The Biter Bit!

Gordon Brown, on CiF, writing about the elections in Burma:

"Next Sunday, 7 November, had the potential to be a truly great day. The first Burmese elections since 1990 should have seen grassroots and civilian candidates compete in free elections, as 60 million citizens finally threw off a brutal military dictatorship in front of international observers and the global media."

As did 2010, where 60 million citizens finally had the opportunuty to throw off a brutal dictatorship in front of international observers and the global media. And the only change that happened was in the colour of the dictatorship!

Unfortunately, it didn't quite happen, did it, because Cameron could not - to use a football analogy - put the 'f'ing ball in the net'.

Democracy is a bitch, is it not Gordon?

Rather Than Quote Of The Day, How About Question Of The Day?

Appreciating that I am the author, how about "Question Of The Day", as against "Quote Of The Day", as in that posed at the end of:

http://witteringsfromwitney.blogspot.com/2010/10/history-repeating-itself.html

It might just elucidate an answer or two - and put 'them' on the spot?

C'mon bloggers - lets 'up the ante'!

What is Good For Redwood, Is Good For Carswell

Following my post on the comment left on the post by John Redwood, the following comment has been left on this post by Douglas Carswell.

"Perhaps you may like to publicly comment on the last paragraph of:

http://witteringsfromwitney.blogspot.com/2010/10/history-repeating-itself.html

It would be helpful, for those of us who look to you as a 'Saviour' of our country, to know where you stand and whether your 'beliefs' are that strongly held?"

On the basis that - having met Douglas Carswell and believing he is an 'Honourable' member of the House of Commons - I know I will receive an honest response.

30th October 1991

A day to remember:

"Addressing the Commons just a month before she was ousted as Tory leader, Baroness Thatcher said: ‘Monsieur Delors said at a press conference the other day that he wanted the European Parliament to be the democratic body of the Community, he wanted the Commission to be the Executive and he wanted the Council of Ministers to be the Senate.

‘No! No! No!’"

Unfortunately M'Lady, after many attempts by those leading the party which used to be called 'Conservative' - the present incumbent, in common with your successors, only believes: "Yes! Yes! Yes!"

Far be it for me to hasten, or wish to hasten, the demise of Maggie, however all I can ask is that, when it happens, could she make sure that she re-incarnates FDQ!

And They Both Wear Blue? WTF

This BBC report:

Shouldn't Cameron at least be wearing yellow? So descriptive of his character and political policies!

Just a thought.................

History Repeating Itself?

Daniel Hannan posts on the TeaPartiers, presently standing in the American Mid-Term elections.

"The Boston Tea Partiers, just like their successors today, were rising against “their own professional political class”, above all the luckless Governor of Massachusetts, Thomas Hutchinson. They were doing so in the name of a series of liberties which they believed their ancestors had secured for all Englishmen: liberties which stretched back through the Bill of Rights, back even through the Great Charter, to the inherited folkright of Anglo-Saxon common law."

Which is what those of us today, who still believe in the United Kingdom as a self-governing nation, are hoping to accomplish - enforcing the Magna Carta which states that no foreign prince or prelate (or state) shall have governance here.

There is, however, one fly in the ointment. Hannan ends his post thus:

"I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again: it’s time to repatriate our revolution."

Hannan would do well to remember that the colonists had a leader, someone who was prepared to put his head above the parapet and 'lead'.

So, Hannan, what about it? What are you waiting for? Is it not time that the likes of you, Carswell - and those other Conservative MPs who have signed up to Direct Democracy - decided to publicly repudiate the party whose rosettes you wear and with whom you are so obviously in disagreement - and put your 'principles', in the form of a new party, to the public vote at the next general election?

Question: Man or mouse, Hannan? Answer: Squeak?

European External Action Service

The Telegraph and the Mail-on-Sunday both have articles on the above, which is due to be formally announced by Cathy Ashton on December 1st from her office in Brussels - the one that costs over £10million per annum in rent alone!

£32.8million on bullet-proof limousines?

As I am sure the EU really does believe in 'value for money', perhaps we should ask al-Queda, or the IRA, to 'test' that our money is being well spent, with of course Ashton and her staff acting the part for which they are so well qualified - that of the dummies!

Closer Military Relations With France

Is good for Britain - so writes Liam Fox in a comment piece in today's Sunday Telegraph. As is often the case, the print edition differs from that online.

The print edition commences:

"Too often the debate on defence within Europe has been focused on what the EU should or should not do. Yet it has always been my view that defence must be a sovereign, and therefore an inter-governmental issue. When nations can benefit from co-operation without losing sovereignty, they should aim to do so - which is why this week will mark the beginning of a long-term commitment to closer defence and security links with France. There are many reasons why this co-operation makes sense. We are Europe's only nuclear powers. We have the largest defence budgets and are the only two countries with real, large-scale expeditionary capability. We are both permanent members of the UN Security Council, and leading members of the G8 and G20. And there is no better time to deepen our relationship with France."

The print version, later, continues:

"This is not, I must point out, a repeat of Tony BLair's trip to St, Malo, where he called for deeper military co-operation through the EU. Nor is it a push for an EU army, which we oppose."

Well, he could have fooled me - but doesn't!. It is by now a well-known fact that the EU proceeds by stealth and this policy stinks of 'EU stealth'! Regardless of Fox's assertion that:

"I want to make it very clear that, if required, we maintain an autonomous capability to sustain a considerable and very capable military force in the field on an enduring basis."

it is obvious that we do not have the capability to sustain a considerable and very capable military force in the field on an enduring basis - FFS, we are due to have aircraft carriers that will not have any planes.

