Care about Democracy? Be afraid. Be very afraid

The Euro crisis. Unless you have been on a simulated mission to Mars, or heard goats in a village in Africa it can hardly escaped your attention that the Euro is in difficulties.

It was always going to happen, given how it was set up. Sooner or later things would get more out of kilter and eventually something would trigger the systems falling apart.

But then that was avoided as a problem for another day by the European elite railroading the European state through over the wishes of what one suspects they see as an “unenlightened” electorate.

It is questionable if the Euro can function for any time as a currency without both political integration of the states using it and massive transfers of cash from the Northern states to the Club Med States.

But no matter. For many of the Europhile elite the Euro is a symbol of unity and it binds states and politicians more tightly into the developing European Super-state. None must be allowed to slip from the fold.

Now it seems they had seen a way to turn what for them was an unthinkable threat into an advantage… To further their goals.

When Greece began to wobble so badly the Prime Minister George Papandreou, faced with massive protests over crippling austerity measures the EU wished to impose, apparently decided the only way he could avoid massive civil unrest and maybe worse was to get the people onside.

He decided, not unreasonably, to hold a referendum on the measures. If they were accepted he had a solid mandate, if not it would be brutally clear to all, that without the banks taking, not so much a hair cut on Greek debt, but more like a hippy getting a crew cut it would be impossible for Greece to remain in the Euro and he might get a better deal from Europe.

Either that or Greece might default, re-instate the Drachma and become more competitive, at least as a tourist destination, by devaluing. It seems the Strength of the euro is harming the Greek tourist income as it haemorrhages to Turkey and other non Euro states.

The referendum might have been better for Greece and the democratic process, but it appears that those considerations are irrelevant in European politics.

The European patrician political elite have had unfortunate experiences with referenda. They can't be relied upon to produce the "right" result and have to be repeated again and again and again, with pressure applied, until they eventually do get the “right” result.

They moved speedily and effectively. One can only suppose offers were made that were simply put "impossible to refuse".

Suddenly the referendum was off the cards and Papandreou might as well have been declared taken ill at his dacha in the Crimea in time honoured fashion.

Presto-chango! The Greek PM was suddenly (blnik and you'll miss it) Lucas Papademos the entirely unelected ex head of the European Bank. His Foreign Minister? The now Ex EU environment commissioner Stavros Dimas.

And the Greek parliament were all lining up behind him in a “Unity” government. No referendum, No election. No Democracy…

Turning our eyes west we find Italy. Half of it at least another Club Med Euro Economy. Their debt is becoming too expensive as markets worry and their economy is a bit too big to easily bail out. PM Silvio Berlusconi, one minute declaring he is fighting fit to lead, the next disappearing stage left with the aid of a hook on a long pole in true vaudeville stylie.

And who quietly shuffles on sideways to replace him (sans elections) hoping the average punter does not notice?

Non other than Mario Monti, Ex European Competition Commissioner (what a coincidence) and founder - president of the Bruegel European Economic think-tank. Also an arch critic of Burlusconi. Not a game character at all. :-)

So the new European solution to wobbly Club-Med economies? Let’s not bother with that old fashioned democracy stuff shall we?

“Hey! Let’s just make dem bozos an offer dey can’t refuse an put our own guys in”.

I expect it is not lost on them that if the natives cut up too rough the is always the shiny new EUROGENDFOR waiting quietly tucked out of sight, like a club with nails in held behind their back.

EUROGENDFOR or EGF standing for European Gendarmerie Force and modelled (Oh joy!) after the French Gendarmerie and the Italian Unità Specializzate Multinazionali (M.S.U.) of the Carabinieri . Staffed by nationals from (naturally) the French Gendarmerie, the Italian Carabinieri, the Spanish Civil Guard, Portuguese National Republican Guard, Romanian Gendarmerie and the Dutch Royal Marechaussee.

