

We all know that Blair would rather have never put the issue on his manifesto (isn't hindsight a wonderful thing) but the depths of shame he should be feeling over the following revelation can never make up for his supposed support for a compromise on the issue:

Mr Blair is understood to be deeply unhappy at the prospect of introducing an outright ban. He regards that as contrary to his new Labour ethos of governing for the whole country and not acting out of spite towards any group of voters. He also accepts, however, that he missed the opportunity of introducing a “third way deal” in the last Parliament. Since then he has given pledges on a hunting ban to MPs in return for their support over bitterly contested votes for the Iraq war and top-up tuition fees.

Yes, yes, I know. This is the way politics works; I am not naive. And this is a perfect example of why millions of voters no longer engage with politics to any great extent.

Some really old Frenchman blogged the same thing in one of those book thingies.

Deconstructing the myth

This deconstruction of Mr. Austin Mitchell's (MP for Grimsby) notion that an English Parliament would be disastrous makes interesting and entertaining reading. It is some months old but that does not make it any less potent:

Mitchell and his ilk obstinately refuse to accept that it is Scottish and Welsh devolution that has already undermined the viability of the UK by rendering the previous 'asymmetry' unworkable. They must now reconcile themselves to the English dimension; they have no choice if they wish to maintain the Union.

DIY - not just about putting up shelves

Michael Knowles, chairman of the English Constitutional Convention, gave a speech at the convention launch. The content of that speech is available to read here. His point about the relative silence of MPs on the issue of political representation of the English is a good one:

Why should people as unknown as us, village hampdens, have to take it [the issue of an English parliament] on? There are 550 English MPs in the UK Parliament all of whom must be aware of the injustice and disadvantages to England I have listed. What are they MPs for English constituencies for unless to stand up for the welfare and the rights of the English people? They must know that Scotland has acquired unique advantages from Devolution 1998 denied to Wales and to England. Yet they do nothing. This island is a political union of three nations, and the basis of the union must be political and constitutional equality. Yet these 550 MPs are strangely silent.

But, and this is the dirt of the matter, why do we not hear English MPs pressing the issue? Why do we not even hear them talking about an English parliament? They sit in English seats, put there by English voters and they are fully aware that, for instance, Scottish MPs are voting on English only issues whereas they themselves cannot vote on Scottish only issues.

Why are they not spitting teeth?

English Constitutional Convention

This just in:

English Constitutional Convention - House of Commons; 20th October 2004.

So busy has it been in its headlong rush into the abolition of England as a political entity, and so eager to embrace unwanted regionalisation, that the UK Government actually forgot to consult the English nation on this major constitutional change.

A slip of the mind we're sure.

Not so the Campaign for an English Parliament. Today (20th October 2004) sees the launch of the English Constitutional Convention at the House of Commons.

www.englishconstitutionalconvention.com

It is an ambitious project but we very much hope that this will be the launch pad to a frank and open debate on the way that England should be governed.

Whether this convention is a success or failure may well depend on the involvement of the major political parties but we are now taking our argument into the halls of Westminster. Today's politicians should take note, because the Campaign for an English Parliament is the advance guard of a movement that will not go away. The longer our voices are ignored, the louder and more numerous our voices will become.

Campaign for an English Parliament Secretary, Scilla Cullen, will make an address to the Convention on behalf of the CEP.

www.thecep.org.uk/ECC/ECC_address.pdf

For more information on the Campaign for an English Parliament please visit our website at www.thecep.org.uk or phone 07071 220234

Gareth Young

www.thecep.org.uk

Wake up!

Tim Worstall has a post up on the issue of self rule for the English. He identifies three ways forward:

• An English parliament
• An English grand committee within the UK parliament
• Dividing England into regions

Tim thinks, perhaps, that the committee is the right way to go which I have to admit is not my favoured option. I would go for the English Parliament every time, though having said that better the committee than regional assemblies. If regional assemblies are ever allowed to happen there will never be a time when the whole of England is represented by a single parliament. Self interest and billions in infrastructure will ensure that an England of regions will never be stuck back together again.

Tim includes the following very interesting commentary:

Behind all of this seemingly recondite constitutional manouvering are some hard political facts: The Labour Party would find it very difficult to get a majority (they would have one today, but not in more normal times) in an English Parliament, just as the Tories will never get one in the Scottish. An English Parliament would not allow the Barnett Formula to continue, the system by which 30 billion a year of tax money is sucked out of England and spent in Scotland. And, of course, all those Scots, people like Gordon Brown, Robin Cook, John Reid, would never be able to be Ministers with authority for England.

Whenever I think of this issue, and how the English are allowing it to remain and further develop to their disadvantage, some rather fine lyrics from a song I quite like by Rage Against the Machine go through my head.

Wake up! Wake up! Wake up! Wake up!
Wake up! Wake up! Wake up! Wake up!

I misread Tim's posting. He writes to put me straight:

...one teeny correction if I may? I actually say I would prefer an English Parliament, but would compromise for a Grand Committee if that's all we could get.

English regions

Heh, good letter in the Times today:

Sir, Mr Richard Caborn, our Minister for Sport, was moved to write to you (letter, October 6) to underline the tremendous support for London’s bid for the Olympics from “the English regions, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland”.

Since he is undoubtedly a Times reader and may be having difficulty finding the score of last Saturday’s football match, could you please tell him that it was English Regions 2, Wales nil.

Yours sincerely,
ROY BOND

Crime is down. No, it's up. Or is it?

Running down the brief list of Michael Howard's 'promises' quoted in this BBC report one in particular catches my eye:

Make Office for National Statistics independent.

It's a good initiative.

They're lovin' it

From The Times:

PETER MANDELSON, Britain’s most controversial politician and the architect of new Labour, said yesterday that he had moved on from British politics and pledged his allegiance to the European Union.

Man seeks leash

So, Robert Kilroy-Silk has confirmed that he wants to lead the UK Independence Party. No surprise there then. I'm not a great fan of Kilroy-Silk really as he seems to lack, how should I put this, a certain amount of statesmanship. He's also a rubbish day time chat show presenter.

I watched a few of his shows when there was nothing much else on and he seemed to spend the whole time trying to sit on members of the audience.

That aside some of the things he articulates, particularly on aspects of political correctness gone mad, do ring true to me and as a general commentator on such matters he can shine.

This does not make him leadership material however. Attack dogs rarely are and are best used to advantage on select occasions, the rest of the time being spent on a well held leash.