The Mail-on-Sunday reports that the Americans have offered to send an aircraft carrier which would be stationed off the British coast in order to boost security during the London Olympics, The suggestion has been, it is reported, rejected by No10 as it would make the UK "look weak". The UK does not have to look weak - it is bloody weak! From the Mail article:

"Cuts announced by David Cameron in the Defence Review this month will lead to the axing of our Harrier jump jets and the decommissioning of the Ark Royal carrier. That means that no British planes will be available to fly from our sole aircraft carrier, Illustrious, in 2012."

It must be obvious to the thickest of the thick presently in the House of Commons that this idea of British/French 'co-operation' presents the EU with something that they have always sought - an EU navy and one with nuclear capability! That fact alone shoots holes in Fox's statement that "Yet it has always been my view that defence must be a sovereign, and therefore an inter-governmental issue". WTF, how can defence maintain sovereignty and, at the same time, contain an element of 'inter-governmental' co-operation? This surely must be another loss of 'power', although it is acknowledged that loss of sovereignty is not a subject that much interests the minds of the present political class.

The present collection of Conservative Ministers that deal with our foreign affairs must be the most supine, spineless apologists for their offices that it has been this country's misfortune to have been saddled with - and they should be hung by their necks in recognition of the shame they appear not to feel!

Gerald Warner

Gerald Warner writes - as only Gerald Warner can - in the Scotsman with the title "Cameron's 'piece of paper' will be a blank cheque for the EU".

Some extracts:

"REJOICE! Rejoice! It is Dave's South Georgia moment. The greatest prime minister since Gordon Brown has won a stupendous victory over the European Union - in his own words, a "significant prize" - by restricting the increase in the EU budget to a paltry 2.9 per cent. Makes you proud to be British. Gawd bless yer, Mr Cameron, you're a toff! They don't like it up 'em… This latest British "victory" bears some uncomfortable resemblance to such historic triumphs as the Charge of the Light Brigade and the three previous Afghan Wars."

"Six months into his premiership, the EU wide boys have already taken the measure of Dave as a hollow man, full of wind and what's-it. It is a pity a larger proportion of the British electorate did not share that insight."

"Last week Dave described himself as a Eurosceptic. With Eurosceptics like that, who needs Ken Clarke?"

Delicious!

News Manipulation

I posted yesterday noting my amazement that the 'ink cartridge bomb scare' had wiped all mention of the story de semaine - Cameron's EU fiasco - from Saturday's Telegraph. And so it continues today, with the only mention that I can find of the EU being an article on them spending £124,000 on a transgender talking shop, an article buried on page 29 of the print edition.

I have no wish to delve into all the 'could have', 'may have' suppositions made by Cameron and May, nor into questions about how Leicestershire Police initially 'cleared' the package and not the Bomb Squad - I leave that to others.

Within the front page article in the Sunday Telegraph comes this quote from David Cameron:

"We have to do more to cut out the cancer of al-Qaeda in Yemen and the Saudi peninsula."

No apologies for climbing on my 'hobby-horse' once again.........but, it is a great pity that David Cameron cannot expend a little of his time and energy cutting out the cancer that is the European Union and which is eroding our sovereignty with each passing day!

For some time it has been apparent that governments of all hues need to keep the people 'compliant' and thus have their eyes taken off what is actually happening in the world. As Sir Terry Wogan writes in his comment piece in today's Telegraph we have had 'Obesity', Mad Cow, Asian Flu, Smoking, Testicular Cancer and, of course, that current 'stand-by when all else fails' - terrorism. This is no more, no less, than news manipulation - and the pity is that the MSM are compliant within this process.

It is maintained by some that when one considers matters like the Bilderbergers, Common Purpose, New World Order - let alone the shenanigans of our own political elite - we, the people, have no idea whatsoever what is in store for us. 

That view may well be true, however we can and should make a start in negating what has become, especially in the UK, a process which I call 'Democratised Dictatorship'. To begin with we could end the process whereby, come each general election, political parties present a manifesto blank sheet of paper and expect voters to agree with it thus enabling the political elite to do what the hell they like with us and our country. We could insist that a recall system - dictated by the voters and not subject to Parliaments 'permission' - be 'guaranteed' (and by guarantee I do not mean a 'Cameron style guarantee) otherwise a party will not receive one single vote. We could also insist that where matters affecting our country and our lives are concerned - be that nationally or locally - no decision is made unless the public are consulted by means of a referendum, otherwise not one single vote.

There will, no doubt, be some readers who consider the previous paragraph to be nothing but naive aspirations, however I would remind them - and our politicians - that history shows where the people are ignored, eventually it results in revolution, which can - and has - become 'bloody'.

The posturing politicos need to remember it is their necks that will be in the noose!

So The Reason Is?

On Conservative Home/Think Tanks Tim Montgomerie posts on the subject of a new gathering of Conservatives and Liberal Democrats to discuss future prospects for co-operation between the two parties.

Linking to a report in the Mail by James Forsyth, Montgomerie ends his post:

"It really isn't a big plot. It is simply a dialogue about policies and ideas."