Mostly authentically “Napolionically European” traditions, several used to enforce the will of dictatorships in living memory.

To mix metaphors are we looking at the nativity of some sort of western “Warsaw Pact MK II” with :-) frilly covers to disguise the tanks?

Maybe more State Capitalism Technocracy “China Syndrome”?

Oh - and before anyone in the UK starts to feel too smug. Don’t forget David Cameron’s sudden volt face about a promised British referendum on Europe, or the fact that he (thuggishly in parliamentary terms) prevented a proper vote on the question recently after parliament was petitioned to debate it under a system he set up.

Time for a change over Eurovision?

Well there is at least one good thing about the Eurovision Song contest. It is a useful reminder of exactly how low the esteem in which much of Europe holds the UK actually is - and curiously places outside Europe like Russia and Israel hold the UK. There seems to be some following for the Contest in Australia, maybe they should participate, they are surely just as 'qualified' as Israel or Russia.

Still, covering 40% of the costs together with only France, Germany and Spain is a steep price for this knowledge. Italy sensibly decided Enough was enough. It could be the automatic qualification for the final when better songs do not make it this massive expenditure buys us probably does not help.

Of course Russia does not like us at the moment, due to the diplomatic row over some mysterious unidentified party killing off Russian dissidents on British soil. The Balkan states know what side their bread is buttered, but it does have to be said the UK entry this year was not, by objective standards, by any means the best, or most likely to do well on it’s ’Euro’ merit.

By the new Eurovision standards the Russian entry was good, but despite the voting probably not the best.

It would be interesting to see how well the UK would perform if the psychology of the Euro sound were to be analysed and a group and song were to be crafted, specifically designed to succeed, rather than relying on the proven inability of the British public to judge current, heavily East European influenced, ‘Euro’ taste.

It would also be interesting to see a complete change in the voting system where all the votes were pooled. It is simply ludicrous that a country with the population of Andorra has the same voting clout as one with a population the size of Germany.

Maybe it would be much better if an arrangement were found where all participating countries paid their fair percentage share, based on their population and no one automatically made the final too.

If these changes can not be made in time for next year’s contest then surely it would be better if the UK followed the Italian example, withdrew from the contest and took it’s cash with it.

The Eurovision song 'contest' rolls round once again

Tonight is the night of one of the greatest wastes of British TV taxpayer’s money in the entire year. The Eurovision Song Contest.

It is saved, mostly by the fact that watching the often frankly amazing performances appeals to the sneaking desire to watch a curiosity, combined by Terry Wogan’s gentle micky taking on behalf of us all.

Humourless European officials decry his efforts, whilst failing to grasp he is probably the only thing that keeps the opinion of the UK public in a mood of benign amusement - as opposed to outright contempt.

The 'contest' is intrinsically silly and unfair, it always has been. He does not need to make it look that way, he just uses the fact that it is to entertain us...

We all know we have very little chance of even doing well in it. We know we are not particularly popular with Europe as a whole, given our relationship with the US. But mostly it is the voting system and the blocks that doom all the old large western European nations.

Namely the Baltic and Balkan voting blocks.

Firstly each group tends, by accident, or design, to vote the high points largely exclusively for other members of ‘their’ block.

This, combined with the fact that a microscopic country that consists of several small towns, has the same voting power as a huge country with a population of multiple millions. Tends to give them a lock on the contest, no matter how good or more likely bad the particular entries happen to be.

It’s as if you were to give each county in the UK an individual vote and they all voted for the UK, and Irish entries.

How different would the results be it it were down to a simple total of all the votes cast for each entry, with no country being able to vote for it's own entry?

One suspects it won’t be much different for Andy Abraham tonight. One fears how good the song, or the performance, is will only have a peripheral impact on how well it actually does. The fact that I don’t come right out and predict it is more a triumph of optimism over experience than anything else. We shall see on the morrow…

Is it time to shrink the state to more manageable proportions?