On the BBC's Breakfast with Frost programme he revealed quite clearly that no one in the UKIP was in control of that leash. Speaking about the current leader, Roger Knapman, he said:

Mr Kilroy-Silk said Mr Knapman had told him he wanted to stand down after the 10 June European elections.

"But then of course he got a massive election result and probably he liked the size of his new train set."

Police advice on pro-hunt demonstrators

Is this BBC report correct?

Over the past 10 days, Mr Michael had to cancel two official events after police warnings protests might turn violent.

The Countryside Alliance has today condemned Alun Michael MP for misrepresenting police advice. Mr Michael stated that Lancashire police had advised him that the right to roam launch last weekend might turn violent. This has been categorically denied by the force in an e-mail to the Countryside Alliance.

The front door rule

As part of the England Project we have always tried to stress upon the young lad that certain rules should be followed to ensure safety. The rules are many but one that I am sure is shared with many other families is the front door rule.

Never, we say, never open the front door to someone unless one of us is with you. A simple rule which is there for a simple reason; anyone can ring our front door bell. The law will not allow us to wire it up to the mains as a preventative measure so we have to cope best as we can with house rules and the like.

So, yesterday evening I get home and as I am pulling onto the driveway I see a man standing at the open front door to my house chatting to the young lad. No Mrs. England Project in sight.

It turns out that she was in the back garden and had no idea that the doorbell had rung and the little lad had, contrary to instruction, opened the door and struck up a conversation with the stranger.

Imagine my surprise when I got to the door and interrupted their little parlay only to discover that the stranger was in fact a professional politician (well, local councillor but that’s a sub-group of the same species surely). The shock! This is exactly the kind of thing we warned the lad about! A textbook example of why we need the front door rule.

Yes, yes, I know the lefty readers among you will say that all I need to do is put up a few stickers saying NO POLITICIANS or NO AGENTS OF THE STATE or what have you but honestly, don’t you think I haven’t already tried that?!

Country sports

I understand that there is no better time than the present to make that move from the city into the countryside. Country folk seem to have decided to abolish all Labour MPs from their communities, promising to hound them whenever and wherever they do encroach.

Then again, vermin have never really been welcome in the sticks so it comes as no great surprise.

Heh, just noticed this up on the Adam Smith Institute blog:

If you go out in the woods today
You're sure of a big surprise.
If you go out in the woods today
You'd better go in disguise.

Dirty, ugly things

Everywhere I look I see vandals:

Tony Blair will curb the powers of the House of Lords to delay and block legislation if Labour wins a third term in the general election expected next May.

A House of Lords (Reform) Bill to be introduced after the election would remove the 92 remaining hereditary peers from the second chamber. In a new development, it would also clip the wings of the Lords by limiting its traditional power to delay proposed laws supported by the House of Commons.

In a controversial move, the Labour blueprint would extend the use of the Parliament Act, which allows the Commons to override the Lords. It would apply for the first time to legislation introduced in the Lords as well as the Commons, allowing it to be used for all government bills.

The end of time

To believe that our current democracy cannot or should not be challenged is to believe that we have reached the end of time and that no further advancements can or should be made in methods of governance.

Commons security - what the serfs say

Some of these BBC Have Your Say opinions on Commons security after the pro-hunt protesters invaded are interesting. My favourite:

What I want to know is why John Prescott didn't hit them?
- Graham, Southampton

Premonition

Rt. Hon. David Blunkett MP, Home Secretary:

Even though the inner sanctum of the House of Commons was breached I am happy to report that all the security cameras worked perfectly.

Ok, I'm listening.

I've historically had a problem with Kilroy-Silk, the face of the UK Independence Party. I didn't like the cut of his jib (an important point I am sure we can all agree). However, like a lost sailor drawn to the haunting sound of the siren I find myself strangely attracted by his song:

Robert Kilroy-Silk, the former Labour MP turned daytime TV star, returned to his old Westminster haunts yesterday to warn the "metropolitan political elite" that the UK Independence party intends to defeat the European superstate and "change the face of British politics forever".

In a speech which deftly mixed self-deprecating humour and combative politics with lacerating attacks on "lying politicians" and "lazy, sloppy" media, Mr Kilroy-Silk repeatedly predicted that an angry and betrayed electorate is poised to overthrow the "old politics" and that he intends to be its instrument.

I can't, it's soooo beautiful.

Political Culture

Being, as were are, in the great age of legislation on the basis of popular demand is it not about time that all politicians were banned? They are clearly not popular and many see them as not contributing very much to society as a whole. They are also extremely dangerous, as every right minded person knows. Unsupecting members of the public have had them go off in their hands and every now and again one of them goes on the rampage.

Political Culture in this country has been allowed to spread too far. From the countryside to our inner cities, everyone has been (or knows someone who has been) touched by a political calamity. The Liberati might argue that minority interests should be protected in a modern democracy but these intelligencia do not live in the real world like the rest of us do.

We’ve lived under this blight for far too long now. It’s about time we put an end to it, before the culture spreads too far.

Replica

Real

Of course an outright ban would have to be preceeded by an amnesty but does anyone really believe that such an amnesty would yeild anything other than buckets full of old, worn out trophy politicians or perhaps a few blank firers? Sure, the press would call it a great success but some are already calling for the press to be banned too; can we really trust their judgement given that a healthy and spreading Poitical Culture is so clearly in their interests?

The answer lies in harsh penalties for offenders. After the short amnesty period any individual caught in illegal posession of a politician should be interned for a minimum of five years, regardless of the calibre; local coucilor, backbencher or cabinate minister – it makes no difference. Each and every one of them is capable of being lethal.

Replica

Real

Read the whole thing

Did you ever think that you would get to read something like this?

Politicians like Estonia's Prime Minister Juhan Parts, Slovakia's Prime Minister Mikulas Dzurinda, Hungary's once and future Prime Minister Victor Orban and Poland's next Prime Minister Jan Rokita are at the forefront of a group of young politicians that will try to bring Eastern Europe's revolutionary free-market conservative beliefs to Brussels.

Very odd invite

My local Conservative councillor has invited me to his place for drinks. I find that disturbing somehow so I don't plan on going. I'm not a paranoid kind of chap but I suspect it's a trap of some kind.

My previous blog, which I had to dump, was read by members of the houses of parliament (I know because of the web stats and because they mailed me) and I think it's something to do with that. I made some enemies and some of them have ninja friends. It took them longer to find me than I expected but it still comes as a shock.