Yesterday I linked to a scathing attack, by Peter Hitchens, on Cameron  and consequently have to ask what would appear to be a logical question. If it is Conservative Party policy to fight the next general election as a separate party with the intention to win an outright mandate, just why are 'talks' being held? Or is this just an insurance policy in case Cameron should miss an 'open goal' - again?

The idea would seem to be no more than another ploy by Cameron to move his supposedly 'centre-right-eurosceptic party' even further to being a 'centre-left-europhile party'!

Conservative Party Or Cameroon Party MP?

John Redwood posts on "The European Relationship" and ends his post:

"The UK government was unable to get cuts in the large and growing EU budget, or even to achieve a standstill, because it has to proceed by majority voting. The government  can dig in and insist on a falling budget for 2014-20, as they have a veto over that. They can also dig in over the proposed new Treaty. If the EU wants to Uk to sign it, the Uk should demand some powers back from the many areas where Conservatives opposed Labour’s past surrenders of authority."

In response I have posted the following comment (awaiting moderation at time of writing:

"the Uk should demand some powers back"

Pray who decides, Mr. Redwood, just what powers we should demand the return of and how are these ranked in order?
All powers ceded should be demanded back! You took the oath of a Privy Councillor and in so doing swore that no foreigner "should rule in this land".
Left to Parliament, again? No thank you as it has been by leaving it to Parliament that most of this country's woes can be traced back to.
The question has to be asked - and I mean no offence in so doing - did Wokingham elect a Conservative Party candidate or a Cameroon Party Candidate?"

English Pensioner has a post entitled "Cameron is not a real man", from which it is worth quoting:

"A certain look of contempt, and Mrs EP replied "I don't mean that sort of 'real'. I mean a real man who will do his very best never to be beaten by a woman. One who would want to show a woman who had previously done the same job that he could do it far better and get better results. But he isn't even trying; all he wants to do is to be liked - real men would prefer to be feared."

Perhaps, like his leader, John Redwood wishes to be liked rather than feared.

So Just What Use Are Our MPs?

Christopher Booker posts on the plight of children 'taken into care' by Social Services and the 'injustices' that the parents of those children suffer. The stories that Booker relates cannot be unknown to our elected representatives. as surely at least some of them read his column?

 Shocking as is the situation that Booker relates, it is however not the only example where people are treated 'according to the law'. Witness this story and the 'punishment' inflicted on someone who 'snapped' at continued provocation.

Booker ends his article thus:

"The only people in a position to reform this system fundamentally are those who set it up in the first place under the 1989 Children Act – the politicians. But they have, with one or two shining exceptions – notably John Hemming – walked away from the Frankenstein's monster that Parliament created. It is now up to them to support Mr Hemming and all those horribly maltreated families who are campaigning for one of the most out­rageous scandals in Britain today to be brought to an end."

which in turn begs the question why our MPs are not making inquiries of the police, in their constituencies, whether any such cases exist? As Booker points out, MPs are the only ones who can right these 'wrongs', so why are they - the MPs - not acting on their own initiative? Why is the MP in the constituency in which the Mail story occurred, not acting on behalf of the family of the man imprisoned?

Are not MPs elected to 'right' 'wrongs' in the law of the land?

Again, just asking...............

Might This Be More 'Nudge' - To Quote Ian Parker-Joseph?

Is this yet another 'government sponsored' effort to have the UK adopt British Summer Time all year round?

OK, so I am a cynic - so what?

We're Sheep Shuffling Towards A Permanently Yellow Britain

That is the headline* to an article in the Mail by Peter Hitchens, which I reproduce:

"David Cameron does not want to be a Conservative Prime Minister. The idea fills him with disgust. He much prefers a Coalition with the ultra-Leftist, anti-British Liberal Party.

Why? Because he is much more like them than he is like the silly sheep who voted Tory in the deluded hope of getting a patriotic, respon­sible and just government

I warned everyone against Mr Cameron when there was still time to stop him. And he repeatedly helped me by confirming that what I said was true.

Two of a kind: Is Cameron, left, more like the Clegg's Lib Dems than he realises

He made it plain, when he shamelessly broke his pledge on an EU referendum, that he was not to be trusted on the Brussels issue – as we now see.

He refused to reply when I asked him, during the Election, if he was closer to Nick Clegg or Norman Tebbit. He gave his answer days later, after the sheep had voted, as he formed a Coalition with Mr Clegg.

But conventional wisdom – which is always wrong – has since then claimed that Mr Clegg is in some way the prisoner of the wicked Tories. He is portrayed as Mr Cameron’s fag at school, or as his helpless underling, by politically illiterate cartoonists.

On the contrary, Mr Cameron is the willing prisoner of Mr Clegg. He loves to have a permanent excuse to tell the shivering, lonesome clumps of real conservatives in his party that he cannot do what they want him to do.

In fact, he loves it so much that he really wants a merger between the two parties – in all but name. Hence the most fascinating – and so the least discussed – political revelation of the week.

My colleague Simon Walters reported last Sunday that Francis Maude, one of Mr Cameron’s closest and most astute lieutenants, had told a private gath­ering that the Coalition is a ‘bloody good thing’, adding that there was very little difference between the Tory and Liberal parties and that many Tories want the pact to continue far beyond five years. ‘Even if the Conservatives win a majority at the next Election, there will be a desire to continue with the Coalition among parts of the Conser­vative Party,’ he said.