The Telegraph asks an interesting question today “Who is the 'right leader' for our hard times”? Sparked by Broon’s waffle about providing the right leaderhip.

Even more adventurously they ask: “Do we need a politician running Britain at all”?

Maybe the question they should really be asking is: “Do we need anyone running Britain at all”?

Personally I am not really sure I want much so-called leadership at all. Belgium seems to have managed well enough with no parliament recently. Could we manage mostly at a county level?

We have after all a perfectly good royal family to represent the country. The queen probably knows more about politics than any two prime ministers put together. They are certainly more in tune with practical environmentalism than the average politician.

So combine the Royal family with a parliament that has responsibility for maintaining the legal system, the armed forces and the currency. Claw back every last parliamentary privilege and power ceded to the unelected EU commission.

Have a watchdog to police MPs propriety and finances. Make it impeachable to renague on election promises. These people should be the servants of the Nation, not it’s patrician ruling class.

Given that we have had a millennium’s worth of very, very, bad legislation in the last decade let's make it as difficult as possible for them to ever pass any new legislation again. Without at least 75% in favour.

The state should be kept very firmly away from telling the citizen what to do.

Let local democracy, take care of all the other details.

Works for me…

What’s the point of petitioning the UK PM?

The state was petitioned to withdraw from the European Union (EU) on the grounds that it is of no benefit to the UK any longer, being a gross waste of money that should not be funded by the taxpayer any longer. That it was an unelected, bureaucratic bloc constantly infringing national sovereignty. It attracted several thousand signatures and is by no means the only petition making similar points.

The State’s response demonstrates a certain contempt for the signatory’s ability to detect bullshit. They say:

“Membership of the European Union has brought significant benefits to the UK, in terms of wealth, jobs, peace and security.”

But fail to actually back this claim with any facts whatsoever.

Security - We are expected to believe that it was the presence of the EU and not, to pluck a random example out of thin air, say... N.A.T.O. that has guaranteed the peace in Western Europe since WWII? Very amusing…

They go on:
”Through the EU, we belong to the world's biggest trading bloc. Over half of British trade is with Europe. An estimated three and a half million British jobs are linked to exports to the EU,

They fail to mention that prior to this through the Commonwealth we belonged to the world’s biggest trading bloc. Much of our trade was with its members and staggeringly huge numbers of British jobs were linked to exports to it. As were countless jobs throughout the Commonwealth. We shall not dwell on the detrimental impact the effective dismantling of much of this trade had, or how much persists to this day

They witter on…
“..and our membership allows us to live, work and travel across Europe and to receive free medical care if we fall sick on holiday.”

Of course Brits were never allowed to travel to Europe or live there before this – Not.

Curiously enough many British people went to live and work in other commonwealth countries and similarly nationals of those countries did as well, Brits to Canada and the antipodes, Aussies to the UK, Canada, etc. etc.

As for free medical care if you do travel to Europe you would be a fool not to have travel insurance - including medical cover.

They continue ”Improved maternity pay, strengthening of rights to paid holidays and now the reduction in mobile phone calls when abroad are just some of the practical benefits the EU has helped deliver. And as part of the EU, the UK is better able to deal with global issues like environment and world trade, and tackle problems like crime, illegal immigration and terrorism.”

Phone calls! Get real… Maternity right, paid holidays.. Get real. The fact is being in the EC massively limits our options to improve things because either we gave up the power or it would be trading on euro toes.

Finally the stench of bovine faeces becomes almost overwhelming…”T he question of whether we should remain in the (then) EEC was put to a referendum in 1975, which passed convincingly. The government sees no case for a referendum on the UK's membership of the EU today.”

They fail to point out that this was spun at the time as a trading partnership and noting more. No Superstate ruled by unelected commissioners were mentioned then, not EU ambassadors or embassies. That vote was on something else, the British public were conned with false information.. It is a probability approaching certainty that if they had so much of an inkling of what they were actually voting for at the time they would have rejected utterly.