Now, if you'll excuse me, the voices in my head are telling me to go home and clean my guns.

Dirty games

Do you think that it could be possible that the loony Livingstone has accepted a roll as ‘the dirty appeaser’ or some-such in a filthy wide game of international politics that neither you or I are invited to play in or even watch properly? I mean, it seems so crystal clear that his meeting with the Jew hating Sheikh al-Qaradawi was an unnecessary gamble for any politician to take yet he took that gamble. Why? Is he really that much of a loon? What hidden dirty game is being played out?

Is the state really this enamoured with itself?

This is what the new government emergency booklet (pdf) says about our children in the context of an emergency (eg terrorist attack):

Schools - If your children are at school you will naturally want to collect them as soon as possible in the event of a major emergency. But it may not be safe to do so. Please TUNE IN to your local radio station for advice and for details of the arrangements your local council has made for letting parents know when to collect their children from school.

The Liberati - What? Who?

Plain speaking, unashamedly populist and un-PC, the home secretary seemingly never misses an opportunity to take a swipe at any hand-wringing moral guardians, in his own party and beyond, who attempt to stand in his way.

In the past, he has referred to such people as "airy fairy libertarians".

But it now seems he has a new, far snappier, if more sinister-sounding, enemy - "The Liberati".

As Ashley from Manchester says:

Did David Blunkett mean to say "Liberace"?

That softy Blunkett

Our dear Home Secretary, David 'Nailer' Blunkett does has a soft side to him. For instance, he loves animals:

David Blunkett, who has been widely criticised as Home Secretary for refusing to take tough action against violent animal rights activists, is revealed today as a supporter of a leading anti-vivisection charity.

A stony silence falls across the room...

Is someone standing up to the Home Secretary?

Humberside Police Authority has asked the home secretary to reconsider his decision to order the suspension of its chief constable David Westwood.

They've fleshed out the story a bit now. Apparently:

"What we don't want, and the worst possible outcome, would be Gunfight in OK Corral in Humberside between the police authority, the chief constable and the Home Secretary."

If Antoine Clarke had his way the coppers would be up against the Home Secretaries Saudi counterpart, which would present them with a far greater challenge I think.

Given that today is Update Friday I give you this David Nailer Blunkett response via The Scotsman:

“In the absence of any new arguments I have decided to maintain my decision and I now call upon the authority to comply with the law and suspend Mr Westwood.

“If they do not I will be taking the necessary legal steps at the earliest opportunity at the beginning of next week to require them to do so.”

What they actually have an issue with is the law under which Nailer Blunkett is calling them out. It would be crass for me to point out to them that they are not the only people to suffer under legislation with which they do not agree. I will point it out anyway.

Judge Blunkett

This is a strong article by Jenkins in the Times. He concerns himself with the case of Garry Mann, the English fireman given a two year (suspended as it turns out) sentence by the Portuguese authorities and the reaction of the Home Secretary to Mr. Mann's current "not behind bars" status.

It looks like a right royal mess with evidence of an unfair trial and a complete misunderstanding as to the legal status of Mr. Mann by the Home Secretary who famously said, though not in a Judge Dredd voice:

Jenkins is right when he says:

Garry Mann might not invite sympathy, which is why his case is a good test of justice.

The judges are insisting that the trial was a fair one that followed all necessary procedures. The plot deepens and only time will reveal the true situation.

I may have jumped in here a little too soon and I put this down to not thinking very much of our Home Secretary, who I was trying to nail (and I don't mean in that US kind of a way). Thankfully, no one reads what I write so no harm done, eh?

In our eyes

Iris scanning devices are to be fitted at major UK airports within a year according to the Home Office. Who is providing the technology and how much is it costing?

The Home Office has signed a five-year contract with French company Sagem SA to provide the iris-recognition system, but Mr Browne [Immigration Minister] would not reveal the cost on the grounds of "commercial confidentiality".

Frankly, this answer is not even close to acceptable.

The dilemma

I should be happy, really I should. Labour are getting such a hiding in the elections that the humanitarian in me wants to shout out “STOP! LET THEM GET UP!”. But I’m not happy.

You see, if this defeat is really down to what people think about the war in Iraq and Tony Blair’s part in it then I simply cannot take any joy from it. How can I?

They say freedom has its price, and it looks like Blair’s career will be part of that price. You just watch as the cowardly creatures of the Labour party stab him in the back and toss him out of number 10.

I won’t be sorry to see him go, but I will be sorry that he was kicked out over the one major thing he did right.

Up for a scrap

Having endured the slings, arrows, barbs and whale-harpoons of sustained media hostility, they are the ones who are truly up for a scrap. Phooey to all this dull 'consensus', UKIP are riding into town looking for trouble. Even their list of '5 Essential Freedoms' includes 'Freedom from Political Correctness'. I have no idea what they mean by this and, possibly, neither do they but it's fighting-talk and refreshing as a shower of lemon zest. David Carr - samizdata.net

This from Drake over at The Edge of England's Sword:

Iain's friend claims that Kilroy-Silk has had a huge effect on things. Sorry, colour me un-spun. I've seen very little talk about Kilroy, apart from among the pundit class complaining about UKIP being populated by freaks and loons. Guess what? Message: we don't care. We're not selecting a government, we're selecting a delegation to a parliament whose sovereignty many of us don't recognise in the first place.

The problem with Howard

Iain Murray sums up Tory European policy in three words: stupid, stupid, stupid. He’s probably right and I probably agree (you probably have commitment problems – Ed). This whole EU issue and Howard’s stated middle ground position is extremely bad for the Tory party on nearly every level.

You see if, as Iain suggests, Howard chose the Euro friendly line to stop a few fat old Tory wets like Ken Clarke criticizing him then Howard has not only handed a bunch of Tories over to the UKIP, myself among them, but he has also revealed himself as an unprincipled leader whose position on the EU is dependent upon the opinion of others and not upon some personally held belief in the EU.

If, after Thursday’s vote, the UKIP does well and there is a subsequent change in the Tory position on the EU as I hoped for here Howard again, though to the EU sceptics advantage, would reveal himself as someone who has no deeply held and principled position. Hollow, if you like.

Alternatively, if Howard really does personally believe in the middle ground in Europe and if many Tory votes do go to the UKIP then he reveals that his position is simply incompatible with that of many natural Tory voters.

Whichever way this goes, Howard has fluffed it.