Those parts will be the ones concentrated in the smart area of West London where Mr ­Cameron and his allies dwell. They are Liberals. They will govern as Liberals. Vote Blue. Get Yellow. If that isn’t what you want, stop giving them support, time, money and votes."

Which is what I posted, basically, back on 21st May (follow the link). Nice to see the MSM once again following the lead given by a blogger!

* And the headline does not just apply to the colour of the Liberal Democrats - it is also applicable to Cameron himself, in that he will not 'stand-up' for the country which he is supposed to represent!

And This From A Welsh Conservative

This post demonstrates just exactly what is wrong with the Conservative Party today - they don't know owt and put their feet in mouth with no effort whatsoever!

"David Cameron probably got the best deal there was (No way I can know that - and neither can anyone else) and he secured a lot of agreement on some fairly sceptical rhetoric. Let my fellow Conservatives turn their fire on the Labour Party, which reneged on its promise to hold a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty, and now stand on the touchlines, doing policy somersaults, watching people who should know better making some damn stupid comments."

David Cameron did not get any 'deal' and the Labour Party are not the only party that reneged on holding a referendum and that do policy somersaults - and making damn stupid statements!

I have posted a comment offering Glyn Davies £10 if the budget increase is not over 2.91% and requesting he cough-up the same amount if it is! 

I wonder whether he will be the first Conservative that will honour a deal?

Update: It seems he is not a 'betting man'.

How We Are 'Duped' By 'Fake Charities'

Courtesy of Subrosa comes this video - and I can but use her 'intro'.

"The subject is 'Bad science in a good cause is just bad science' and Professor John Davies, Director of the Centre of Applied Pyschology, Strathclyde University, Glasgow, explains his reasons for this statement.

For those who are interested in hearing the words of an eminent academic berating the brainwashing 'charities' - using the anti-smoking government funded organisations as his example - this is 4 minutes well spent."

No further comment!

Cost Of The EU

For those who may wonder whether it is worth the UK being a member of the EU, this video of an interview with Dr. Lee Rotherham of the Taxpayers Alliance may enlighten them.

Bearing in mind not one cost/benefit analysis has ever been done - something which Lee Rotherham also mentions - one quote of his is worth repeating time and again:

"The cost of Regulations and Red Tape - and this is from the EU's own statistics - is greater than the value of the trade it is meant to regulate"

 

Watch the video and then - as the Americans say - 'go figure'!

Ginger Rodents

The manner in which this story has been 'blown up' out of all proportion really does beggar belief!

Justifiably, Ginger Rodents warranted much media attention due to the talent displayed and which was mirrored by that of Fred Astaire!

Can we 'move on' now - please?

Politics Home Drops 'Another One'?

On Politics Home front page, at 14:11 today there is an article in the headlines reading:

"Osborne faces child benefit Qs. The Treasury select committee will question chancellor George Osborne and chief secretary to the Treasury David Laws over proposed changes to child benefit because of fears they are unworkable. Prime minister David Cameron yesterday said he does not "predict a problem".

Err, chief secretary to the Treasury David Laws................???

And Politics Home asks for subscriptions for the full service of £39 per month - to provide incorrect information?

Just saying........................

Update: Not bad, it only took half an hour to correct!

Good Timin'?

Far be it from me to suggest a conspiracy, but is it not odd that the 'ink cartridge' bomb scare has wiped Cameron's 'humiliation' by the EU elite off the front pages? One could almost say it was 'Good Timin' - no?

Just thinking is all

Patriotism

This seems to express that, quite admirably!

And take it back, we bloody well will.

And Therein Lies The UK's Problem.......

Gawain Towler, Calling England, posts brilliantly on the continuing 'fall-out' from Cameron's 'supposed victory' in Brussels today. In his last paragraph he illustrates the problem from which British politics suffers - namely that the Conservative Party - which presents itself as a 'Eurosceptic' party and whose Leader personally confirmed his status as a 'Eurosceptic' - still believes it can change the EU 'from within'.

"But when will this crowd of people, the Carswells the Hannans, the Cranmers finally realise that they will not get the freedom, the liberty, the self governance they so often talk about and so plainly believe in will never come through the party whose Rosettes they wear."

A further question is when will the Carswells and Hannans (and the self-appointed 'Archbishop') actually do something 'concrete' and, for example, present Cameron with some real opposition, even leaving the Conservative Party - that term being an oxymoron in itself - if necessary, in order to 'stand-up' for their constituents, which they profess to serve.

On Newsnight this evening, Michael Crick (who was 'put in his place' by Cameron at today's Brussels news conference) was reporting that of those 37 Conservative 'rebels', who voted recently against the Coalition in Parliament, are now saying "Well, Cameron 'got' all that could reasonably be expected". Been 'got at' by the Whips already?

Cameron may well believe he is a 'Major' player in the politics of the EU (think Maastricht) but it is plain to see that his is but the 'Office Manager' for the region known as the UK!

More EU Lunacy Regarding Flying

Back in August I posted about the problems of those who hold Private Pilot Licences (PPLs) and today one of my readers emails me with news of yet more 'EU Interference'.