”It is clear that by working together with other European countries, we can achieve much more in terms of promoting peace and stability, economic prosperity, environmental protection and a range of other important issues than we could achieve by ourselves.” an entirely unsupported set of claims here…

They go on to inform us disingenuously that: ”Successive opinion polls show that public support for a total withdrawal from the EU is relatively low. An ICM poll in August showed that - showed that approximately 21% of respondents favoured a total withdrawal from the EU.”

They fail to point out that the vast majority wish to halt any further integration and claw thing back to pre EU, EEC levels.

They also fail to mention that New-Labour are currently badly governing the UK on the basis of the support of a mere 22% of the British electorate at the 2005 general Election. Based upon the results of the recent local elections we may suppose it is now considerably more precarious than that…

On that basis it is easy to argue that public support for New-Labour is little greater than it is for total withdrawal from the EU

So is there a point to the government’s petition website? Or bothering to post, or sign the petitions? Not much by the look of it…

High Speed Rail Link

As many of us are aware the first of the Eurostar passenger services to Paris and Brussels are due to roll out of the magnificently refurbished St Pancras International at 11:01 this morning.

An undeniably magnificent achievement.

The new high-speed rail link now means that it is possible to go from the heart of London to the heart of Paris in 2 hrs and fifteen minutes. With, it has to be said, considerably less bother than the flying and in greater comfort, but at greater expense by comparison to flying. Even so it is no so great when one takes in the convenience and lack of the sort of problems with check in and security encountered at airports – more civilised.

So that’s the good part. It is fine for those who can get to StPancras/King’s Cross easily. The High Speed line known optimistically as High Speed 1 cost £5.8bn.

Unfortunately there seem to be no plans for a High Speed Link to the North. So what does someone who lives in Manchester or Edinburgh do? Or those in the west? Given the comparatively steep costs of rail travel within the UK, they do what they are already doing - They fly. So that means it is probably of little practical use to the majority of the country.

So how much real utility will the high-speed line actually be, apart from to Euro MPs and the like?

And would the money have been better used on first building a high speed lines from/to the North and West?

French territorial ambitions over Wallonia?

It seems the French may be harbouring territorial ambitions over Wallonia, (Région Wallonne) the largely French speaking part of Belgium, now Belgium has no government, presumably on the basis of finders keepers if the original owner can not be established.

Up to their old tricks? The French First Republic annexed the area in the 18th century.

Of course there are a significant number of German speakers live in the east of Wallonia (Wallonische Region) - Could get interesting…

The lack of government is not such a problem for Belgium as they have regional governments that can manage quite well

Cilivl Liberty Group has concerns over EU arrest warrants

It seems the European Arrest Warrants (EAW), requiring the arrest and extradition of suspects from one EU country to another may be being abused. Why would we be surprised?

Statewatch, the civil liberties group has obtained a secret (it would be) EU report. Campaigners are concerned that the EAW does not allow refusal, if the offence does not exist under national laws and makes no requirement for a proportionality test.

The Secret report concedes: "The principle of proportionality requires that in each case a comparison be made between the seriousness of the offence and resources to be deployed in the executing state and, in particular, that it involves the deprivation of liberty of an individual."

"The EAW does not include any obligation for a proportionality check either by the issuing or executing member state, nor does it include any grounds for non-recognition related to it,"

It seems fast-track extradition warrants are often being issued for relatively minor offences, demanding the costly extradition of people for offences such as possession of 0.45 grams of cannabis, the theft of two car tyres - and in one instance piglet rustling. Officials are concerned that the warrants are being used "disproportionately" to the seriousness of offences.

The Warrants can even be applied when the offence is not even an offence under the laws of the country the warrant is executed in.

Psst! Don’t mention the treaty to the Brits

How do these people ever expect anyone to actually believe their word? Just like Blair - Brown is insisting Britain's negotiating ‘red lines’ were not crossed at last month's summit, so that no referendum is needed. This despite the fact that Nu-Lab promised in it’s 2005 election manifesto that it would hold a referendum on the constitution.

