1000th post - and what they gave me to write about

Forgive, once again, my tardiness in commenting on the actions of the Tory Party when it comes to their least favourite policy: the EU.

Mr Eugenides had promised he would write a little something in honour of this momentous post but due to matters out of my control and probably to do with skirt, he's now too busy. However, I will forgive him because, as frequent readers will know, he has a bewitching hold over me.

But enough of that, for we have the Tory policy on the EU to mull over. And Cameron made a particularly fine effort when he used a lot of words to say not a lot.

The thrust of the argument is that William Hague will go to the other ministers and say that he wants the UK to have opt outs from the EU over issues on employment law, such as the social chapter (now articles 136 - 145 of the Treaty and thus not a 'chaper' anymore), taxation and general sovereignty issues.

I worry that the future Prime Minister, whose eyes appear only to be on getting the keys to Number 10 rather than the future of this country, does not understand that because of the Factortame decision European Law is superior to UK law and has been since The Lady was in charge of the country.

We will also introduce a new law, in the form of a United Kingdom Sovereignty Bill, to make it clear that ultimate authority stays in this country, in our Parliament.

This is not about Westminster striking down individual items of EU legislation.

It is about an assurance that the final word on our laws is here in Britain.

Except that every schoolboy is wrong, and so is David Cameron. That's not bloggertarian hysteria, by the way: it's First year Law at every university in the land.

"Some public comments on the decision of the Court of Justice, affirming the jurisdiction of the courts of member states to override national legislation if necessary to enable interim relief to be granted in protection of rights under Community law, have suggested that this was a novel and dangerous invasion by a Community institution of the sovereignty of the United Kingdom Parliament.

But such comments are based on a misconception. If the supremacy within the European Community of Community law over the national law of member states was not always inherent in the EEC Treaty it was certainly well established in the jurisprudence of the Court of Justice long before the United Kingdom joined the Community. Thus whatever limitation of its sovereignty Parliament accepted when it enacted the European Communities Act 1972 was entirely voluntary. Under the terms of the 1972 Act it has always been clear that it was the duty of a United Kingdom court, when delivering final judgment, to override any rule of national law found to be in conflict with any directly enforceable rule of Community law. [...]

As he who shall not be named for a few weeks at least points out.
Many Tories appear happy with this decision but whether it's because they think it will actually produce any results or whether it's settled their concerns that the electorate will view them as just another bunch of jumped up fuckwits more interested in power than actually doing anything with it, I am unable to say.

Helmer and Hannan are not happy with it, and as these chaps actually know a lot about the EU perhaps that should light a beacon in the view of the party activists and voters who want the British people to actually have a say.

Because the Tories will go into this negotiation having already informed their opponents that they will not play their trump card, withdrawal, I can hardly see them being a success. Such is the lustful panting of The Boy Dave over our slavish and costly membership of the EU their counterparts can just sit there and say 'NO' in a variety of languages knowing there will be no backlash.

And then what? This is already a five year policy - five years of paying billions of pounds to an institution which is going to vote itself another pay rise of 10% come December whilst the press look the other way. In that five years just think of what can happen seeing as it's only been four years since the French and Dutch said NON and NEE and now we have a Constitutional Treaty which has bound our parliament.

The blindness or plain refusal to admit to themselves and us that these big things we need to deal with, like the economy and public debt are bound up with our membership, is deeply frustrating. Cameron is displaying signs of Polly Syndrome: He says he will be lumbered with this astronomical debt but he won't take steps to stop us paying about £50 million a day to an institution which on top of this financial burden also wants to close down the City of London and does everything in its power to stop people being productive and efficient.

I expect it from Labour and the Lib Dems because I think they're mendacious, dribbling morons. They also don't pretend they are in any way eurosceptic which of course the Tories do.

UKIP now represent a very key part in the General Election and not just the jolly good battle which will take place in Buckingham. Aside from some cunt trying to bankrupt the party - conveniently after they beat Labour in the European Elections but that's the travesty that Blair did to the legal system and the civil service - they are now the only party offering the British people the chance to have their say.

Good news on the UKIP front today is that Tom Wise looks to be spending some time at Her Majesty's pleasure. And he used to be a copper which means he won't be having any fine wines unless they're shoved where the sun don't shine.

I am glad that Lindsay Jenkins now will not face charges because she was a pawn in the game of a very nasty man. It was all about the funding of a book, you see. The tale told to me was that one of Sunday Times hack Daniel Foggo's alleged contacts who has been causing trouble in UKIP circles for many years came up with this idea of her book being funded through secretarial allowances. Now, this is not allowed and one must ask oneself why this idea was proposed so vigorously to a number of UKIP MEPs who turned down the idea by someone who would know that this wasn't permitted. One of his lady friends decided to spill the beans on the plot, it has been said.

And why did she spill the beans? Well, our friend the rumour mill says it's because she was pissed off that she didn't get any of the money which was promised to her from Mr Wise. But seeing as I only received that information from party officials and not directly from the source I cannot confirm.

If this was true then surely there should be questions raised about the gentleman in question and, indeed, the lady?

I wonder how old Roger Knapman is taking the news of his friend pleading guilty? When Nigel Farage and John Whittaker took the decision to suspend Mr Wise over this, Mr Knapman was most affronted and one of the people who have been linked to the nutty Junius blog, his former researcher, even sent press releases to the lobby briefing against the party and not informing the UKIP press office. Roger Knapman was aware that Tom Wise was being investigated but had decided not to tell the UKIP leader or chairman. Ah, I was glad when he was no longer leader. It's a shame that one of the people who I understood to be working for a leadership contender also knew and decided not to say anything.

It was a most undignified mess but then most things under Knapman's leadership were including certain diverted e-mails from head office to a former MP who then, it has been alleged, decided to forward them onto the usual troublemakers.

I'd like to think that this has brought an end to the saga of the loonies. Many have left to form their own party and then quit that, some have died, some are still bimbling around inventing stories about Farage and Hannan and calling up Sunday journalists.

In any case, 1000 posts later I do feel that lines have been drawn under a few issues which were at the forefront of my life when I started this blog.

Most importantly, we know where the Tories lie on matters of national sovereignty and we know that when it comes to a vote on the future of our country, they won't be the ones to deliver.

So if we want to take our lives by the scruff of the neck and decide for ourselves then the Lib Lab Con won't be the people to vote for.

Why oh why do we pay taxes?

Forgive my tardiness on the subject of David Nutt and his sacking for saying something the government didn't like.

But what can one really say that hasn't been said a thousand times on this blog and others far superior to my pink witterings?

The fact is that what Professor Nutt said, and for those of you who've been dead for the last few days, here it is:

He repeated his familiar view that illicit drugs should be classified according to the actual evidence of the harm they cause and pointed out that alcohol and tobacco caused more harm than LSD, ecstasy and cannabis.

He also argued that smoking cannabis created only a "relatively small risk" of psychotic illness.

has been around for years.

Presumably that means that the chap who came to my school to give myself and my school chums a lecture on drugs was also fired for making the point that alcohol and tobacco are more dangerous than other drugs? It's hardly a new statement and that's because it's true. There are these handy things called statistics which prove it.

But of course that doesn't fit in with the way the government and, as reports show, the Tories want us to live our lives. They know that what professor Nutt said was true but it would mean having to justify why alcohol and tobacco are still legal and why other drugs aren't. Taxes and convenience, mainly. And who would vote for a party which proposed to ban booze? Patsy Hewitt, the wierd woman who lives down the end of the road and shouts at shadows and that's about it.

Alan Johnson should be ashamed of himself for morphing into a beast which despises debate and truth. Sacking people because you don't like what they say is something which this country fought against - years ago with our legislative reforms and also against other countries.

As the row intensified yesterday, Nutt said he had been contacted by more than half the council's members, who had shared their "horror and disgust" over the manner of his dismissal and were now considering resigning en masse.

Do the decent thing and resign. Do the decent thing and stand up for what you believe in. It is what this country needs in the long run along with thousands of people like you who also put their hands up and say 'my god but these politicians are shit.'

And of course what it needs is millions of people not to vote for vile parties who say that people should be sacked for putting the government in a difficult position by expressing an opinion.

Because that's fascism.