Twittering twit

Tony Banks MP, a politician notable for his anti-liberty stance on hunting, would like to draw attention to the fact that he thinks the human race sucks. I mean really, really sucks. He holds the whole species in such disdain that he would like to see every man, woman and child killed in a burning inferno of doom.

How do I know this? Well, in our mechanisms of government there is this thing called an Early Day Motion (or EDM) that an MP can author. Though these EDM's are not expected to be discussed as such, they are a way of bringing an issue to the attention of parliament and they also allow other MP's to add their signature to the motion in support of it.

A kind of, "hey, what do you all think of this then?".

Well, the latest by Tony Banks is a real hum-dinger:

That this House is appalled, but barely surprised, at the revelations in M15 files regarding the bizarre and inhumane proposals to use pigeons as flying bombs; recognises the important and live-saving role of carrier pigeons in two world wars and wonders at the lack of gratitude towards these gentle creatures; and believes that humans represent the most obscene, perverted, cruel, uncivilised and lethal species ever to inhabit the planet and looks forward to the day when the inevitable asteroid slams into the earth and wipes them out thus giving nature the opportunity to start again.

Luckily Peter Bottomley MP has added some amendments to the EDM, restoring a little sanity to the House. For instance amendment "EDM 1255A3" which states:

Line 6, leave out from 'earth' to end and insert 'when humans and other creatures may with luck have the chance to live together again.'

Fuel tax protests

And so it begins.

Fobbing off

Talking about tax freedom day and the villagers of Fobbing, reader Andrew wonders:

 I suppose this must be the origin of the phrase "to fob off"

Tax freedom day

Tax freedom day 2004 falls on May 30th, this Sunday. Sickening isn’t it, but what choice do we really have about it? Not much really.

I mean we can stop buying beer, stop using petrol, stop going to work etc but none of those options really appeal. I want to enjoy myself a bit and that generally means getting out there to earn and spend a little money. Fast cars, expensive women, grain and grape products; man that’s living but living means paying taxes.

Perhaps history can give us the answer. Let’s see, something about little people and big government. Kings. Lords and Ladies. Peasants. Aaaaha! The peasants’ revolt of 1381.

What a good name for a pub that would be, “The Peasants’ Revolt”, I’d drink there (wow, this train of thought stuff is weird).

Apparently these peasants were really annoyed. I mean really, really miffed. The reasons were complicated but much of it had to do with the insistence that they pay a tax of 5 pence on demand by the King of England, Richard II. Three times in four years they were asked to pay and eventually they couldn’t take it anymore.

The peasants went ape shit.

Some of them decided not to pay, which I guess is a reasonable method of protest. You see back then taxes had to be collected or handed in by hand. There were no computer transfers or pay-as-you-earn schemes. People had to hand real money over to real people, face to face like, so holding back on payment was relatively simple. You just stayed in bed, or wherever.

In May 1381, which was just about when our annoyed peasants were enjoying their own self made tax freedom day, a tax collector went to visit a village in Essex called Fobbing to find out why the people there were not paying the tax.

They kicked the bugger out of the village.

The state, not taking kindly to this kind of proactive protest by the masses, sent a bunch of the king’s soldiers to the village, swords and all, to sort the peasants out.

They too were kicked out.

Fobbing, clearly, was not the kind of village to be taken lightly.

The thing about the English, certainly back then, was that when they had enough that was generally it. No bargaining, no small talk, no dancing around the issue. They were serious people.

So they got together with a whole bunch of other peasants from other villages for a party or something, had a few drinks and thought about what their next move should be. A guy called Wat Tyler emerged as a natural leader of revolting peasants and, given that they now had a leader, a cause and a whole bunch of people the villagers decided to march on London to have a word in the King’s shell-like (he means ear – Ed).

On the way to London our annoyed villages burnt down buildings that housed government records, destroyed tax registers and records and generally left a trail of anti-state propaganda in the form of charcoal on their route. It was a messy business.

They eventually reached the gates of London which, oddly enough, were left open by the townies in support of their countryside brothers (there’s about a foxes chance in hell of that happening nowadays), walked in and marched straight towards the centre of town.

Then something happened that had never happened before and has not happened since. These villages captured the Tower of London. The Tower of London! The French couldn’t do it, the Dutch couldn’t do it, the Germans couldn’t do it. But these guys did. I told you they were annoyed.

Now, just about then things started to go a bit pear shaped and the villages took to drinking heavily in London’s pubs and bars. Had Bohemian Rhapsody been written then I am sure that the city streets would have heard a drunken rendition or two.

Wat Tyler tried his best to keep the peasants in line but what with all the big city lights and the pleasures on offer to the cities rural visitors things just got more and more out of hand. It’s a shame really because the protest was going really well up until that point.

On the 14th of June the King, who was only 14 years old at the time, met the villages and offered them all that they asked for. No more unpopular taxation and no repercussions. He suggested that they now go home, their point having been well made and some of them did. But others were still angry and, I am sure, the hangovers didn’t help.

Instead of going home they wondered over to Tower Hill, near the Tower of London, and cut the heads of the Archbishop of Canterbury and the King’s Treasurer. That’s how unfair these guys though their taxes were. No writing to the Inland Revenue, no blogging, no moaning over a pint or two in an unusually named pub. Cutting off heads; that’s the way they protested over taxation in those days.

The Mayor of London, a right old bugger then as he is today, in an attempt to get the peasants out of the city organised a meeting with them at Smithfield (outside the city walls). This meeting took place on the 15th of June during which the Mayor made a point by sticking his sword into the rebel leader, or so the story goes. Seeing this and hearing confirmation of the King’s promises was enough to encourage the villagers to go home.

By the summer the king had gone back on his word. A bunch of peasants were hanged and, though the special tax was not re-introduced, things generally went back to the way they were before.

Nothing changed in the intervening few centuries and this Sunday we find ourselves again enjoying tax freedom day. Perhaps, one day, we’ll see another revolt against high taxes, the state and its half baked ideas. Maybe it will start in rural England again. Maybe it will end up on the streets of London.

If it does the peasants should take my advice. Don’t listen to the Mayor of London. He’s a slick little bugger who’d stab you in the back as soon as look at you.

Over dinner

So, at the dinner table last night I happened to say something a little sarcastic about a certain politician.

"Who’s he?", says the good lady.

"A Labour MP", says I.

"What did you say? Who’s he?", says my six year old boy quite rightly wondering why I should be speaking so unkindly about someone he has never met.