It is worth while taking a look at the following four links (in date order) to see how those, whose hobby is flying, is about to be made that more difficult and likewise how their costs are going to escalate.

http://www.loop.aero/LPA2362/EURO+WAR+ON+US+AIRCRAFT+AND+LICENCES.aspx

http://www.loop.aero/LPA2365/PARK+THE+PROPOSALS+EU+TOLD.aspx

http://www.loop.aero/LPA2372/EASA+IS+THREAT+TO+AIR+SAFETY.aspx 

http://www.loop.aero/LPA2366/AOPA+WINS+IMC+CONCESSION+FROM+EUROCRATS.aspx 

Commonsense says that whilst some hobbies may be more dangerous than others and that some rules have to apply, the question has to be asked as to whose necks are at risk? I have to return to a comment made in my earlier post: namely that "It is also a matter of contention that we are supposed to be a free people and that we have a choice how we live our lives - especially without interference from others over whom we have no control - whether that be at home, work or play!"

In any event, if the UK has ceded the power over ruling how those whose hobby is 'private' flying are regulated, then surely this is yet another example of why we are no longer a self-governing nation and, having ceded that 'power', is reason enough for a referendum? A loss of power is a loss of power - it matters not what that 'power' is.

David Cameron Sings The Blues!

H/T: Old Holborn on Twitter

What A Topsy-Turvy World It Has Become

In 1945 Britain was a 'victorious' nation and Germany was a 'vanquished' one. Fast forward 65 years and look how the pendulum has swung! And not one bit of 'ordnance' used!

The article has one section which is very, very revealing and one that I do not believe any other media outlet has 'picked-up':

"Britain insisted on support, even if only declaratory, for EU spending to be kept on a tight rein at a time when several countries are imposing budget cuts." (my emphasis)

We only have Cameron's 'word' - and we all know that his 'word' means nowt - that EU spending is to be kept on a tight rein while Member States impose budget cuts.

Lee Rotherham has an article on Conservative Home Centre Right in which he ends:

".......if the last chance to implement reforms is to be cast aside, if no powers are ever to be repatriated, then patently we now live in an unvarnished new reality. If there exists neither the prospect nor the will for reform, there remains no other alternative than for this country to leave the European Union."

Powers never will be repatriated; there is no prospect of reform - there never is in any Socialist system as all that system knows is even more 'central' control - therefore there is no other alternative but for the UK to leave the European Union.

No nation that promotes itself as a democracy can be a member of the European Union in its present form - so what about it Dave, when do we leave?

The Gift Of The Gabb

Sean, of Gabb fame, has expressed yet another opinion well worth reading - here.

Mentioning the Spending Review and Cameron's speech to the Confederation of British Industry - with some pithy comments between - Sean Gabb ends:

"Taken together, the two statements on economic policy show that nothing has been learnt and nothing forgotten since the last crisis of overexpansion in the 1970s. What the Prime Minister and the Chancellor of the Exchequer have promised us is the equivalent of switching on a fan in a room filled with stale air."

For Heffer and Heffer, Amen!

From our Simon:

"David Cameron and the euro millions roll-over.

Since Lady Thatcher left office it has been easy to predict the outcome of EU summit meetings. A prime minister talks tough beforehand – especially in election campaigns – about defending British interests. Yet when he arrives it is a matter of moments before he is on his knees, doing exactly as he is bidden by our masters in Brussels. 

Dave is no exception, and nor did I expect him to be. It is not just that he reminds us more of Ted Heath every day. It is that he is a natural appeaser, a man born to take the line of least resistance. He is also in bed with serious Leftists and federalists posing as Liberal Democrats, whose enthusiasm for the European project, and indeed for the disastrous notion of a single currency, remains undimmed. And it is part of Dave’s own project to realign his party on the centre-Left, which means, in the end, he will always do what he is told by Brussels. 

There is absolutely no need for a 2.9 per cent rise in our contributions to the EU. Europe is tottering financially. The EU should be saving money, as most countries are, not finding ways to spend more of it. Yet those ways abound. Eurocrats tell us that the new foreign service that the EU has devised, under the profoundly undemocratic Lisbon Treaty, is expensive. I bet it is. They also want to put more money into environmental schemes, overseas aid, and other pointless exercises which, if we feel we have to do them, we ought just to do ourselves. Dave was saying only a few days ago that he would seek a freeze or even a cut in our contribution. For him to roll over so quickly, and to agree to have the taxpayer’s pocket picked in this way, is predictable, but contemptible. 

The EU is a sovietised operation. It is a dictatorship of bureaucracy. Those unelected, and unelectable, officials who run the EU decide what has to happen: and, even if it takes a lot of time, anguish and grief, it happens. The price of an elected head of government saying “no” is ostracism for him and his country. Sometimes, however, ostracism is no bad thing. The EU also has to engage in elaborate pretences and rigging to ensure that its institutions, unviable though they may be, continue to exist. This is true of the euro itself, a grotesquely overvalued currency that is wrecking the continental economy and whose strength fails entirely to reflect the crippled national economies that, with the notable exception of Germany, comprise it. 

It is not least because Germany, and its poodles in France, fear long-term damage to their own interests from these weak economies that new rules on economic management, which would require a revision of the Lisbon treaty, are being proposed. We now await the cunning plan to be devised by eurocrats that will enable only a tiny section of the treaty to be re-opened, as if by keyhole surgery, to write in new rules by typically undemocratic means. Anything else would have to give Dave the opportunity to fulfil his promise and have a referendum on the whole treaty before ratifying any changes, something his apologists in his own party have always claimed he is willing to do. 

We should believe that when we see it. What has happened in the past couple of days is an affirmation of business as usual: an exhibition of Britain’s devastating loss of sovereignty, and the continual willingness of those who should defend us to run up the white flag. It is no surprise to those of us who never believed Dave was a Conservative. Perhaps, though, it has helped open the eyes of those who foolishly thought he was."