This country is fucked, though. Recently I've just been sitting here wondering what the point of it all is. Where can we move to, away from these hidous beasts who need to be removed for the sake of liberty and freedom? People are stupid, that I know. But when people get into politics they become caricatures of the stupid people they repesent and, combined with that narcisism and greed which propels people to scrabble and claw for the upper echilons of power, it turns them into the worst examples.

What has this life, this country become?

Er, what?

From the PA newswire:

Tony Blair, Dolly Parton and Archbishop Desmond Tutu will discuss how their faith and beliefs have shaped their lives in a new flagship BBC religious programme hosted by Fern Britton.

That sounds like something Paul Merton would come up with as an example of 'the most unbelievable programme lineup going'.

Maybe it's the fact that everytime I think of Desmond Tutu I imagine him in a tutu which adds the je ne sais quoi to the picture in my mind of him, Blair, Dolly in something trashy and Fern Britton sitting happily on a pastel sofa?

Speaking as a vegetarian

What the bloody buggery hell is Lord Stern on about with his 'give up meat to save the planet'?

People will need to turn vegetarian if the world is to conquer climate change, according to a leading authority on global warming.

In an interview with The Times, Lord Stern of Brentford said: “Meat is a wasteful use of water and creates a lot of greenhouse gases. It puts enormous pressure on the world’s resources. A vegetarian diet is better.”

Lord Stern: repulsive little hypocrite who wants to see you live in a cave

Actually, a vegetarian diet is not better and I say that as a vegetarian. You don't get as varied a diet and it takes much more of an effort to ensure that you get the nutrients you require, rather than just eating cheese on toast in your jims jams whilst watching Strictly Come Dancing.

I would imagine that if the bastard EU hadn't imposed so many laws which resulted in the closure of local abatoires then animals wouldn't be transported so far but that's not what this loon is getting at. He appears to hate animals so much that he wants to see them wiped from the face of the planet.

He predicted that people’s attitudes would evolve until meat eating became unacceptable. “I think it’s important that people think about what they are doing and that includes what they are eating,” he said. “I am 61 now and attitudes towards drinking and driving have changed radically since I was a student. People change their notion of what is responsible. They will increasingly ask about the carbon content of their food.”

Fuck Off Fuck Off Fuck Off.
FUCK. OFF.
Carbon Content? The only way I'm interested in knowing about the carbon content of my food is to find out if my father has once again dropped my veggie sausage in the bloody barbeque.

Lord Stern, who said that he was not a strict vegetarian himself, was speaking on the eve of an all-parliamentary debate on climate change. His remarks provoked anger from the meat industry.

Oh there's a surprise: someone in politics who is a complete fucking hypocrite.

There are bloggers much more dedicated than I to providing the details of just how Lord Stern has been earning his various honours. For me, it's just the madness that anyone with a position of responsibility can be quite such a cunt.

He's also forgotten, of course, that it's not just not meat which comes from cows. If a job's worth doing, it's worth doing well and so Lord Stern really needs to lead by example and become a vegan.

Go on, then. You horrid little man!

Miliband hedging on a Tory government?

Yesterday David Miliband (who, to be frank, I've fallen a little out love with) ruled out becoming the EU foreign minister if David Cameron doesn't support Vaclav Klaus so he feels obliged to sign the Lisbon Constitutional Treaty.

David Miliband has ruled himself out of taking a senior role within the EU, while endorsing Tony Blair for the new post of European president.

There have been suggestions the foreign secretary may become the new EU high representative for foreign affairs, to be created under the Lisbon Treaty.

But Mr Miliband told the BBC he was not "available" to be a candidate.

However at a speech at the International Institute for Strategic Studies he spent his time talking about how absolutely vital it was that we become a satellite state of a federal Europe run by grey suited twonks in Brussels.

"It is very strongly in the British national interest for the European Union to develop a strong foreign policy," he said.

"To be frightened of European foreign policy is blinkered, fatalistic and wrong. Britain should embrace it, shape it and lead European foreign policy."

Well, quite. I mean, look how useful our EU countries are when it comes to the alliance of nations fighting in Afghanistan. The Belgians, well. Sometimes they stick their head out the door of their compound and of course they can't lend us any helicopters because they don't have the equipment or the training. Why's that? I hear you ask? Because the EU have given them jobs to specialise in.

They've recently ruled out sending extra troops to assist with the conflict even though that's what's needed to lessen the opportunities where Terry Taliban can creep out and lay IEDs.

European defence ministers expressed reluctance yesterday (28 September) to send more troops to the NATO-led mission in Afghanistan, anticipating their response to a possible US call for reinforcements.

Rather than send reinforcements, several EU states want to focus resources and efforts on training the Afghan military and police, defence ministers meeting for informal talks on the west coast of Sweden said.

Like EUPol are doing: sitting in their air conditioned offices in Kabul whilst the Afghan police take bribes not to search lorries? I'm not making that up - a journalist stood for hours on a check point watching it happen.

There is one point Miliband made which I do entirely agree with:

"The truth is that there is a deception here at the heart of policy - a deception of the country that you can hate Europe as it exists today and remain central to European policy making," he said.

Quite right. It's in or out.

Of course Mr Miliband is so terrified of what the public think that he and his vile cronies vote against giving us the opportunity to decide our own future.

They appear to think that this country is theirs to give away.

It's not. And I hope that we can remind them of that at the next election.

I suspect that given his gushing praise of the position which he has been linked with perhaps his refusal to be a candidate isn't so strong and he himself knows that the Labour Party will be in opposition for a few years.

Quotation of the nanosecond

Goes to my friend Mark on The Other One Eyed Loon's performance on Question Time last night:

Watching Griffin was like watching Frank Spencer - he embarrassed himself so comprehensively that there were times when I could barely bear to watch.

If this is the answer...

I hope the people that came to my blog through the search terms 'Is my boyfriend likely to cheat on me when he goes to Lisbon' and 'Is there anything better than a left handed gay man' managed to find the answers.

If it helps:

1) Men do have a habit of cheating. It's because they're genetically programmed to try to stick it anywhere warm and wet. I'm not sure Lisbon adds anything to that mix save it being quite windy.

2) A left handed straight man?

Sexual favours

Now, I guess it depends how good you are at them, but I think the girl got herself a good deal:

Yes - it's true. I gave a blowjob in exchange for a handbag. I wondered at the time of negotiations (during which my husband laughed in an exasperated and unbelieving manner...) if it makes me some kind of mild prostitute.

Er...no. I think you'll find that you've stumbled upon a win win situation.

Give us EU Emperor Blair

It's the October session of Strasbourg this week, as I'm sure you're all aware from the masses of press coverage on it. Apart from the first ever Question Time in the chamber there was also a debate on what's usually called something along the lines of 'The Future of Europe'. Since the Irish managed to pick the correct answer on the Lisbon Constitutional Treaty the second time they were asked the pressure on President Klaus to sign the Treaty was on.

President Klaus doesn't want to sign it, of course, but he's under such immense pressure. David Cameron could easily lift that burden off his shoulders and be a pillar of democracy in the European Union by promising to hold a referendum regardless of whether it is ratified.

But of course he won't: a ridiculous stand when you consider that the chances of it not being ratified by the time the UK holds a General Election are greatly increased by him taking this position.

A position of defiance from the Tories allows Klaus to continue being strong and stand up for Czech national interests in the knowledge that the EU federalists will have more than one target. And one of the targets will be the future Prime Minister of the UK and the man with the wallet.

A referendum in the UK would produce a NO vote which is exactly why we've been denied the opportunity to have our say since the 1970s. Where would our ragged old politicians go to if we weren't part of the EU? Who would do the work for our MPs and stop them picking out curtain fabrics and soft furnishings for their tax payer funded homes if they had to actually bloody do some?

David Cameron and the Tories have the opportunity to do something brave and something right and an opportunity to show that they value democracy more than the gravy train.

Which is why, I suspect, they'll whimper and flounder and continue with this facile policy of 'we don't fucking know what we're doing on Lisbon'.

The Big Chill

Enjoy!

The Electoral Commission: let's hinder democracy

So it's been decided that the Electoral Commission were right to demand £350,000 off UKIP for an admin error:

Mr Bown had been on the electoral register in Thanet, Kent, but was removed by mistake without his knowledge in December 2004.

He did not find out until December 2005 and he was reinstated the following February.