So, my good lady goes into one about how these politicians run the country and how normal people decide who should be in charge every now and again.

"Pah", says the boy, "the police should be in charge."

And there it is. From infant to Home Secretary in an instant.

The Grid

In the Matrix, Neo brought forth confusion. He shook up the order of things and interrupted the smooth flow of the pre-ordained program. Neo was Chaos to the Matrix.

In the grid there is no clear Neo like character.

There's a Morpheus who works outside of the grid. He's called Gordon.

There was a Mr. Smith character, or Alastair if you will who is off doing his own thing and who can no longer be relied upon for the order that it brought. We can only hope that it is not replicating itself.

There is, however, no hero. No single individual who would free the masses from the governance and iron grip maintained by the grid.

Perhaps there is no hero because there is no Oracle. There is just The Nanny. The all seeing and all knowing Nanny who sits in the centre of his program. A program called The Home Office.

And there is the grid itself, craptacular in its inadequacy. Once firm and defined, now twisting and turning and more of a U shape than a grid.

Will it hold or will it fall? Will we be free?

It’s like playtime

Remember?

When I was at secondary school I was often witness to a debate or two in the playground. Indeed, I was partial to a good old debate myself. All that gradual raising of voices, the jeering crowds, the spitting and swearing, the clenching of fists and the inevitable exchange of that usefully non-committal phrase - come on then.

Ah yes, and when a little older the debating moved from the playground to the public house. All very much the same except that the language was a little different and there was less spitting. The phrase come on then changed to Right! Outside! and there tended to be a little less jeering from the crowd probably in recognition of the more serious nature of the material being debated.

I never looked for interesting topics to discuss with fellow students or drinkers but, instead, had weighty issues forced upon me. Your team’s rubbish at football. What do you think about the poll tax and Thatcher? Hey, are you looking at my girlfriend?

Then it all stopped. Thankfully. I got a job, got married, got a blog and stopped debating all together.

However, clearly some people decided they liked the rush they got from a good old fashioned face off. What to do? What to do?

What could they do other than get a job in that playground of all playgrounds, the House of Commons.

So this bloke Blair said to his mate that he wants a referendum on the EU constitution and that bloke Howard had a right old go at him ‘cos he thinks Blair will keep asking everyone to vote until they give him the answer he wants. It was mad.

Tory leader Michael Howard seized on the words, which came in his clash with Mr Blair in a rowdy House of Commons.

In fierce exchanges, Mr Howard mocked ministers' U-turn on holding a vote.

…both sides heckled and jeered…

…the two leaders slugged out their opposing positions…

…the battle lines were set out…

…a war of words…

You know, as long as the shouting and the screaming continues in the House of Commons we’re unlikely to go completely to hell in this country. Shouting and screaming is good not only for people, but also for Democracy.

Hitchens on Blair

Peter Hitchens doesn't like Blair:

A growing number of people have recently been confirming this column's long-held view that our supposedly brilliant Prime Minister is, in fact, Olympically dim, a soap actor miles out of his depth.

This fact, whispered across Whitehall, was hidden for years by the skills of his mental valet, Alastair Campbell, who impersonated Mr Blair's brain for him. But it can no longer be concealed.

A chant for the enemy class

What do we want?

Hey, that's not fair, the Beeb changed the title to Call for more AMs and powers. Ho hum.

Tories are holding a conference on gay issues

What on Earth are the Conservatives up to. I suspect that events like this contribute negatively to the heterosexual majority view on gay rights. I mean surely there are other more important issues that need to be dealt with by the Conservatives right now.

What about a conference on civil liberties or perhaps one on the European constitution and European integration in general. Even better one on family issues, as Ms. Widdecombe said:

Here we are, supposedly the party of the family. We are not offering a family summit, we are not offering a fathers separated from children summit, what we are actually offering is a homosexual summit.

Tackling problems

Monday, 22 March, 2004 - Saudis criticise US reform plan

Saudi Arabia's foreign minister has criticised US-led calls for reform in the Middle East.

Prince Saud al-Faisal said Arab nations could tackle their problems themselves.

Tuesday, 16 March, 2004 - Saudis 'arrest five reformists'

Saudi authorities have arrested five of the country's best-known reformist intellectuals, sources told the BBC.

Those arrested are both liberal and Islamist figures who have put their names to petitions calling for wide-ranging political and economic reform.

Blunkett looses

So Home Secretary David Blunkett has lost his appeal to keep a Libyan national in prison without trial for as long as Blunkett sees fit. The reason?

The special tribunal's ruling has said the man - known as M - was held on "wholly unreliable evidence".

I bet the Home Secretary is fuming. How dare the justice system do this? It needs reforming! Modernising! Crushing!

The Blunkett Zone

Stephen Pollard is writing David Blunkett’s biography and it seems to me that he’s a bit of a fan:

Take Mr Blunkett. The caricature view is that he’s the most ‘right wing’ Home Secretary since…well, since whom? Jack Straw? Or Michael Howard? The facts say something rather different. Rather than the ‘lock ’em up and throw away the key’ caricature, Mr Blunkett is engaged in a fascinating experiment to see whether it is indeed possible to be both tough and tender, and to be severe where necessary and lenient where permissible.

WHAT do you give someone who’s been proved innocent after spending the best part of their life behind bars, wrongfully convicted of a crime they didn’t commit?

An apology, maybe? Counselling? Champagne? Compensation? Well, if you’re David Blunkett, the Labour Home Secretary, the choice is simple: you give them a big, fat bill for the cost of board and lodgings for the time they spent freeloading at Her Majesty's Pleasure in British prisons.

I have a great respect for most of Stephen’s writing and am an avid fan of his blog but I think that Blunkett has managed to cast a spell on him. This would be in keeping with the rising opinion that Blunkett is indeed evil. Not so much as having something of the night about him but rather more like being the Prince of Darkness himself, manifest in almost human form.

Now being a blogger, and therefore entrenched as a member of the chattering class I was surprised to read Stephen’s opinion of us:

The typical chattering class response when I tell people that I am writing Mr Blunkett’s biography is an asinine variation on that ‘right wing’ theme, followed by self-congratulatory guffaw at their having had so astonishingly original a thought. That there might be more to the policies emerging from the Home Office – that it might be possible to want retribution and rehabilitation, for example – doesn’t cross their mind. In part, that’s because of the Home Secretary’s remarkable ability to say what people outside Islington think.

I wonder what this biography will be called? Here are some ideas.