The sooner our political class grow a spine, the media grow some tits and balls (where applicable), the British public wake up from their slumbers and a new Act of Parliament which states that never again can our political class forget and ignore the words of a Privy Councellor's oath. That Act should then be adopted as a national prayer - concluding with the words forming the heading of this post.

Cameron Roasted By A Boiling Frog

The Boiling Frog has not only roasted our Prime Minister Regional Governor, but virtually skinned him in the process.

"Martin Schulz, the German leader of Europe's Social Democrat MEPs, the parliament’s second biggest bloc, said Mr Cameron’s promise was “nonsense” and the Prime Minister was “setting himself up for a fall”. He said: “The negotiations have barely begun - it is not for Mr Cameron to announce their conclusion.” He added: “The figures he is talking about bear little relation to reality. He is setting himself up for a fall.”

A diplomat from one of EU countries that signed Mr Cameron’s letter predicted that the final deal would be larger than promised. “It will be very difficult to keep at 2.9 per cent with what the parliament is saying,” said the diplomat.

And a European Commission official stressed that Mr Cameron’s guarantee “doesn’t change anything” because legally binding “conciliation” talks continue until Nov 11.
 
In office but not in power, eh, Mr Cameron?"

 Note that Martin Schulz and the unnamed EU diplomat both recognise that 'it is not over till the fat lady sings' - ie, they both know that what Richard North, EU Referendum, wrote is quite correct, namely that it is the EU Parliament who holds the 'whip hand'!

As Douglas Carswell writes:

"The spin says that the proposals from France and Germany for fiscal governance extend to the Eurozone only and so will not affect the UK.

The truth is that the EU might not be able to impose sanctions at this time, but our budget will be subject to as much scrutiny like every member state, including in theory Greece.

Having established common EU scrutiny over our budget, this deal also means a common EU legal framework applicable to "all EU Member States" - irrespective of us being outside the Euro.  The path is now clear for us to be out voted on future EU legislative initiatives involving our internal fiscal affairs. 

We've not just given ground over how much of our money we give the EU.  We've given the EU a say over how we spend our own money at home.  Some victory, eh."

And when Cameron has his 'fall', it will be a more joyous day than all my 68 birthdays, 68 Christmas' - and my 3 divorces - all rolled into one!

Words Of Wisdom

Autonomous Mind has a brilliant post on Cameron here, entitled "The village has a new idiot".

Using the infamous 'Peace in our time' photograph - but this time featuring Camerlain - Autonomous Mind writes:

"Does this remind you of another British leader who returned from Europe lauding another grand achievement? This ‘spectacular success’ means British taxpayers will have to send around £450m to the EU. If that is considered a success then what in the name of all things holy is the definition of a failure? He genuinely expects us to believe this nonsense and embrace him as a conquering hero rather than what he really is – the impotent figurehead of an EU province sent home with his tail between his legs and carrying a tax demand for nearly half a billion pounds extra per year."

Making the point that he does not usually resort to profane language, AM ends:

"David Cameron is a shit for brains, spineless, lying, quisling bastard, devoid of any integrity and possessing a character that makes a plague infested rat skulking in a sewer seem respectable in comparison. I wish he and the rest of the charlatan political class would just fuck off."

Quite, AM - Quite!

 

Review Of Party Funding

The Committee on Standards in Public Life have produced a paper on the above, at the beginning of which they set out what they term "The Seven Principles of Public Life".

The seven principles are: Selflessness; Integrity; Objectivity; Accountability, Openness; Honesty and Leadership - and I am sure all would agree with me that MPs have failed dismally on every principle.

The Coalition Government has talked a lot about cleaning up party funding. They want to put a stop to big money dominating politics, however, one of the proposals being seriously discussed at the moment is the introduction of more regulated state funding of parties. This is not acceptable.

From the report:

"The Coalition Agreement committed the new Government to pursuing “a detailed agreement on limiting donations and reforming party funding in order to remove big money from party politics".

No doubt like the Referendum Lock and the Recall System, the above promise will be kicked into the long grass until such time as Cameron and Clegg are forced to go looking for it!

The political class don't listen to the people on a number of matters - for example, the EU and Immigration - and we pay hundreds of millions for a Parliament which is no more than a 'rubber-stamping' organisation for rules emanating from Brussels.

So why the hell should the public be forced to fund the work that they are supposed to do, but don't?

Just asking, like....................

You Are A Statistician - FFS!

Mike Smithson, Political Betting, posts with a heading "Has the EU simply ceased to be an issue".

"This polling is something I refer to from time to time whenever the EU is in the news and there’s hugely a heap of abuse poured on me for daring to raise it.

But the hard fact is that the vast majority of the public don’t give a money’s - they simply couldn’t care less. The EU has been totally part of our lives since a Conservative government courageously took us in 37 years ago and we’ve got used to it

The idea of Britain joining the Euro has been side-lined and even when the Lisbon treaty was making all the headlines a couple of years ago the MORI figures were very low as can be seen from the chart.

So I always get amused when I see the Westminster village getting into such a state of excitement over it."

Is it any wonder that the EU/Europe fails to register with the public when (a) the political class lie, obfuscate and at times refuse to discuss the subject; and (b) when the political class can control the media so that nothing adverse does get written or said?