Ukip, which has one MP and 10 MEPs (sic), admitted breaking the law, but said it was due to a clerical error and that to order forfeiture of the entire sum would be disproportionate.

In August 2007, City of Westminster Magistrates' Court held that although Ukip had not taken ''all reasonable steps'' to establish that Mr Bown was on the roll, the error was accidental.

It ruled that Ukip should forfeit only £18,481 of the total but the Commission brought a judicial review of the decision and the High Court ordered a fresh hearing.

Ordered a judicial review at the expense of the tax payer, of course.

The Chairman of the Electoral Commission at the time this decision was taken was Sam Younger, whose father was a minister under Attlee and who received an honour at the beginning of 2009.

It's most convenient for the government that the party beat them into third place in the European Elections should be so disproportionately attacked as the country prepares for a General Election.

UKIP Leader Nigel Farage said: "Something extraordinary is going on here. It is acceptable under the rules for Lakshmi Mittal, the Indian businessman, to give millions of pounds to the Labour Party and for the Liberal Democrats to be allowed to keep £2.4 million from an impermissible donor who has since received a lengthy prison sentence, yet the Electoral Commission goes on kicking the smallest boy in the playground!"

And this is democracy? When the establishment can bankrupt political parties because they're losing the political arguments?

It makes me sick to my insides that we're stuck with these bastards, these people who take our money without asking and squander it on porn films and rent boys.

How many second homes of MPs is Alan Bown going to be paying the decoration bill for? How many items of furniture, how many fucking duck houses?

Because the money doesn't go back to Mr Bown, it goes to the stinking, thieving government: the same government who stole your pension, who denied you a referendum on the Constitutional Treaty, who moan and whinge about having to pay the tax that they try to bankrupt you with every month. The same people who fly out to Afghan to get PR shots with the same troops whose houses they can't be bothered to maintain or equip and who try to tax everything vaguely enjoyable whilst demanding you subsidise their enjoyment of it.

It is high time for me to put an end to your sitting in this place, which you have dishonored by your contempt of all virtue, and defiled by your practice of every vice; ye are a factious crew, and enemies to all good government; ye are a pack of mercenary wretches, and would like Esau sell your country for a mess of pottage, and like Judas betray your God for a few pieces of money.

Is there a single virtue now remaining amongst you? Is there one vice you do not possess? Ye have no more religion than my horse; gold is your God; which of you have not barter'd your conscience for bribes? Is there a man amongst you that has the least care for the good of the Commonwealth?

Ye sordid prostitutes have you not defil'd this sacred place, and turn'd the Lord's temple into a den of thieves, by your immoral principles and wicked practices? Ye are grown intolerably odious to the whole nation; you were deputed here by the people to get grievances redress'd, are yourselves gone! So! Take away that shining bauble there, and lock up the doors.

In the name of God, go!

Poll results - a failure for feminism

Slightly delayed, the results of my poll following a suspicious holiday taken by Mr E which I was not invited to.

Well, dear readers, it seems that you chose the last line in the quotation to heart when you voted:

21% said I should string the cad up for making me worry, let alone playing away
21% said I should give him a chance to explain and then melt into his arms
forgivingly and enjoy his velvety caresses.
16% recommended I serve him
rabbit for dinner and put Fatal Attraction on the TV
40% told me to knock
the bitch out, blaming her sartorial elegance and pungent smell wafting from the
hem line for his wandering, er, person.

It strikes me as a bit harsh that someone who was single gets the blame from the majority of people but I think that's a pretty fair representation of how people do react to these things.

When my ex boyfriend cheated on me I initially blamed the girl first for not leaving well alone someone who was living with his partner. But really, she was single and he wasn't and he was the one who should have tried to keep it in his trousers.

Now I know that a man's body is just a life support system for his cock but why do we persist in letting them get away with behaving badly and instead choose to pile the blame on the woman in any cheating situation? Do we just expect it of men and thus rely on women, supposedly the kinder, gentler sex, to behave themselves?

Because I fear that's also a recipe for disaster, as any town centre on a Friday night will illustrate.

Britblog Roundup - The one that hates the Daily Mail

is here!

In other news

AFP reports that President Klaus, the last bastion of democracy in the European Union, will not drop his objections to the Lisbon Constitutional Treaty.

I explained that I fear, and I am not the only person to fear, a deepening of European Union integration," he said after talks with Russian President Dmitry Medvedev.

"For me it is something of vital importance. In my opinion, the conditions that I have made for signing the agreement are serious and the idea that I can forget what I have said is not well-founded.

Those of us who want a referendum - which I think is roughly the same as saying 'Those of us who don't want to be part of a federal Europe' are lucky to at least have someone to help stall until we in Britain have a General Election and kick out Brown. Or, of course, until Cameron grows a pair and says he will hold a referendum on Lisbon no matter what. Because that, of course, would be providing much needed armour to President Klaus who right now is doing a rather good impression of Britain in 1939.

His comments came the day after European Commission chief Jose Manuel Barroso told the Czech president -- who has become the last major obstacle to the long-awaited reform treaty's entry into force -- to quit stalling on the issue.

Quit stalling? Has the man with the unnaturally dark hair taken on a minor position in an American SitCom?

Barroso said Tuesday: "We expect the Czech Republic to honour the commitment it has taken. It is in the interests of nobody, least of all the interests of the Czech Republic, to delay matters further.

Hey - we expected Gordon Brown to honour his commitment but he bent us all over and laughed whilst he did it.

It's in the interests of democracy, you freakish hater of humanity, that the Czech Republic delays matters further. It's in the interest of the millions of voters in the UK who were denied what they were promised that we get a chance to have our say. It's in the interests of everyone under 50 that we get an opportunity to vote on the future of our country and debate exactly who we want to govern us.

It goes right to the heart of everything that is wrong with this European Union, so ably represented by the man that is Barroso.

How fitting is it that Tony Blair is the main man to take the position of President of the European Council - the man who could boldly talk about Weapons of Mass Destruction in Iraq being able to be deployed in 45 minutes knowing that Hans Blix had concluded nothing of the sort and in fact said that Saddam Hussein was complying with the weapons inspectors. The man who sent troops to this war without the required provisions because he joined the table too late and made a rash decision.

Still, it's quite convenient if they're all in the same building a lot, I suppose.

The Third Way doesn't exist

I haven't had much to do with Richard Howitt before but if you can listen to him for more than 10 seconds without wanting to do damage to something nearby then you're a better person than me.

A nice demonstration on how politicians lie and think that British people are complete idiots. The fact that Fiona Hall decided to try to imply that the Lib Dems are in favour of an 'In or Out' referendum given their behaviour over the ratification of the Lisbon Constitutional Treaty is, alas, typical of those who seek to dictate to us the way we live our lives.

pro-Lisbon businesses lay off workers

But after the biased referendum.

Funny, that

My great TV programme idea

Many thanks to Nutty Cow for telling me about this great programme called 'Four Weddings' and inspiring my creative juices.

It's a programme called bathrooms or bitching or bitching in bathrooms or fanny flapping or some such. It's all a work in progress at the moment but the general idea is there.

Women bitch.

Women like to listen / watch other people bitching which is why there are channels like Living TV and magazines like Heat.

When women go to the bathroom they bitch. This is usually increased with the consumption of alcohol.

So why don't we have a reality TV programme based on listening into conversations of women in bathrooms in restaurants, offices, parties, clubs etc up and down the country. We will have to have some clips to the footage going on outside to put it into context and that would also give opportunities for everyone to have an opinion in all of 10 seconds based on an outfit or hair colour or job. Maybe we could even stir it up a bit. You know, Get the Cabinet to meet in a titty slag bar and then listen to Harridan Harperson go mad as she has to go to the loo with some women who 10 minutes ago were smearing fanny sweat around a pole. Or even the ladies' loos in the cabinet office and listen to the women bitch about each other. We'd get some government secrets then.

And as they're going to be kicked out soon, I pray to God and his little angels on bicycles, it's not like they'd be telling us any top security country-in-danger sort of stuff that we didn't know by watching Labour party conference and the website of the ONS

Second time lucky

The Irish appear to have voted the right way when they were asked a second time round.

Opinion polls and informal exit polls indicate that the Irish will say "Yes" to the treaty - just 18 months after rejecting it in the first referendum...