Whatever else Mr Brown may be he is an intelligent man - and is fully aware that this treaty is the rejected constitution in a rather thin disguise. Yet with no apparent sense of shame, or embarrassment, he makes the barefaced claim that no referendum is needed.

But in fact the new European Union ‘Constitutional’ treaty will mean "transfers of sovereignty" from Britain and Gordon Brown is
absolutely right to conceal it from the UK electorate according to Jean-Claude Juncker, Luxembourg's premier He said, speaking to Le Soir, a Belgium Newspaper:

"one can always explain that what is in the interest of Europe is in the interests of our countries,"

"Britain is different. Of course there will be transfers of sovereignty. But would I be intelligent to draw the attention of public opinion to this fact?"

"There is a single legal personality for the EU, the primacy of European law, a new architecture for foreign and security policy, there is an enormous extension in the fields of the EU's powers, there is Charter of Fundamental Rights,"

These are all core elements of the Rejected Constitution.

You have to ask yourself - Why is it that the European elite are always so keen that what they are doing should be concealed from the UK electorate? Also why are our supposed representatives apparently willing to oblige them it this.

Lord Leach of Fairford, speaking to The Daily Telegraph said:

"Gordon Brown should think twice before going back on his party's manifesto pledge to hold a referendum on a treaty that is the EU constitution in all but name.”

"If he is serious about wanting to 'listen and learn' he should let the people have a say."

An ICM/Open Europe poll recently found that 86 per cent of voters want a referendum on the treaty and if Mr Brown refuses one it could damage his electoral chances.

It would seem you do not have the right to remain silent

You know you always thought that you couldn’t be forced to incriminate yourself under English law – Well maybe you used to be right, but not any more... 'Cos that was then and this is now - Be afraid. Be very afraid.

Two anti speed camera campaigners, Idris Francis and Gerard O'Halloran, argued that the centuries-old right to silence should allow drivers to refuse to confirm to police who was at the wheel, as they would be being forced incriminating themselves.

They trustingly took their case to the European Court for Human Rights...

Unfortunately for them - and more worryingly, the rest of us - Judges at the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg voted by 15-2 to reject their case.

The court said: "The court did not accept the applicants' argument that the right to remain silent and the right not to incriminate oneself were absolute rights,"

Mr Francis said "In my view it is a perverse decision" "I am shocked and amazed."

"The fight for freedom goes on. We can't allow the tyrants, who are taking away our rights, to succeed. They have to be stopped."

Now if, as the court says, they are not rights in this case - will it be any different for other offences?

So maybe the pair should now sue the government under the Trade Descriptions Act. The police and Criminal Evidence Act lays down the following modern interpretation of the ‘right to silence’ also known as the "caution":

"You do not have to say anything but it may harm your defence if you do not mention now something you later rely on in court, Anything you do say may be given in evidence."

This is obviously now complete rubbish. It should read something more like:

”You do not have the right to silence and failing to disclose anything we want to know could result in your receiving a harsher sentence - if we can manage to find a jail cell for you.”

Probably wouldn’t work though, the court would probably argue it was naive to the point of idiocy to believe anything a politician promised you.

Now for the moment we shan’t even start to look at the erosion of the principal of ‘innocent until proven guilty’ lurking in the law relating to UK road tax brought in by Nu-Lab…

Irish allowed Referendum on EU Constitutional Treaty

As we all now know, following anti democratic pressure to ignore his electorate and avoid a referendum, from the President of the European Commission, Jose Manuel Barroso, Tony Blair the outgoing UK Premier has signed the German Chancellor’s new European constitutional‘treaty’.

It seems though, that other nation’s leaders have a greater commitment to the democratic process. Ireland's constitutional arrangements actually make it difficult not to call a referendum on the treaty. Hence Irish Taoiseach, Bertie Ahern is to call a referendum on the ‘treaty’.