Mike Smithson may well get amused, especially when ignoring important facts such as (a) and (b) above, but it is also a tad disingenious of Mike Smithson to rely on 'surveys' which no doubt are phrased in such a way (as is the way with all 'surveys') to ensure the answers received are those required!

He would do well to remember that one day the public are going to 'wake up' to what is being done in their name - and when that day arrives the political class (and certain statisticians) should be wary of their fate!

Just a thought...................

One To 'Upset' The Ladies

An example of female 'Logic'? From today's letters in the Telegraph:

"A bag for life trashed
 
SIR – My wife takes reusable bags (Letters, October 28), fills them with rubbish and then throws them in the bin.


Rob Turnbull
Hutton Rudby, North Yorkshire."

Cameron's Brussels Press Conference

aka: what a load of bullexcrement!

Camerons maintains that the 6% increase is 'dead' - pardon? I can but refer, once again, to the opinion of Richard North, EU Referendum, one which for the avoidance of doubt I requote:

"Cameron is pledging that he will block the six percent rise in the EU budget which is set to cost us an extra £900 million this year. Can he do that? Well ... the short answer is no. Only the EU parliament can do that. And the long answer? That is here in the consolidated treaties as amended by Lisbon – Article 314.

Basically, what happens is that the Council looks at the proposed budget and agrees a "common position". This is Cameron's first hurdle. If he wants to block the budget, then he has to get a majority on the Council under the QMV procedures.

Supposing by some miracle he get his majority ... not that he will ... the next move is up to the EU parliament. The Council decision is put to the parliament, which decides whether to agree with it. If not – which would be the case - it draws up amendments and forwards them to the Council.

A conciliation committee is then formed to hammer out a joint text. This must be approved by the committee, the Council component by QMV, the parliament by a majority. But then comes the killer:

If the European Parliament approves the joint text whilst the Council rejects it, the European Parliament may, within fourteen days from the date of the rejection by the Council and acting by a majority of its component members and three-fifths of the votes cast, decide to confirm all or some of the amendments referred to in paragraph 4(c). Where a European Parliament amendment is not confirmed, the position agreed in the Conciliation Committee on the budget heading which is the subject of the amendment shall be retained. The budget shall be deemed to be definitively adopted on this basis.

In other words, if the conciliation committee comprising the parliament and the council (the latter acting under QMV) agree the budget, even if the full council then rejects it, the parliament's vote is decisive. It can still approve the budget, without the approval of the 27 member states - of which the UK is but one."

Cameron only got 12 other Member States to sign his 'agreement', making 13 in total - which is not the 14 which would have been required to block it under QMV. Neither is it a 'victory' when all Cameron has done is to get other Member States to agree to an increase that they had previously called for - especially considering Cameron had previously declared it his intention to get a freeze or cut!

Cameron continues, along with his puppet, Haig, to prattle on about the fact that sanctions will not apply to the UK in view of Protocol 15 to the Lisbon Treaty; however they both seem to forget point 34 of this document.

On his return Cameron will present this 'agreement' as a victory for the UK and in any subsequent vote no doubt his MPs will obey the Whips and file through the appropriate lobby, exhibiting a lack of backbone we all know to be true!

To use a quote from The Talking Clock:

"The Conservatives need a real conservative to lead them - and fast. Cast Iron? He should be Cast Out"

Update: Paul Waugh Tweets: "Hague admits his "top priority" is the cost of the EU not worries about passage of powers to Brussels" which tells you all you need to know about Hague and the bloody government of which he is a member!

Let Us Get A Few Facts Correct!

With the EU - and Britain's membership of that odious organisation - in the news, there are a number points that need making:

1. Cameron is not a Eurosceptic.

2. Cameron is not to be trusted - whatever he says he will do, he most definitely does not do.

3. Cameron, Hague, Liddington and the media know f'all about the EU, which is obvious from their output.

4. Europe is not a country, it is a continent presently ruled - due to the crap it produces - by the incontinent.

5. For the avoidance of doubt virtually half our laws have originated from Brussels - which means there has been a significant transfer of power, something that has continued under the Coalition government.

6. As a result of 5, the United Kingdom is no longer a self-governing nation - something which no-one can any longer deny.

7. The 'expertise' of our political class is, in the main, non-existent - so the sooner they are 'hung, drawn and quartered' the better.

8. In view of 1-7, we - and our country - are well and truly f*****d!

Letter Of The Day

"SIR – Somebody needs to buy David Cameron a handbag. 

Petter Hindes
Chelmsford, Essex"

Priceless!

One In One Out

No, not regulations that stifle business - quangos!

The Conservatives post on the demise of Regional Development Agencies (RDAs) and their replacement by Local Enterprise Partnerships (LEPs). More detailed information can be found at News Distribution Service (NDS) for government and the public sector.

We have an admitted Europhile Lord Heseltine, who will Chair the Independent Advisory Panel, which will consider all bids submitted to the fund and make recommendations to Ministers on which to approve.

Of course what the NDS does not tell you is that replacements for the disbanded RDAs was necessary as it is a requirement of the toy parliament to provide an organisation through which EU funds are disbursed.

Yet another example by this Con/Lib 'so-called' government of hiding the truth about the need for the decisions they make.

As Helen, over at Your Freedom and Ours says:

"What a good thing Labour was voted out and the Cleggerons formed a Coalition. Everything is so different."

Just Who The Hell Is This Prat Liddington?