Ireland's foreign minister predicted a convincing win for the "Yes" campaign.

"I am delighted for the country," Micheal Martin told Irish radio on Saturday.

Ireland's political establishment poured enough money into guaranteeing a YES vote - with the obligatory dollops of scaremongering and downright lying and defamation natch - but I suspect that they're not delighted for the country but for their own salary.

Of course, Ireland should never have had to have voted twice. Once was enough and it demonstrates the complete and utter disregard the EU and our political masters have for our opinions that Ireland was the only country to get a vote and that they had to be asked twice. What do we matter? We only pay the fucking bill.

From a personal point of view, the yes vote offers me the opportunity to firstly see which country Call Me Dave will hide behind now (will Klaus wait until a Tory victory in May?) and secondly I can't wait to see the reaction of the Irish yes voters and their dastardly politicians when their 'guarantees' are shredded by the legal entity which is the European Union.

If they're not included in any law then how are they legally binding? It's a question I expected the BBC to ask on one occasion at least but they're happy to promote the line that it will streamline the EU (fair point - it takes away the need for consensus and democracy is a tricky little blighter always getting in the way of their plans) and that the Irish have 'guarantees'.

Vote YES, get Blair. Although some of us have been pointing to that particular chestnut since December 2005 when rumours were rife he'd get the job if he'd slash the British rebate won for us by a decent Prime Minister.

Decent Prime Minister: there's a thought. Can't see one of those for the next 15 years.

Tory EU policy "a bloody mess" shock romp

So. iDave yesterday confirmed what most people who understand the EU have known for a while; namely that the Tory policy on the Lisbon Treaty is a mess. Such a mess, in fact, that I've heard they've appointed a new shadow 'Europe' minister:


In the European Election campaign both Cameron and Hague's performances indicated that they had absolutely no cohesive policy on the EU and our membership of it or even the right of the British people to have a say on it.

Ireland, Poland, Germany and the Czech Republic have not endorsed it yet, but are likely to do so before the British general election next year.

In that case, a new Tory government would have to decide whether to hold a British referendum on a ratified treaty, something that other EU leaders say would effectively be an in-or-out choice on Britain’s entire EU membership.

Mr Cameron has repeatedly refused to say what he will do if he comes to power with the treaty ratified, saying only that he will “not let matters rest.”

In an LBC radio interview, the Tory leader said that if the treaty is ratified, “new circumstances” will apply, suggesting a new Tory policy will be needed.

So basically what Cameron will do is hide behind the other countries and deny the British the right to have their say. Our choice is basically being decided by some other countries because the Tories are determined not to grow a pair.

"If this treaty is still alive, if it is still being discussed and debated anywhere in Europe, then we will give you that referendum, we will name the date during the election campaign, we'll hold that referendum straight away and I will lead the campaign for a No," he said.

I suspect that he won't actually, because he doesn't really understand it and his track record so far is to use the EU when he thinks it's helpful to him in the media and the rest of the time to studiously ignore it.

"Now, if those circumstances change, if the Germans ratify, if the Poles ratify, if the Czechs ratify, if the Irish vote Yes to the treaty, then a new set of circumstances [apply], and I will address those at the time."

Translation: "I've no fucking idea and I'm hoping that someone else will make the decision for me."

He went on to signal that he would not consider a move that could lead to Britain leaving the EU.

So that's a referendum once the Treaty's been ratified, then. Glad we've cleared that one up.

He said: "I want us to be in the European Union. We are a trading nation, we should be co-operating with our allies and friends in Europe over things like the environment and crime, of course we should."

Oh Dave, you just don't get it. You haven't a clue. You are not intelligent enough to be our Prime Minister if you can't grasp basic economics and think that it's acceptable to bankrupt the nation with Green Lies and that people should be thrown in foreign police cells on the basis of a magistrate in another EU country.

Andrew Symeou has been in prison in Greece, sharing a cell with murderers, for a lot longer than 42 days and yet the great Champion of Liberty David Davis and the Tory Party who are supposed to want freedom and democracy have absolutely nothing to say on this issue.

Now, if anyone can find the newsnight episode from the 2nd September I'll be forever in your debt.

Three p or not Three p

The Daily Mail has an exclusive about the scandalous 3p increase in the price of stamps that Royal Mail are planning.

Royal Mail is planning shock increases in the cost of postage, with first class stamps rising by 3p, amid claims it is facing financial disaster.
The controversial proposals are designed to rake in more than £100million from customers in a year.
The record increases have been sanctioned by the industry regulator Postcomm as an urgent measure to fill an enormous black hole in Royal Mail's finances.

How far do you think you can get on 3p? How far do you think you could get on 25p and how much further would you get with the additional 3p? Not very, I suspect. Not unless you're on one of those Army challenges where you rely on your MOD90 and the good will of Joe Public to do an amusing number of things like kiss blondes and go on the radio.

But the beauty of Royal Mail is that you can post a letter in Upper Chiddingfold and have it arrive in John O'Groats for the same price as someone sending a letter down the road. It's the universal delivery which counters the inevitable market failures which rural deliveries bring about. So what's 3p on the cost of sending a birthday card to the other end of the country? Not a lot, if it's actually delivered on time.

As I've written before, there are rules governing the subsidising of POL and Royal Mail which we have the EU to thank but what, I ask myself, do the Communication Workers Union think they're up to?

Two weeks ago the Office of National Statistics published the latest figures on the employment rate which showed that it had dropped to 72.5%.

The inactivity rate for people of working age was 21.1 per cent for the three months to July 2009, up 0.2 both over the previous quarter and over the year. The number of economically inactive people of working age rose by 97,000 over the quarter and by 125,000 over the year to reach 7.99 million, the highest figure since comparable records began in 1971.

It seriously fucks me off that after all the work Thatcher did trying to make Britain a business friendly country; her supply side reforms and strong action over the unions, we've gone back to a situation where a group of people who have themselves partially to blame over the cost of the postal service, think that they should not face any reforms to a business which clearly needs reforming. And how to they demonstrate that they are decent people who should be supported? By not doing any fucking work.

There are a lot of people out there looking for work so I say tell those who are striking to fuck off and give their jobs to people who actually want to earn a living and not muck up the postal service in this country with their selfish behaviour.

I have important shit to send, you know. And I'm going to be less inclined to send it in paper format if I don't know the bugger when it's actually going to arrive.

The course of true love never did run smooth

Ay me! for aught that I could ever read,

Could ever hear by tale or history,

The course of true love never did run smooth;

But, either it was different in blood,--

Readers may remember that some time ago I held a poll as to whether I should take up the offer of the stately blogger that is Mr Eugenides to spend a weekend with him getting up to all sorts of naughty things. And you voted that I should go and consequently, both our blogs went very quiet over that weekend.

Over the last week our blogs have once again both been quiet and some of you may have suspected that it was because he had asked me to join him on his travels. Holding hands as we walked bare foot down the beach, the clink of crystal as we shared a drink whilst watching the sun set and those moonlit nights with nothing to disturb us but the lapping of the waves on the beach.

We'll, you'd be wrong. He's gone, and I'm still here. The 19 year old from down the road has been missing for a few weeks and if she comes back with a peeling tan and sand rash then at least I'll know for sure.

But, as is often the way with matters of the heart, I've no idea what to do and I need your help...

Germany: lucky bastards

Lucky Germany. After their elections Angela Merkel's party has a 34% majority and can dump the socialists and form a coalition with a pro business party.

Mrs Merkel's CDU and its Bavaria-only sister, the Christian Social Union, won 33.8 per cent of the vote and the Social Democrats took 23 percent...Mr Pofalla said his party was sticking to its election promise of tax cuts.

"We want tax cuts in two steps in the next legislative period which will result in relief of 15 billion euros ($22.03 billion)," he said.

However, the FDP will push for a more ambitious programme. While Mrs Merkel has steadfastly refused to put a time frame on her party's plans, given the dire state of public finances, the FDP campaigned for quick cuts worth 35 billion euros.

And what do we have over here? Apart from the knowledge that 11% of the population are mental?

BELEAGUERED Gordon Brown today pledges to cut broke Britain's debt in half by 2013.

Writing in the News of the World on the eve of the Labour Party conference, the PM promises to get the economy under control WITHOUT massive cuts.