1. The Evil Deed
2. The Sceptical Human
3. I’m an Idiot and so is my Boss
4. When Experiments go Wrong
5. Franken-Blunkett

Why not have a go yourself? And remember, try not to indulge in any self-congratulatory guffawing.

Barking?

The Safety House

My secondary school was a rather good one. I started there only a few years after it had changed from a grammar school into a state comprehensive one and the legacy was there for all to see. The old school buildings just oozed history with wooden panelling everywhere occasionally graced with the names of boys and masters who had been involved in one conflict or another. These from the boar war, those from the Great War, more from the Second World War.

We were taught rugby and cricket (football, though not frowned upon in the playground, was not taught as part of the curriculum) and we were able to take lessons on things such as the classics. Indeed one of the most animated and dedicated teachers I ever had was a classics teacher. Whilst the class was going through one of Homer’s books he looked up from the page and said that he was jealous of us because we had so much time left to us in which to enjoy such great works. "There are too many books and so little time left to me" he said.

Another interesting subject we were taught was commerce, which was an odd mixture of business economics and politics. Probably a product of a tight timetable schedule this odd subject produced what was for me a gem of a statement from a teacher. One particular day I was struggling a little with the idea of a second chamber at the houses of parliament. I couldn’t see the point of it so I asked the teacher the typical "yes but why" kind of question privately towards the end of a lesson. Mr. Green (I think that was his name) was obviously a little, well perhaps not annoyed but maybe frustrated that I had not got the gist of it from the comprehensive lesson I had just been given. And then he said "think of it as a safely valve for government".

There was one of those sharp focus moments when everything became much clearer. It was the missing piece for me and made perfect sense. In-fact at that point the second chamber changed from being a superfluous and impenetrable artefact of tradition into an essential part of government.

Which brings me, in a round-a-bout way, to my point.

If there has ever been a time when the value of an independent House of Lords has been there for all to see it has been during this Labour government.

When a powerful government, with a huge mandate from a disinterested people decides to railroad over the traditional values and processes of our great country the House of Lords is there. You can tell when it’s working because government ministers effectively tell you it is. They say things like what the Lords is doing is "completely undemocratic" or they use weasel words like "modernisation". These phrases are replacements for valid argument and are a dead give away that the Lords valve has opened. They are the same kind of statements used by the playground bully who is determined to get his own way for no other reason than it suits his purpose. A purpose that has little to do with the welfare of the kid whose dinner money he has just stolen.

I am a firm believer in a strong and independent House of Lords in its traditional form. Any government that is not is a government that you should look upon with even greater suspicion than usual. They are up to no good.

THE most serious clash yet between Labour and the House of Lords was looming last night as ministers threatened drastic retaliation to prevent peers blocking new laws.

Withdrawing the Bill and putting it into the Commons would add to the pressure on the Government’s timetable. But ministers could be sure of being able to force it through. For while peers would block the Bill when it reached them, it would be reintroduced in the next parliamentary session and pushed through under the Parliament Act, which stops the Lords blocking a measure in two successive sessions.

That last one is an important question because the dangers are great. If the benefits to you as a citizen of this country are not substantial and felt then you should be asking yourself why the government is taking these risks.

Thatcher once said:

There will always be threats to freedom, not only from frontal assaults, but more insidiously by erosion from within.

In other words, what we have here is a breakdown of the conventions that have governed us. Both judiciary and government are at fault; but ultimately it is the government which, through its autocratic, legally illiterate, mob-rule, Jacobin-lite approach has provoked this crisis.

Natalie Solent, as part of a gang of three wades in on the case:

As Iain Murray put it in the comments to a Samizdata post introducing Sean Gabb's article, this is no more than the usual practice of a conqueror: to "destroy an icon of the conquered people."

Behind the lines

I’m not saying that this mistake was a deliberate one because that would be pure unfounded speculation of the worst kind. Anyhow, such rumours would only jeopardise the position of our man on the inside. Ooops, no I made that up. Honest.

More martyrs please

This popular notion of not wanting to create martyrs really gets up my nose. It’s becoming an excuse to do nothing.

Party chairman Ian McCartney last week ruled out taking any action which would make Ms Short "a martyr".

More martyrs means cheaper martyrs and that’s got to be good for everyone.

Ms Armstrong is expected to make a recommendation on Ms Short's future in a week's time although a spokesman for Labour insisted there would be no "show trials".

Blair on Short

Clare Short's allegations about British bugging of UN chief Kofi Annan has solicited this response from Blair:

"I regard what she said as totally irresponsible, and entirely consistent."

Much as I dislike Blair I am with him on this one. It is totally irresponsible for an MP to make such a public comment on her perception of the work done by our security services.

Clare Short is a national disgrace.

A civil servant responds

A great little response from ‘a senior civil servant’ to, presumably, Blair’s speech on civil service reforms:

You paid tribute to the way the Service ensured that “the transition to new Labour after 18 years of Conservative Government was achieved with remarkable ease”. I cannot let this observation pass without paying tribute to the contribution you made to the transition by deciding not to change any of the policies of the outgoing Government.

Blair seeks change

Oh oh!

Tony Blair has outlined his vision of a reformed dynamic civil service which will drive change rather than acting as a buffer against it.

Blair is fed up with traditional safeguards because they get in the way of his advancement of state powers under the guise of modernisation.

It's easy being a cynic. All it takes is experience.

My suggestion?

A tax on politicians and government officials due to the health dangers introduced by their contributions to high blood pressure:

The Government is planning a tax on fatty foods in a bid to tackle the problem of obesity.

Why big government survives

I don’t know, but to hazard a guess I would say that as an average disinterested citizen it takes nearly a lifetime of disinterested exposure to big government to recognise it for the incompetent, self interested and expensive meddling mess that it is.

By then you’re too old and tired to care and too broke to afford the time to do anything about it.

Then you die.

Ian Lucas MP, the kind of man to play at poker

When commenting upon the Countryside Alliances attempt to hold a fundraiser at the Royal Courts of Justice, Ian Lucas MP commented:

“They claim to be the persecuted rural minority, but this shows them to be among the rich metropolitan elite.”

This statement put me in mind of a quote which, though is specific to decision making rather than commentary, I should imagine fits Ian Lucas rather well:

Every now and again a senior politician makes a decision that is so lame, so ramshackle, so out of touch with reality, that you have to question the whole basis of his judgment. Does he understand the context at all? Is he in fact hopeless? - GREG SHERIDAN

Lucas is not a senior politician, though I suspect he would like to be, but on the basis of his commentary I think this very unlikely.