Having just watched a segment of today's Daily Politics in which Douglas Carswell is interviewed (here) and then Liddington (here), one can but wonder what planet the latter is on!

For Liddington to suggest Carswell reads EU documents, to better understand them, beggars belief! Oh, were there more MPs like Carswell who states that he has a duty to tell voters where the truth lies.

What I - and many others - wish is that Carswell would start flexing some muscle and let it be known, for example, that there are x MPs willing to vote against any deal that Cameron brings home which is to the detriment of the UK, even if that means defeating the Coalition.

The only worry of course, knowing what a spineless bunch they are, is how many Conservative MPs would be willing to be included in the 'x' factor!

And Just Where Does The Bloody Money come From?

The Telegraph reports that MPs who resigned or lost their seats at the general election received more than £10.3 million in controversial "golden parachute" payments. The newspaper reports that: 

"The House of Commons is refusing to disclose exactly how much each MP received....The parliamentary authorities refused to disclose how much had been paid to each MP. It said: "We consider that disclosure is not necessary and that the interests in disclosure do not outweigh those of Members."

MPs are public servants, paid from the public purse and consequently the public have every right to know exactly how much each MP has received.

It appears there are degrees of 'transparency'!

Seems A Reasonable Suggestion?

One letter in today's Telegraph caught me eye:

"SIR – Why cannot we use our international development budget (Letters, October 25) to pay our dues to the European Union?


Ron Cookson
Reading, Berkshire"

After all, it would more likely only end up in the same Swiss bank account!

Asda & Others To Lose Their 'Double Deckers'?

Amongst supermarkets Asda are known to use 'double-decker' trailers as they estimate that the double-deck trailers save around 7 million miles per year on the trunking operation and another 3 million - or 500 vehicle movements per week - on store deliveries. What the EU intend is to limit the height of trailers, thus making 'double-deckers' illegal.

Untill recently there was no European wide approval of Goods Vehicles with individual Member States operating their own national type approval schemes. Approval in one Member State did not automatically allow for registration in others. However, a recent amendment to the Framework Directive (70/156/EEC) changed this. Directive 2007/46/EC, signed in October 2007, introduces the basis of a European wide scheme for trucks and this will be phased in over coming years.

And the Department for Transport (DfT) says it will fight the European Commission (EC) over any proposals for 4m-high trailers in the UK.  FFS! Its a Directive and has to be implemented - but hey, if the DfT fancy powderpuffs at dawn, who are we to stop them!

Bl'EU' Plaques?

Courtesy of Gawain Towler, England Expects, comes this story - and the headline! The document to which GT links is entitled: "Proposal for a DECISION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL establishing a European Union action for the European Heritage Label" and can be read here.

Lets begin at the beginning:

"This proposal for a Decision of the European Parliament and of the Council puts
forward the introduction of a European Heritage Label, whose general objectives are
to strengthen European citizens' sense of belonging to the European Union, based on
shared elements of history and heritage....."

History? Heritage? What f'king history and heritage? Even if one takes the European Coal and Steel Community in the Treaty of Paris as the starting point of the EU, that is only 60 odd years - compared to the UK's centuries of history?

Then of course it only takes the next paragraph to illustrate the desire of the EU to brainwash the children:

"First, the initiative will be based on the European narrative of these sites and their symbolism for Europe, rather than aesthetics. Second, the focus will not be on conservation, but on the promotion of the sites and access to them, which includes providing good explanations on the European significance of the sites and organising educational activities, with special attention to young people."

Do note the words: 'with special attention to young people'!

Still only on page 1 we then get:

"The original concept of the European Heritage Label emerged in 2005 as one of the responses to the gap between the European Union and its citizens. This gap is linked to an important extent to a lack of knowledge of the history of Europe, of the role of the European Union and of the values on which it is based."

Again, please note the words 'of the role of the European Union'. No doubt this will be the oft-repeated spin about the EU preventing further wars in Europe - when in fact it was the Americans who carried out that role, in the process letting it be known that if anyone did start something they, the Americans, would kick arse! It is also worth pointing out to these 'EUnumpties' that sticking a few blue plaques up ain't going to make people forget they are Norwegian, British, French, German etc. The EU still don't realise that Europe is not a f'king country - it is a continent, presently (because of the amount of crap that emanates from Brussels) ruled by the incontinent!

Oh and guess what? There is going to be a Directive or Regulation shortly, forcing us to have these bloody bl'eu' plaques - see page 8 for the "Proposal for a DECISION OF THE EUROPEAN PARLIAMENT AND OF THE COUNCIL establishing a European Union action for the European Heritage Label". It is their intention - per Article 2 - to place these plaques on "monuments, natural or urban sites, cultural landscapes, places of remembrance, cultural goods and objects, intangible heritage attached to a place, including contemporary heritage." Shades of 1984, in that we will be daily reminded of 'the wonderful place in which we live' - what the bloody plaques won't remind you is that there is f'all we can do to get rid of the people who are ruining our lives!

Later on (page 16 - Article 14.1) we are informed:

"Each site awarded the European Heritage Label shall be monitored on a regular basis in order to ensure that it continues to fulfil the criteria and that it respects all the commitments made in its application."

which is Eurospeak for their wish to make sure no one has written 'Foxtrot Oscar' over them!

The EU has regions, sub-regions and sub-sub-regions - it won't be long people before we are all classified as normal, sub-normal and sub-sub-normal.