So all roads appear to point to tax rises, chaps.

I heard the other day on Radio 4 a debate about whether this recession had proved that Keynesianism was right. Bit early for that, isn't it? Huge amounts of money were thrown at mainly inefficient public services whilst many businesses closed down and now we're in a big wallowy pit of debt.

Our problems as a nation are nowhere near over because things are only taking a very slight turn upwards and contractionary fiscal policy can change that in a matter of months.

We need the tax cuts that the Germans are going to do and bugger all the moaning about cuts. The recession brought good news for many of us, reading that Peter Mandelson had decided to delay bringing on bits of damaging business regulation (save damaging businesses for when they're doing a bit better eh, Peter?) and the bloated, blancmange like public sector was going to get a slicing.

Hurrah for slashing budgets of government departments! This government has overseen an entire change in mindset towards controlling everything the individual does and it's been supported in doing that with our own money. If there's one thing the recession could do which is useful it's hack away at the deadwood in Whitehall and town halls. Sack the Quangocrats and let them forage for food in the real world. Have some responsibility and accountability for public funded projects like the NHS computer system.

Yes, Germany is very lucky not to be burdened with an economically illiterate government. Okay, it likes the EU and seems to be in favour of the Consolidated Corporate Tax Base in the Lisbon Treaty but it's better than what we've been lumbered with.

And 2010 will bring a General Election with the chance of voting Brown and his cronies out of power.

But with David Cameron saying that the Lib Dems and the Tories are identical in many ways and David Miliband saying that areas of Tory and Labour policy are identical then what Nigel Farage has been saying for about three years: that you can't get a cigarette paper between them and you're just voting for a change of management is sadly true.

Cuts, dear chaps. Let people spend their own money, let them start up their own businesses and you'll have a leaner, stronger economy than anything a socialist could bring about.

Britblog round up - The Best of Britain

here

Trixy elsewhere

Over at Nourishing Obscurity having a jolly good rant about Irish MEPs being rather dumb, amongst other things.

The YES vote President - the speech

Man's got a point: if Lisbon gets bulldozed through then it makes the eurorealist argument much stronger.

Only beef is that we'll need someone in Westminster to demand that referendum and Cameron will be as keen for that as he would be for a daily banana emema on live TV.

How many times do they have to say it?

So, it comes as no surprise that the wonderfully fucking democratic cunts at the EU have once again stuck their fucking oar in and said that Ireland's refusal to ratify the "Lisbon Treaty" is entirely unacceptable and they need to fucking have another vote. And I suspect that if the bog-trotters tell them to "feck off, you feckin' feckers" once more, it will just go around until they give in and give them the correct answer.

Fuck the fact that the Irish have a rule that says that constitutional changes require referenda. I bet once they're ground down into accepting Lisbon, there'll be some handy fucking clause that means that they will never have another referendum. They'll be fucked, and fucked forever.

Meanwhile, the utterly useless buttered new potato will be keeping his fingers crossed that the bog-trotters fold before he has to grow a set and tell the EU to take a flying fuck at a sugar frosted doughnut. Despite the fact that the cuntweasels in Labour promised us a referendum at the last election, which contributed to their election victory (probably not a lot, but it definitely did), we're never going to get a referendum thanks to the virulently pro-EU political class.

Call Me Dave has not got the stones to have a referendum, really. I'm not sure he doesn't want the UK deeply embedded into the pucker of the EU's arsehole. Even if the Irish do tell the EU to suck their collective balls, Dave's going to find a way out of this one. Wait and see.

But in the mean time, the fucking EU will keep on asking the question until everyone gives in. Or they'll just fucking ignore all the dissent and go ahead without our consent. Fuck, it's not like they need it already.

Your money will keep disappearing into the bottomless pit of the EU's unaudited-for-a-decade accounts, your rights and even the judiciary will keep being homogenised to EU standards.

The return of the individual to precedence will become ever more unlikely and the state will blossom from the current invasive horror of a dysfunctional, out-of-touch and unaccountable national government and quangoes to an even more dysfunctional, out-of-touch and unaccountable multi-national EU government.

So if you see an Irishman between now and the referendum, buy him a drink and ask him nicely to vote no. The longer we hold the EU at bay, the better the chances of something or someone game-changing coming along, like the LPUK or UKIP, if it survives the departure of Farage as leader.

Because there's certainly no LibLabCon fucker out there who gives me hope at the moment.

The YES vote President

As you can tell from the wall to wall coverage in the national and regional media the European Parliament is wasting more of your money by gathering in Strasbourg.

The Commission president for 2004 2009 President Barosso is standing for re-election on the grounds, I suspect, that no one else has thrown their hat in the ring.

I won't bore you with details of his speech because he's a fucking dull bastard and slippery as an eel covered in slime but here's the thing.

He was president when the French and Dutch voted no and he said that the Irish should vote again when they gave the wrong answer to the almost identical Lisbon Treaty.

So why are the British Conservatives voting for this man? He doesn't want a referendum in the UK which they were supposed to be desperate for and he's already going to be putting into place elements of the Lisbon Treaty even before the insulting re run of the Irish referendum.

Because he'll be chosing the new President and the Foreign Secretary for the EU. Chosing the jobs before the Irish have had to vote again because they've poured so much of your money into this YES vote, traveling round the country lying to people, that they think it's already there.

So decent Tories should be voting against Barosso on principle, surely?

Or do they not have those anymore?

BFPO - go sign

Our MPs. They love taking advantage of the positive feeling the public have towards our Armed Forces but they also have an irritating desire to take money off them.

Sign here to keep the BFPO in mainland Europe.

Nigel Farage closing speech

Those who attended UKIP conference told me this speech was the best one Nigel Farage had ever given.

See for yourself - I suspect it was certainly very moving.



The Telegraph have also run the story that Lord Pearson has decided to throw his hat in the ring and run for leader of UKIP.

Last night he told the Telegraph: “It is rather daunting so close to a General Election, but I am throwing my hat into the ring.”

He cited a poll in yesterday’s Daily Telegraph as an example of how the political leaders are not in tune with public opinion on Europe. Forty three per cent said they would prefer to leave the EU altogether rather than accept the Lisbon Treaty.

He added: “I think Lisbon is a watershed. If it goes through that’s pretty much the end of the game. Our membership of the EU has removed the rights of British democracy.

He's right, of course. Lisbon gives powers to the EU which means they don't keep having to refer back to the pesky people who are directly elected by the peoples of Europe. It's just a shame that David Cameron doesn't grow a pair and say that if the Conservatives win the next election they will hold a retrospective referendum on Lisbon because that would stop it in its tracks and then maybe more people would have a chance to let the politicians know their opinions on the EU.

Because you like a challenge

These guys from 7 Air Assault Bn REME are very close to finishing their 1000 mile cycle ride. They started at Wellington Barracks, London, last Monday and must finish their route to Edinburgh, Cardiff and back to London by 1700 on Wednesday.

In only a few weeks these guys will be off to Afghanistan but before they do they want to raise £10,000 for the Army Benevolent Fund.

A stroll in the Autumn sunshine

Anyone who fancies a walk around Westminster in November can join Old Holborn as he ensures he is 'Fit 4 Life' in accordance with government guidelines.

I shall be dressed in my usual attire, please feel free to dress however you wish but special invites go out to anyone who wishes to wear a pig costume for the day. It would give me great pleasure to herd a few noisy pigs and Guy Fawkes's into the Public Gallery to face their MPs.

I do hope Nick Soames doesn't take a wrong turn somewhere or it could all get very confusing.

Britblog Roundup

Gosh but that came around quickly again! here it is

'Just answer the question you f**king fascist'

Were the first words which came out of my mouth this morning. Yes, there were of course the early morning mutterings as I padded around trying to remember how to use my arms, but this was sniper fire in Anglo Saxon vernacular. I spat those words out.

And I'm sure many other people did too when listening to the stream of detritus emerging from the mouth of Children's Minister Delyth Morgan.

How shall I sum up the latest piece of draconian legislation from this government? Okay.

If you're an adult then you're a paedophile until the state says you aren't.

And I don't think I'm exaggerating with this one because John Humphries seemed to come to exactly the same conclusion as me and I've often thought he's a bit of a softie. But the woman, of course, could not answer a simple question. It was like Paxman and Howard with her refusal to answer an example on this proposal from her department.