He has revealed his hand and his true reason for opposing the Countryside Alliance is there for all to see.

Rehabilitated, hoorah!

Proof that community service "works".

Or a load of old cobblers and the man is the same one cast out not so long ago. You decide.

That man Straw

Via Andrew Sullivan I came to read Jay Nordlinger's summary of Jack Straw's performance at Annual Meeting of the World Economic Forum in the village of Davos, Switzerland.

It seems that the UK foreign secretary put up quite a commanding defence of the Iraq business.

Another questioner alleges that Britain et al. are "cooking the books" in Iraq — placing their thumbs heavily on any electoral scale. Straw himself describes this as a charge of "a stitch-up job," then knocks it down, in no uncertain terms. He again avows his special love of democracy: "I have been democratically elected to public office. Who else in this room can say the same? Let me see hands, please. One? Fine. But I don't care to take lectures on democracy and democratic legitimacy.

Right a bit, right a bit.

The Adam Smith Institute on why the blogosphere leans right. It's because blogs are the ideal medium for views that require more detailed explanations, says the ASI. I'm not sure I agree because the left are just as capable of having and expressing complex ideas. However, as a general tool blogs are perfect for presenting facts and figures, trends and analysis, and sustained argument requiring methodically archived output.

I think that the more accurate part of the ASI posting is saved for the end:

Perhaps this lack of understanding is because relatively few on the left have converted to the left. Conversely, many on the right were brought up with left-leaning ideas, ingrained from their teachers and parents, and then during their teenage or university years worked out that they were wrong. An inherited view is just believed: a view you are won over to has to have an intellectual foundation.

Howard attacks cost of government

The leader of the conservative party, Michael Howard, has attacked Blair on the costs of central govenment to the tax paying public:

Since Labour came to power in 1997, the costs of administering central government had risen by £7bn.

Pack of prejudice

Hehe. The Countryside Alliance have produced their own deck of most wanted cards:

Ann Widdecombe, Conservative MP for the Kent constituency of Maidstone and the Weald, is pictured in the so-called Pack of Prejudice as the Queen of Clubs.

The list - a parody of the cards issued to troops by the US government in Iraq - also includes Liberal Democrat leader Charles Kennedy as the Jack of Hearts.

Minister of State for Rural Affairs Alun Michael has a Joker card, while Labour backbencher and former actress Glenda Jackson is the Queen of Hearts.

Mugabe's honorary knighthood

It's news to me but apparently Robert Mugabe has an honorary knighthood. It was given to him for his contribution to relations with Britain in 1994 (whatever they were).

Well, it looks like it might be taken away from him:

Mr Blair was asked by Andrew Robathan, Conservative MP for Blaby, whether he would recommend withdrawing the knighthood awarded to Mr Mugabe on his last state visit to Britain.

Ministers have previously brushed aside the question of the knighthood which was raised earlier by the Foreign Affairs Select Committee.

Mr Blair said: “We will certainly look at the issue of the honorary knighthood, although I somehow question what the impact of that might be on him.”

Upset Mugabe to miss party. Bleats.

The leaders of the Commonwealth are going to meet tomorrow and it looks like Mugabe is pissed that he has not been invited. It also looks like all that power he has at his disposal (who's arrested and who isn't, who eats and who doesn't) has warped his mind so much that he thinks he's being haunted by a white alliance that's out to get Zimbabwe.

Asked whether, as Mugabe claimed, there was a white alliance out to get at Zimbabwe, he [Don McKinnon] told reporters: "I do reject that.

"I've talked to just about every Commonwealth leader more than once over the past six months. There's variety of views over how to deal with Mugabe, there's by no means a split between Africa and the rest of the world."

Parliament and stand up comedy

I was discussing Mr. Howard’s performance at Prime minister's question time yesterday with my good Lady. Instead of taking the matter seriously she giggled and said I quite like Michael Howard. What she found so funny about this exchange is anyone's guess:

"How many people in the 'big conversation' have told the prime minister they want top-up fees?" he wonders.

"Many," says Mr Blair, a little weakly.

The Tory leader ups the sarcasm: "Let me remind the prime minister - I'm here to ask questions on behalf of the country. He's here to answer them."

Will the government do a u-turn if the majority of people oppose tuition fees, he asks.

Mr Blair's answer only provokes further sarcasm: "This grammar school boy is not going to take lessons from that public school boy on under-privilged access!" bellows Mr Howard.

Mr Blair still won't answer whether, having "listened", he may scrap top-up fees.

"We've had three questions asked, none of them answered. Let's try again," says Mr Howard. Will he give a referendum on the EU constitution if the people want one?

Mr Blair chooses to answer the previous question, on hospitals, which provokes Tory jeers.

"It doesn't bode well for the 'big conversation' if, in this 'little conversation', he won't answer any questions," jokes Mr Howard.

Now everyone's revolting

We know that the countryside has been revolting for quite some time. Then, earlier last month, we saw how the peasants were revolting. Then came indications that members of the government were contemplating a revolt of their own. Now it seems that the Lords have decided to revolt.

Three Guardian readers and a dog in Blackpool stand together in their defiant support of Tony Blair's government; and the dog is beginning to turn.

Michael Howard and tax freedom day

Now this is worth sharing far and wide:

In his first party political broadcast since taking over as party chief, Mr Howard said the day of the year when people stop working for the taxman and start working for themselves should be marked by a public holiday.

When Labour came to power in 1997, Tax Freedom Day fell on May 27. But after 60 Labour tax rises introduced by Chancellor Gordon Brown, it fell on June 2 this year, and will not arrive until June 9 in 2005. That means two weeks' money, that used to belong to the people earning it, is now swallowed by the state.

Howard bites

After the Queen's speech Michael Howard had a few words to say to the prime minister. Quite a few as it turns out and some of it nasty:

"Real prime ministers lead their chancellors, you follow yours," he told Mr Blair.

"You may strut your stuff on the world stage, but when it comes to domestic policy, never in recent history has a prime minister been so weak, so feeble, so utterly unable to do what he wants - and all this with a huge majority in this House.

"How utterly humiliating for you, and how very damaging for our country - outmanoeuvred by a politically obsessed chancellor."

The drinks are on you

Londoners, just go and read how the mayor of London pays for his political band standing:

How much did the reception cost and who paid for it?
'It was a few thousand.'