An Irish Department of Foreign Affairs spokesman said that although some constitutional elements had gone, 90 per cent of what was there was still there.

Denmark has also been looking at whether, or not, it has to hold a referendum.

Last night, the UK Shadow Foreign Secretary, William Hague, pointed out: "As each day goes by, more and more of the Government's case on the EU treaty falls to pieces.”

"It is now getting clearer and clearer that this is basically the constitution by another name. Large amounts of power have been transferred to Brussels and the Government has failed to safeguard Britain's interests.”

"People in Britain will want to know, when Irish voters will decide for themselves on this crucial treaty, why Gordon Brown thinks British people do not have the right to have their say, even though he promised they would."

It would seem, when it comes to democracy, some nations are more equal than others.

Is that a Licenced Sporran you'r wearing laddie?

You couldn’t make it up - The law of unintended consequences strikes again.

A spokeswoman for the Scottish Executive said there are now new rules to bring Scotland into line with existing European regulations, designed to protect vulnerable species.

They require anyone who owns any part of a protected animal to obtain a licence the penalty is a maximum fine of £5,000 and/or six months in prison.

It seems that Kilt wearers would be liable to prosecution under the regulations, if they were in possession of an unlicensed sporran.

Best place to keep the licence would presumably be your sporran as they would presumably be most likely to be asked to produce it when actually wearing it.

"Is that a licence in your sporran, or are you just glad to see me?" ;-) Hat tip to Mae West.

The legislation applies to animals killed after 1994.

So how could you prove how old your sporran was - and more to the point, exactly how much will the licence cost…

EC President against UK referendum

European Commission President Jose Manuel Barroso is now urging the UK not to hold a referendum the constitution /treaty h is trying to push through at this week's EU summit.

Speaking to BBC, he said:

"Sometimes I hear people saying that for Parliament to approve it would be by the back door.

Is that the respect some people show their Parliament, maybe the greatest Parliament in the world? I don't consider Parliament the back door”

We are talking about Tony Blair approving it not Parliament. If it is done without a referendum it is certainly by the ‘back door’, the British have not had to opportunity to express an opinion and the EU has very little impact on what party they voted for as there is not much difference.

And do we really respect Parliament? I suspect most of us could count the politicians in parliament we actually respect on the thumbs of two hands - So that would be no then.

He went on:

"Britain is the country that exported Parliamentary democracy to the world. Do the British people consider Parliament the backdoor?

"Do the British people who killed their king to protect the rights of Parliament consider it the back door? “

Is it the backdoor? Absolutely - and Jose, it was a civil war. It was a Puritan Parliament killed the King. Plenty were fighting for him, just less organised, less well equipped. What has that got to do with it anyway?

He went on to say leaders had to stand up to the sort of "ugly nationalism" that traded on "imaginary threats" such as the idea that the EU was becoming a super state.

Here he is again branding the desire to actually have a say in the matter as ‘ugly nationalism’ this time and urging the political elite to stand up against the democratic process and resist it.

No. The idea of the EU becoming a super state is completely ridiculous, how could we imagine it for a moment?

EU President 'leans' on Poland and the UK

Barroso is at it again, still trying to strong arm through his (or rather the German Chancellor's), bogus constitution with anti democratic ‘meaningful comments’.

Maybe he would have more luck with one that looked more like this - then again. No, with the EU political elite, probably not.

In Brussels Jose Manuel Barroso, President of the European Commission, has warned EU members not to block progress towards the EU treaty comprising much of the previously rejected 2005 EU constitution. He warned:

"It is not in the interest of any member state to be in a position that is seen as hardliner,"

“The environment for a deal is clearly there. Please avoid appearing as blocking. This is not intelligent, this is not in your interest.”

“Defend your positions, but don't come with these red lines and vetoes."

by “any member state” he of course means Poland and the UK.