Yes or No. That's all it would have taken. Would someone who took some kids to swimming lessons on a regular basis at the request of the parents of the kids be required to undergo an anti kiddy fiddler check.

And she refused to answer time and time again, realising I'm sure that the answer was indefensible no matter how many high profile cases have occurred over the last few years. I suspect this is a woman who used to put her cossie in a rolled up towel and trot off to the local swimming baths to thrash around in a vain attempt to do front crawl without her parents being duly concerned that the lifeguard wanted to see what was in her pants rather than the pants of the pneumatic blonde he was on duty with.

But in this country, under this government we're all guilty until proven innocent. Habeas Corpus is vanishing like that small kid at the top of the flume ride and it's our politicians who have given him that shove to hurry him along.

But how was it ever going to be otherwise with a government who honestly believes that a policy of not allowing your aunt can't take you to brownies without a police check is a 'proportionate, common sense system.

Adults, including parents who regularly transport groups of children for sports or social clubs could face prosecution if they fail to register with a new agency.

Common Sense? How the fuck is this common sense? All this will do is stop people doing favours for friends and thus stop children taking part in social activities which the government desperately wants them to do whilst munching away on their 5-a-day. Think about it. Prosecuting people for being a good friend. That's what this is.

Now, I don't have children, I don't want children and I'm not likely to take anyone to Brownies but this makes by blood boil because it spits in the eye of 'authoritarian' it's so...well, fascist. They'll be telling people who can have children and who can't have children next. Seriously - we already have a charity recommending that some children be taken away at birth so what evidence do you have of the past few years to suggest they won't go any further than this?

Ms Morgan said that the new scheme "is not about regulating parents in their own home" but will ensure that there is no reason why they should not be working with children.

And given your blatant disregard for the people of this country there's no reason why you should be working in politics and have any say over our personal freedoms but alas I can't see anyone walking into your office, grabbing you by your split ends and kicking you out into the street.

When will the horror end?

p.s a quick google search allows me to conclude that the woman is, in fact, barking. And a quick google image search brings up these images which might be cruel but hey - she thinks you're a paedophile.


UPDATE

The Daily Mash has a guide to passing those tests

Farage vs Bercow: the plot thickens

Reform my fucking arse. Just because he now has a decent candidate standing against him why on earth should johnny tax payer - already sitting in a shop doorway, covered by a stained blanket kept company by a hungry dog - fork out for him to have a spin doctor?

He's already show that he has quite enough money to dip into his current account and pay back the tax he should have paid on his second home had he been a decent sort of chap and so, if he feels he needs his mate Tim Hames to make him look good to the voters, why can't he pay for it out of his own pocket?

Mr Bercow, the MP for Buckingham, “flipped” the designation of his main and second homes between London and his constituency so that he could designate each as his main home at the time he sold it. It meant he paid no capital gains tax on either sale.

While he insisted that he had done nothing wrong, Mr Bercow said he had decided to “voluntarily” pay tax on the profit from the sale of one of the houses. “From 1997 until early 2003, I designated my constituency home as my second home,” he said. “I did make changes in the designation of my homes during the course of 2003 as a result of which CGT was not payable.”

Why should we all have to pay for him to keep his seat when he's already proven that he cares not a jot for what we think? The only thing he stands for is election. I'm delighted that he'll have to fight to remain the MP in Buckingham.

The best debate on the Lisbon Treaty

Watch Farage rip Dick Roche a new arsehole here

Britblog roundup 238

is here! Summer, alas, is walking away towards the horizon.

Farage vs Bercow

Better late than never, I've finally gotten round to writing my thoughts on the decision by Nigel Farage to resign as leader of UKIP and concentrate on leading the Europe of Freedom and Democracy group in the EU Parliament and stand against the ghastly Bercow in the forthcoming General Election.

I've never much liked Bercow and this was confirmed when I walked into his admin offices in Westminster to find they had stuck the front page of the Independent: '50 reasons to love the EU' up.

A couple of people have questioned why Farage has done what he's done. Isn't it just a short term stunt which will only benefit him?

No, it's not. Think about it. UKIP has been going for 15 years and since then it's beaten the Labour government and come second in a national election. It has councillors including county councillors up and down the county and has its best by election result in Norwich North recently - despite the media deciding that the fourth choice in the race was the Green party.

So where to next? If you were Nigel Farage and you'd led a group in Brussels and been the unofficial leader of the opposition in the European Parliament: you'd exposed commissioners for having a criminal record, confronted two Prime Ministers, been personally blamed for the 'NO' vote in Ireland by the Irish Prime Minister, organised demos in the Parliaments, campaigned in referendums across the continent, been threatened with arrest and personally thanked by President Klaus for his speeches during the Czech Presidency what would you want to do next?

So where is the next step for the party? Even if it was the biggest party in the European Elections 78 MEPs cannot change any legislation on their own. It's the Commission who propose the legislation and with more and more areas being moved to Qualified Majority Voting in the Council neither can a British Minister.

Coupled with that, the media do not cover what happens in the EU bar a few articles on a simple topic. There's no real coverage of speeches, of the depth of legislation and the sheer number of acts being voted on each month.

The focus is still Westminster and so for Farage to continue to push for his ultimate aim of withdrawing the UK from the European Union then Westminster is the place to be. Because no matter what happens in Brussels, there isn't the coverage and isn't the awareness of issues and the policies of other parties. And until that happens then there's not going to be the political will to allow us a vote on our own future.

Of course, given that Bercow is the Speaker and himself embroiled in the expenses scandal there will be plenty of knicker knitters who will drag up the old shite about Farage 'boasting' about his £2 million in expenses. I've written about that before but still some people can't seem to grasp someone wanting a debate about the massive cost of each MEP with a politician caught out for fiddling the taxes.

It's us against them now. By electing Bercow to the position of speaker what our MPs did was steal with one hand and with the other stick up their middle finger straight in our faces. It was a demonstration that they do not want reform and do not expect us, the voters and the paymasters, to remember or care long enough to kick them out.

So as with other high profile battles in constituencies, this one is an opportunity to get involved and send a message. And, of course, to send a man to Westminster who actually cares about what he's doing and who will put country before party.

With thanks to Tory Bear, and let's make up the t shirts:

The reason some girls stay single

This little snippet may give some indication why there are women who prefer cats and putting up their own shelves to being in a relationship.

I personally am going to patent my own nutter magnet as it's highly effective.

Britblog Roundup 237: The 'sorry it's late but I was on holiday' edition

Yes, I know it’s late, but I came back from my holiday to write this so be grateful. Still, it was a pleasant welcome back from Tatiana Deliagina who wrote not once but TWICE to us britbloggers to inform us that not only had we won either £75 million or £750,000 in the Toyota awards; presumably that’s an award for having a blog which wants to be faster and more expensive than it is whilst desperately trying not to be run of the mill – but that we’ve also won £1million in the British Telecom awards. I don’t know about you, but I’m excited. I’ll leave it to the Chameleon to decide how the wonga gets split.

Now, onto the main item on the programme which is of course you lovely people. And haven’t you been busy! Much busier than that crowd on Blackheath who appear to be having a rather relaxed time what with ice cream vans (fuelled by the breath of kittens, I hope) and a woman inexplicably standing on one leg whilst wearing a dress made from a pair of curtains. Random Blowes meanwhile (you need some shoes for those feet) explains why Barclays is being targeted and the Bristling Badger – an old hand at these things – explains a little of the history of climate protesting.

Moving on slightly from camping to the weather and Diamond Geezer talks weather. And armpits. And voices an opinion which clinging to has gotten me through most of my career, that ‘...some people will believe anything if it looks pretty enough.’ Even maps?

Changing lines at White City, Amused Cynicism talks BBC and market allocation:

But that’s not important. The important question is: do these proposals make sense? Redwood is concerned that the BBC, by virtue of being popular, is unfair competition to private sector news websites. To a certain extent, that’s a valid concern. But the economy doesn’t exist to make private sector entrepreneurs rich, it exists to make things people need and want. And people clearly do want the BBC — according to Alexa the BBC have the number 2 and number 4 news websites worldwide, and by far the most popular UK-based one.

Whilst The Adam Smith blog is less helpful with suggestions.