How many thousand?
'A few.'

Who paid this few thousand?
'It came from the Project Development Budget.'

Who finances the Project Development Budget?
'The Greater London Authority.'

Who finances the Greater London Authority?
'Well, you know the answer to that.'

The Queen's Speech

The Queen's speech is notable for what it did not include:

The lack of a commitment to a hunting bill will anger some Labour backbenchers after the Lords blocked attempts to ban hunting with dogs earlier this year.

What is Chirac on?

And here is an alternative take on the England Australia match:

England's rugby champions have won effusive praise from Jacques Chirac, who said their defeat of Australia was "a victory for Europe."

Lean times

It's difficult to get a word in edgeways at the moment. The left seems to be exploding all by itself.

What would you pay...

...to see a couple of anti-anti Bush protesters at the up and coming march holding up a banner saying:

Go home
Anti Bush Protesters
You lefty wankers

What a shower

Once again the annual Leonid meteor shower will soon be here.

Experts predict that up to 100 Leonid shooting stars could be seen streaking through the sky every hour.

However, light from the moon will make the meteors hard to spot until about Wednesday.

Look Tarquin, a sign from the heavens. Tomorrow we shall face the demon Bush and crush him.

It all falls into place

Andrew Ian Dodge highlights some speculation that the Iron Lady's curse is over. Surely this is just crazy made up nonsense. What next, Thatcher uses Jedi mind trick on Portillo "This is not the job you're looking for". Crazy. Or is it? Or is it?

Tainted

Peter Cuthbertson on Michael Howard:

But Howard fought on against such people and proclaimed again and again that "prison works". In his three and a half years in the Home Office, he was able to prove this. His solution to rocketing crime didn't approach the sophistication of a postmodernist sociology graduate's thesis. There was little in anything he said about the need for all of society to take responsibility for its criminals and louts. He wasn't a slave to buzzwords about social exclusion and the like. His solution was to keep those who burgled, attacked and mugged innocent people inside prison so that those outside would be safe from them. Nothing is likelier to provoke liberal ire so much as a dash of common sense. The trouble for them is that under Michael Howard the Conservatives were able to reverse a historic rise in crime, Howard ensuring a reduction of 18% in the time he was Home Secretary.

In Gordon's hands?

Melanie Phillips writes about the battle between Blair and Brown which seems to have become a little more public recently. She says that

The Prime Minister is now exposed, lonely and supremely vulnerable.

The public have fallen out of love with Tony Blair and I suspect that the braying and neighing of barnyard animals will soon be heard coming from within the labour party.

Baaaahhhhd Tony.

Away from the middle?

Iain Murray, over at The Edge of England's Sword has taken the questionable Worlds Smallest Political Quiz. I took this some time back and came out centrist though this seems to have changed now:

In the comments on Iain's article Alan states:

The World's Smallest Political Quiz would be better if it had more questions covering a wider range of issues.

Ken is so wrong

London mayor Ken Livingstone is dissing spidy.

Mr Livingstone said the protest, part of a continuing campaign by Fathers 4 Justice, did nothing to help Mr Chick's cause.

He added that Mr Chick, was "amply demonstrating why some men should not have access to their own children".

"He is a man who is putting his own life at risk, police officers at risk, other Londoners who may be passing along the road at risk," he said.

Anyhow Ken, if spidy is putting everyone at so much risk why have the police

decided to reopen the roads around Tower Bridge

UPDATE: Melanie Phillips throws her hat into the ring:

But this problem is far broader and deeper than flouted contact orders. The whole justice system is institutionally biased against men and marriage. It is driven by an extreme feminist agenda, which stretches from the humblest family lawyer through the politically correct Law Commission to reach all the way up to government and the senior reaches of the judiciary.

UPDATE (7:30ish pm): The issue has just been discussed on Channel 5 news where the particular piece was introduced with the news that Mr Chick has come down. The newsreader stated that 98% of court cases end up with the custody going to the woman. Are we really saying that only 2% of men are capable of bringing up their children?" to which an invited expert said something along the lines of "No, no we can't say that. It's clearly an issue that needs addressing." I would say that Mr Chick has shown what direct action can do to highlight an issue. Ken, no doubt, is fuming.

Peter's monsters

Peter Hitchens declares that:

Michael Howard has been drafted in to keep the party warm for Michael Portillo.

A squalid putsch and a series of dirty deals will not save the Tory Party. Nothing will save the Tory Party.

By the way, I shall deny all knowledge of this posting if Hitchens is proved right.

UPDATE: Brian Micklethwait from samizdata.net:

This Labour government may limp back into office after the next election, but I believe that its days are now numbered.

It's nice to have a choice

Noelle Lenoir, France's minister for European affairs, has ordered all French schools to pin up a map of the EU and a summary of its constitution; the award of a "European citizenship" card to everyone who reaches 18; and the flying of the EU flag at all major sporting events next to France's national flag. Her aim is to promote awareness of the EU's "role in the management of issues and international crises".

DerekWyattMP@barking.mad

I wish I could make something like this up but, frankly, I'm not a comic genius.

MP suggests solution to Spam

Current email address is:

derekwyatt@aol.com

New address would be:

derekwyatt@aol.swiaoaa.co.uk

Sw1aoaa being his postcode and .co.uk so that we know where the email has come from so an end to .com though .com.uk would be fine.

Since some, especially children, might balk at giving their postcode in an email the postcode can be exchanged for a pin number so:

derekwyatt@aol.123456.co.uk or derekwyatt@aol.123456.com.uk

The pin code is held by the Information Commissioner's Office.

ISPs would have to be persuaded of the need to resolve jurisdiction of emails (14th Amendment US constitution) and if they can't, then EU and other governments would legislate.

So spammers would be traceable by postcode or pin number and country of origin.

Smell that coffee goodness

I laughed out loud I tell you. I caught Labour MP Diane Abbott on radio 5 live the other night trying to explain her decision to send her son to a private school when she has actively campaigned against others doing the same for their children.

To be fair to her she did admit to not having a leg to stand on (haha) and to being a hypocrite (haha) but she also said that:

Private schools prop up the class system in society

This woman was worried that state education would not give her child the education that he needs so she paid for a better one; another class warrior wakes up and smells the coffee.

Break, damn it

Over at samizdata.net Perry de Havilland reminds us that Michael Howard (most likely the next leader of the conservative party) is cast from the same mould as the current Home Secretary, David Blunkett.

Why is it that the bad moulds never break?