Now why would it be “not in (the UK’s or Poland's) interests” to defend their interests? That really does not make sense.

Barroso effectively urges Blair not to give in to democracy!

José Manuel Barroso the president of the European Commission addressing an audience of national and euro-parliamentarians yesterday, concerning the thinly disguised re-vamp of the EU constitution, said he hoped the Prime Minister "will have the courage" to scrap more national vetoes and to sign up to an EU bill of rights despite public hostility.

''You know about the UK, and the respect I have for your country,"
"We have to stand up in front of our national public opinions, not give up to some of the populisms we have in our member states."

“Populisms” presumably being his pejorative ‘code’ for the democratic process.

Excuse me!! We are trying to pretend we still live in a democracy here you know!

The soon-to-be Ex UK Premier was elected on a manifesto promising to put the now rejected contents of the EU constitution to a referendum in the UK.

“Let the people have the final say”, he said.

He is supposed to be representing that position, not conniving to betray his electorate. Is this the price of becoming a commissioner?
If this isn’t clear evidence of a chilling indifference to the democratic process on the part of the EU elite, then what is?

William Hague UK MP said on the matter: "Tony Blair shouldn't be standing up to British public opinion; he should be standing up for it: the Prime Minister's job is to stand up for Britain in Europe, not stand up for Europe in Britain."

Most European citizens would probably, on balance, prefer a democratically governed EU.

Worryingly it increasingly seems as if the European political elite are not so much concerned how a European super state might be governed, only that it exists in some form - and they are in charge.

To preserve appearances they would probably be happy enough with a tame domestic electorate, to rubber stamp their decrees, but as they have discovered, the European electorate is still feral and as like to savage an unwary hand as anything.

It might be more honest to proclaim it the new Holy Roman Empire - and all hail to King Barroso the first!

At least we could have a glittering aristocracy and the pageantry that goes with it to keep our minds off of unnecessary, inconvenient, plain out of date, frills - like democracy. Maybe better to give the job to one of the British Princes, they really are Royal and at least the UK might be less inclined to make a fuss then. The Commissioners could all be Lords, or Barons...

EU saves us from deadly barometer threat!!

Headline: The heroic EU has saved the grateful citizens of Europe, yet again from another deadly curse of our times.

The fearsome Mercury Barometer will terrorise us no more! Thanks to The EU’s environment committee, including two British Labour MEPs, Linda McAvan and Glenis Wilmott.

After the bruising battle the Miss McAvan, a Yorkshire MEP, bluntly stated there is "clear evidence" that mercury in barometers was "highly dangerous".

A sinister conspiracy of traditional British barometer makers and restorers, backed by Liberal Democrat MEP Chris Davies, have finally been outflanked and foiled by this stalwart paragon of democracy and are now facing the closure they so richly deserve. They almost got away at the last moment, but the redoubtable, the steely eyed Lord Rooker UK minister for sustainable farming and food, managed to prevent that.

As we all know these merchants of death are single headedly responsible for the terrible swathe of death and destruction wrought by mercury barometers over the last three centuries or more. Not to mention the acres – oops! Square kilometres think I got away with that one - of land left uninhabitable.

I don't see anyone trying to ban Compact Flourescent Light bulbs. No they are promoting them as environmentally friendly! I expect McAven & Willmott will probably tell you so too.

Now compact fluorescent bulbs contain an average of 5 milligrams of mercury each, not a huge amount you might think. All CFLs will eventually need to be disposed of though - and you know they will end up in the trash and get broken.

Well some 200 million light bulbs a year are sold in the UK alone - replace them all with compact flourecent bulbs and you could end up with a Metric Ton of mercury being dumped in the UK every year.

Contrast that with the odd broken mercury barometer!

So in the great scheme of things – would it really have hurt for them to have granted an exemption?