I think it’s fairly safe to say that the person who can find a way to make news websites profitable and stop the fear in the newspaper industry will find themselves clothed in finest ermine and pissing on a golden loo. I’d rather they just actually researched what they wrote. And of course it’s local journalism which is hit the hardest and presumably the reason why so much of it comes from the wires. Perhaps The enemies of Reason has the answer?

Sticking with the BBC and with what I regard is their finest production, we’re over to the Royal Albert Hall for the Proms and On An Overgrown Path looks into the cost of each concert:

In an April 2009 article (source 1) Roger Wright explained that 'of the £8.8m budget for the [Proms] festival, approximately £6m comes from BBC subsidy'. In 2009 there are 95 ticketed Prom concerts, of which 19 are for chamber music. Dividing the BBC subsidy by the number of concerts gives an average subsidy of £63,158 per concert. That word average is important; 20% of the concerts are for small forces so the subsidy for the larger performances will be considerably higher, and probably in excess of £75,000 per concert.

Quite pricey, I guess, but give me a couple of hours a night of good quality music any day over some tacky, shrill soap opera featuring 25 bottles of fake tan and some bloke called Gary. Newspapers and TV might publish what they think people want but personally I’d rather have a turgid news story than some article on a peroxide nutter I’ve never heard of. Sadly, I appear to be in a minority.

Now, on to Dan Hannan. Nice bloke. Good ties. And a politician who wants debate and wants people to get involved with how their lives are run. Mark Reckons that this is a good thing, something which caused a fair amount of debate on his blog. Mr Eugenides also picks up on the 'mock outrage' people on the left of politics have had over such a simple statement. Not that it’s the first time it’s been said in recent years but then Hannan is rather a figure of hate for authoritarians at the moment. I bet he’s loving it.

Providing a lovely link from daily politics to the ever popular subject of feminism, in a sort of elevenses ‘lovely slice of cake’ way, Feminazerylooks at Sharia Law vs the Daily Mail. Meanwhile, Stroppybird over at Liberal Conspiracy has an excellent piece on Fay Weldon’s witterings. Heresy Corner looks at a post by Melissa McEwan who has written a comment which I think insults most women; essentially that anyone who argues with a feminist is a misogynist. That includes me, then, although it’s certainly not the first time I’ve been called that. As it happens, ladies, I’ve often found the best defence against a man blathering on about nonsense is to kick him in the bollocks. If you don’t fancy him, that is. If you do then you don’t need me to tell you how to keep him quiet.

In other news, Stuart Syvret doesn’t like the Jersey Evening Post, Liberal England with the truth about the Blue Peter dog and Random Acts of Reality on the Ambulance vs the Fire Brigade.

And just to be different, I’ll end with a welcome.

That’s all for this week. Next week Charlie’s hosting so send your nominations to the normal address: britblog [at] gmail [dot] com.

Until then, pip pip and keep blogging!

Trixy

xxx

The NHS: why we should debate

The latest figures for inpatients and outpatients waiting times have been published today by the Department of Health:


Inpatient Waiting times
• The number of patients, for whom English commissioners are responsible, waiting over the 26 weeks standard for inpatient admission at the end of July 2009 was 25 (compared to the total of 590,000).

• The number of patients, for whom English commissioners are responsible, waiting over 13 weeks at the end of July 2009 was 43,000, a decrease of 1,900 (4.3%) from June 2009, but a rise of 3,500 (8.9%) from July 2008.

Outpatient Waiting times

• The number of patients, for whom English commissioners are responsible, waiting over the 13 weeks standard for a first outpatient appointment following GP referral at the end of July 2009 was 62 (compared to the total of 1,032,000).

• The number of patients, for whom English commissioners are responsible, waiting over 8 weeks at the end of July 2009 was 62,000, an increase of 8,500 (15.8%) from June 2009, and a rise of 26,900 (76.7%) from July 2008.

For me, it's not so much the increases or decreases and percentages which gets me (although an increase of almost 16% for those waiting for an outpatients appointment is rather hefty) but the actual targets themselves.

And the reason I am raising it is not because I want to berate it or praise it, because I'm not a doctor and I don't know if waiting half a year for an operation is normal in the rest of the developed world. It goes back to the debate Dan Hannan took so much stick for getting involved in. Why can't we have a proper discussion about this without the loony left and badly read hacks starting to hurl 'he wants to privatise the NHS' around with the same hiss as they would call someone a paedophile?

Would privatising the NHS be so bad? Would it mean we had better health cover and shorter waiting times? Or not?

I fear the reason we can't is the same reason we don't discuss a proper overhaul of our benefits system, immigration policy and membership of the EU: because those in power don't want to highlight what a complete and utter fuck up they've made of running the country for the last 70 years, because they don't know that much about it and can't be bothered to find out or even admit to themselves they don't know everything and because the public are considered too ignorant to understand what they're talking about and we'll probably pick the wrong answer.

So we'll stick with the same, for better or worse.

The smoking gun

A snippet from the press association which will have the killjoys and controllers at the Department of Health dropping from strokes and heart attacks:

Another soldier described the stress of driving an armoured vehicle 29 hours through the blistering hot Afghan desert.

Mark Freeman, 21, credited smoking with surviving his ordeal in Helmand Province. The convoy averages 4.3mph and can stretch to more than 100 machines.

He joined the army in 2005 and steers a vehicle guarding supply trucks for military outposts - and said he smoked to relieve the stress.

"The most I have driven was about 29 hours. We took quite a lot of indirect fire going through," he added.

A few weeks ago I wrote about how the Americans were going to let their troops smoke:

American troops are not to be banned from smoking in war zones, the US Defence Department says...Mr Morrell said the Pentagon would examine the recent study to see what else could be done to move towards banning tobacco in the military.

He said: "Obviously it is not our preference to have a force that is using tobacco products."

Surely if people pass their fitness tests and don't use illegal drugs which could impair their judgement - that's the current position so I'll go along with that regardless of personal opinion - then it doesn't matter if they smoke?

The government are having a wee bit of a struggle over soldiers at the moment. They don't like them asking for a decent amount of compensation or wanting to live in decent accommodation but they love the feeling that the British public have for their armed forces and revelling in the opportunities to get down and cuddly with the troops. But they do smoke and drink a lot and swear and go to strip clubs which is not in the 'NuLabour guide to very dull and sanctimonious living'. So what to do?

Well, as it's this government what they'll do is still try to make it as difficult and expensive as possible to smoke because they don't like it and they're the boss. Until you get a chance to vote, of course.

An English Country Garden

With thanks to Godfrey Bloom MEP for shoving this in my direction:


It's all very youtube orientated here at the moment. That's because I'm very busy and important and need a valium just to listen to the news these days.

Seriously - I heard some Lib Dem moron and a chap from The Times on the news last night where the gist of what they were saying was that people shouldn't be able to debate.

It's rather like the hideous reaction to Dan Hannan's comments on the NHS. It was met with cries of horror that anyone could criticise the bloated slush fund that is our health care system, carefully circumnavigating those huge tables which show Britain as somewhere behind Slovakia and a region in the far north of Iceland in terms of patient choice and survival rates. Never mind that with such a large amount of our money being spent on it we should regularly debate it, attacking the NHS appears to be the political equivalent of telling your best friend you want to shag his mother.

My GP, a nice chap and not particularly given to bouts of what I like to call 'being an interesting bloke' said that when he was at school learning history Communism was something he couldn't get his head around. Then he joined the NHS and it all became clear.

Anyway, enjoy the video thing. I'm off to listen to my mother talk about how she can't find a GP within a 10 mile radius to register with now that hers has retired.

The Sound of (rave) Music

Can't see this happening at Gare du Midi, though. Too many MEPs and Commission workers would start filling out health and safety forms.

Now they're snooping on lightbulbs.

Fuck Off. Please, just fuck off.

It's a lightbulb. You spend millions of pounds of my money jetting around the world, moving from one unnecessary parliament to another using an awful lot of bloody 'carbon footprint' (mine's more of a shoeprint) and you begrudge me reading a book without getting a headache?

Not to mention the nightmare of trying to change an energy saving lightbulb.


When are we going to do something about these people? And what will you do when some grey suited lightbulb transactine executive comes to your local hardwear store? This blog does not condone, and never would condone breaking the law. But it is very keen on the idea of common sense and the moral highground.