Madeleine McCann

Madeleine McCann– Still Missing

A thought - I have not heard it suggested on the news - but anyone on holiday in the area in the weeks running up to her disappearance could help, just by looking through all their video footage and stills, to see if there is anything inadvertently captured in them, that in retrospect, might be significant could do their bit.

It could, however unlikely, turn up the missing piece of the jigsaw, so is well worth doing on that basis alone.

EU wants Taxpayer to foot entire Galileo Bill

The European Union’s satellite-navigation system, Galileo, will have to be built with public funds if it is going to be built at all, the European Commission announced.

So clearly, from this pronouncement, any one with any business sense realises it’s a bit of a white elephant before it even gets off the ground - and are reluctant o throw their own perfectly good money away on it.

Still that sort of consideration never put a politician off wasting tax payer’s money to their own glory. Some £2.7 billion they estimate – yes pull the other one and then multiply it by 12, if the London Olympics are anything to go by.

Now the question immediately arises - Why on earth ;-) would you want to go to the trouble and truly enormous expense, of building you own satellite navigation system, when there is a perfectly serviceable one up there already?

Even if you built it you would then have to try to wean the users of the existing system (who have coughed up cash for their sat-nav equipment) away from it just to get anyone to use it at all.

Is it dog in the manger-ism? Or they fear it will become unavailable. I know the European elite are not fond of the US but I hope they are not actually planning to go to war with them.

Democracy in Action - Voting

I note the ‘heats’ for the Eurovision Song Contest were on Thursday evening (10th May). There was the usual spread of stuff on offer - of varying quality.

When they announced the vote results though, as far as I could tell, regardless of the merit of the offerings, apart from Turkey, only eastern European efforts actually made it through to the final - and some that did I felt were embarrassingly ghastly.

It often seems that in the past the Nordic countries voted for each other, according to the great sage Wogan. Now it could be the Eastern Europeans are taking a leaf out of their books.

What is the betting the main contest goes in a similar direction? We shall see this evening.

In any event the results seem to be based on approval of the states involved rather than having any relation to any merit of the songs.

All in fun, you may say and that’s as may be., but by accident, or intent, it looks as if the vote may be being consistently ‘tactically’ distorted.

The underlying theme, that goes largely unnoticed, is that this is a problem with virtually all voting systems.

I am not sure if the Eurovision system of national votes could be regarded as a Borda Count system, but internally within the UK it looks more like an Approval Voting system. The overall effect being a combination. It would be interesting to know what methods the other nations use.
I wonder if it might be better to switch to a Condorcet system. Any thoughts on the subject of voting anyone?

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Eurovision is over for another year, the taste of ashes in our mouths ;-)


“Flying the flag” is a descendant (and inheritor) of “making your mind up” and by all rights should have done well. Done well, that is, until the admission and proliferation of Eastern European States – oh and Tony B upset everyone in western Europe.

What we recognise as the 'Euro' sound has changed. It was a sort of lowest common denominator of the old Europe’s musical tastes, the sort of thing that does well in the clubs of the med.

Eastern Europe however has added a new (Early 8os) element - Anthemic Power Rock, plus fireworks and black leather gear, a sort of love child of Aerosmith and Europe (the group)

I know there is much dark talk of block voting - and there may well be an element of that – but next year!

Next year Tony and his inheritance of continental disapproval may have faded from French and German minds.

Next year, if we can cobble together a group of long haired, reasonably slim aging hard rockers capable of lasting through such an energetic number and carrying off black leather and studs. Accompanied by some leather (if scantily) clad young, operatically voiced women. A sort of a cross between belly dancers and biker chicks.

Next year, if we can craft an anthemic European power ballad that can stir the eastern European sole.

If we can lay our hands on enough fireworks...

Then maybe we will be able, once again, hold our heads high in the halls of Europe – and - who knows, apart from funding a huge chunk of the cost of the contest, possibly even have to go to the additional expense and bother of hosting it too! What more could you ask?