Brit Blog roundup

here

Particularly liking the do it yourself free sheet.

Next week I will be hosting, from my holidays no less. That's dedication for you.

UK taxpayer 'feels like a pelican'

Every way they turn, they've got an enormous bill.

The latest one comes via everyone's favourite antidemocratic instutition: the EU.

Britain's net contribution to the EU – the amount we contribute minus the amount we receive in terms of grants and rebates – is going to increase by more than £2 billion next year. Having sworn that he would "not negotiate [the UK's rebate] away", Mr Blair proceeded to precisely that. His action was endorsed by the then chancellor, Gordon Brown.

I was there at that meeting in 2005 when Tony Blair sat grinning at the front of the chamber in Brussels.

Godfrey Bloom MEP sat at the front in a deer stalker with pipe: Sherlock Holmes searching for the win for Britain in the whole deal.



As he says; why should British tax payers fund new sewers in Budapest and a new underground system in Warsaw? Everyone would benefit if we engaged in free international trade. It's not a new concept, Ricardo's Theory of Comparative Advantage has been around for a while and yet the excuse that people use for wanting us to remain in the EU: some notion of collective power and trade - has stopped that happening.

This government lied about the referendum, used their inability to believe a word they say as an excuse in court and cost you billions of pounds for an organisation you've repeatedly said you're not happy with.

The Irish Referendum on the Lisbon Consitution is in October. After Libertas who knows what Declan Ganley is doing but bet your bottom dollar (literally: your tax money will be used to fund the YES campaign in Ireland for the second time) that the people who think you're too stupid to know what's best for your future will be campaigning for a YES vote this time round. It's the only acceptable answer to them, you see.

I know that Nigel Farage will be campaigning for a NO, trying to let the Irish people know that these 'promised' they've had aren't worth the paper they're written on so nothing's changed since they first voted NO.

back!

Sort of. After a lovely holiday during which time I did not want to get too frustrated with all these tedious news stories, I am now back and ready to get back on with the job.

I think it must have been hearing David Miliband on the Today programme this morning (he was sort of right about that terrorism comment: think the Madrid bombers and that socialist government which was then elected and also let's also think 'debate') which encouraged me to get back on with the job of getting really pissed off with very stupid people.

However, rather like warming up before going for a run, I'm going to get cross gently and will ease back in gently with this vignette:

Holiday

I am off on an adventure for a week and so I won't be able to update my lovely blog and probably won't really have time to watch the stupid politicians on the news.

Speaking of stupid politicians, how is that dickhead Rasmussen now Sec Gen of NATO when he's a euro fanatic left wing prick?

I will leave you with this:



Pip pip and see you on my return

Trixy

xxx

PTSD or bad job?

I can't imagine that news of the MoD press officer who claims he has Post Traumatic Stress Disorder will go down that well in Helmand Province.

civil servant has broken ranks to reveal how he was forced to lie about the war in Iraq and Afghanistan.
John Salisbury-Baker, 62, was working in the Ministry of Defence when he says he was ordered to deliberately mislead bereaved families and the public.
He claims he was instructed to issue official statements through the media which were 'heavily spun' and clearly at odds with the reality.

But it does bring around the timely opportunity to see how much a civilian employment tribunal places on the disorder compared to the department being sued.

Whilst the judges deliberate over Marine McWilliam and Cpl Duncan who has their compensation increased considerably from the original beancounter decision due to the complexity of their injuries, John Salisbury-Baker doesn't have the posibility of a compensation limit.

For the Armed Forces Compensation Scheme places PTSD in its most serious form; usually reserved for those who can't even make it out of bed - at a maximum tariff of 8 or £48, 875 up from £28,750. And one of Mr Salisbury-Baker's own colleagues in London has regularly told journalists that PTSD is a bit of a myth in the Armed Forces and cases in the military are less frequent than on civvy street. Really? I suspect that's not so true but more to do with the classifications of PTSD and the decision many soldiers take of not declaring any such concerns.

One can, I suppose, feel sorry for him. There will be a judicial review on the use of snatch landrovers but unlike those he was apparently traumatised in talking about, he had a clear choice in his job. He applied for it and accepted it. He chose to continue doing it rather than get a new job or raise concerns. And yet he didn't. And so unlike troops who get sent where they are told and put their lives on the line: who don't get to go home to a comfy bed and have to eat out of 24 hour ration packs, still paying tax even when on ops, whilst hearing that the politicians who sent them there are happily spending our money, he had a choice.

The result? If he gets a large payout (let's not forget the poor, wee typist who sprained her wrist) not only is it a huge insult to all those who suffer from PTSD and who have been awarded paltry sums (often it's not even recognised in the top 3 injuries) under the AFCS but it takes much needed money away from the MoD who already suffer at the hands of a Treasury who clearly dislike the Armed Forces.

I for one will be watching closely to see the value placed on the wellbeing of a civilian who merely had to talk about soldiers and the value placed on those guys on the front line who, day after day, demonstrate why we should be so proud of them.

By all means, let's celebrate Armed Forces Day and allow the Nation to express their thanks. But can we also honour the Military Covenant and stop taking advantage of the stranglehold the MoD has over service personnel.

The last turkey in the shop?

This story has been all over the news this morning and I for one don't agree with this statement by Helen Penn of the Child Exploitation and Online Protection Centre:

We can completely understand why young people want to post these images to each other...

Maybe I'm an old cynic or have an outdated idea of romance but I really would rather be sent a picture of a kitten than some chap's contorted face during the vinegar strokes. Or, indeed, the last turkey in the shop.

word up, peeps

It's the Britblog Roundup which this week is being hosted by the edible Jackart.

Not as edible as Mr Eugenides, though. Sorry.

Another day, another report

This time the Foreign Affairs select committee have ruled that UK troops in Afghan have too many different objectvies:

The military mission in Afghanistan has failed to deliver on its promises - as troops have too many tasks, MPs say.

The House of Commons Foreign Affairs Select Committee says "mission creep" had brought too many responsibilities, including fighting the drugs trade.

Well, when it comes to the drugs trade one could point out that if we legalised and controlled the things then we wouldn't be assisting the enemies of our troops. But that is far too sensible and idea and would upset people who read the Daily Mail so we'll just all crash on through regardless of fact or evidence.

I was told by someone who fought in one of the earlier OP HERRICKs that the British had told the Afghans that they would buy up the poppy harvest. However, he told me that as that was am agricultural subsidy it came under the control of the Common Agricultural Policy.

How true this is I don't know but it's something I've been trying to find out. Certainly, it sounds like the sort of nonsense which spurts from the arse end of the EU.

Listening to Radio 4 this morning I heard Kim Howells MP talking about the conflicts in Iraq and Afghanistan. I paraphrase one of his points, for I was trying to decide what to wear at the time, but it essentially was that because the public don't like the wars then we might have to look at why we were there and, in the case of Afghan, if we still should be.

Now, mistake me if I'm wrong but the last time I checked most people in this country weren't Generals. Or, indeed, Field Marshalls. Trusting politicans is always tricky these days and trusting this government on anything military is particularly hard even without the news of the Armed Forces Compensation Scheme which some of us have been lamenting and trying to change for a while. And as for the Iraq Inquiry, more on that later. What concerns me is that we elect MPs to make decisions for us - yes, it's a pity that most of them decide to outsource it to the EU but that's the fault of the individuals rather than the set up - and then they spend their time either completely ignoring public opinion and breaking manifesto commitments or passing the buck on their responsibility which is to make decisions.

Voters do decide who gets the position of MPs but should MPs decide what to do based on what they think will make them more popular? Shouldn't they be guided by principle and take all the evidence to reach what they feel is the right decision? And then be honest about it? Politics run by PR and the readers of tabloid newspapers is no basis for a system of government. Supreme exective power derives from a mandate from the masses, not some farcial aquatic ceremony. Or Rebekah Wade.

A quick dash through the Iraq inquiry, for it's something I've written about before. (Indeed I've written thousands of words on the damned thing).

18 months? Why? Let's have the cabinet minutes and cross reference them with the minutes from the UN Security Council and find out if the reason we went to war was either

1) Someone can't read
2) Someone didn't want to read

and in either case, sack them.

Also has the added bonus of saving money.