Don't you know who I am?

Picture this. He has tattoos. “HATE” and “ACAB” on his knuckles and a spiders web on his neck.

He is shaved bald and struts imperiously. He is walking his dog Bruno. It is some unspecified sort of bull terrier. The dog defecates on the floor near a “no fouling sign” and he walks on by, just leaving it.

A young mother takes him to task over it and he blankly refuses to do anything about it telling her “It aint Brunoe's fault, he's only a puppy and no way am I going to pick up shit, you think I'm do'in that you are stupid” Suppose she stood up to him anyway and there was a fierce argument over it...

What would you think of our dog walking example? You would think he was scum wouldn't you?

You might think he relied on his physical power to avoid admitting responsibility and doing something he considered beneath him.

Now suppose the dog walker was female, maybe a UK government minister... say the Solicitor General to pick a post at random. The post is currently held by ID card and dog loving Vera Baird MP for Redcar.

If it was her would you change your opinion?

The confrontation over the dog mess was sufficiently fierce, or the dog fouling sufficiently annoying, for members of the public to call the police.

In this instance, despite the police becoming involved... well a community support officer anyway. No action was taken. No fine for allowing a dog to foul, no nothing.

When the hapless Support officer attended the scene when they didn't show sufficient biased deference she reportedly demanded of him “Don't you know who I am?” Maybe they had thought it shouldn't matter who she was. That the law should apply equally to all...

No action was taken but, it is reported, the dog owner got an official apology.

I wonder who go to clean up the mess?

You might be forgiven for thinking that, practically speaking, there is one law for the political elite and one for the rest of us.

I suspect you could be sure if it had been an ordinary member of the public they would have been instant fodder for Police figures, probably getting a fixed penalty fine, possibly being arrested and having their DNA taken if they had no ID.

Rural communities in the UK get a raw deal from New Labour

A report by the Rural Services Network points out what has been apparent for years; that ‘rural’ communities Small towns, villages and hamlets in the UK, come a very poor last when it comes to almost anything the state has control over or any influence in.

Things like schools, hospitals, post offices, public transport, police stations, fire stations, etc.

In many areas it is literally impossible to manage without cars. If there is heavy rain or snow many of these can not get through.

Schools and hospitals are have been centralised into larger and larger buildings, further and further away from many rural communities.

This is hardly surprising when the state is controlled by an urban patrician elite, who see anything outside of large towns and cities as the equivalent of one large diorama, or quaint theme park, provided largely for rambling purposes and as a backdrop for BBC costume dramas.

It is also worth noting that where these elite do not hold sway they are quite happy to damage the provision of services in order to ensure those provided in their own seats are maintained and their seats are therefore safer.

They would presumably prefer to spend nothing on it, whilst still milking those living there for every penny they can - pretending the entire countryside is populated by fabulously rich conservative farmers who spend all day hunting foxes.

Will this report make any difference? Probably not…

Income Tax, Oversight and Government Accountability

Taxation is a bit like a multi-channel TV package crossed with a protection racket.

You get a load of rubbish that you wouldn't want for free - let alone actually have to pay for - forced upon you, along with a few things that you might actually want, some of the time – and if you don’t cough up the boys will be round...

Of course with the TV you are not actually forced to subscribe (except for the BBC TV Tax of course)

Most people don't know where their taxes are going, what they are being spent on, or why. If they did they probably wouldn’t approve of some of it - and until people can engage more with where their contribution goes they will be reluctant to endorse, or even support the expenditure. Voting just does not do it.

If it were actually the Government's money that would be no problem. But its' only the Government’s money in the sense that the proceeds of any robbery become the thief’s. Taxation is not voluntary.

So here’s an idea. What if only a 3rd of tax gathered actually went to the Government to do with as it would - But the rest the individual contributing it could, if they wanted to, decide where it went and on what, depending on their priorities.

It would still have go on something, but they could decide what. That would surely be much more democratic, help to engage the public in politics and make them feel more empowered.

It would harness the so-called wisdom of crowds and reduce available Government spending where it was not generally wanted and increase it where it was felt to be more needed. That way it is unlikely anything worthwhile would suffer, as people’s views would probably tend to balance out generally. Maybe the poor old armed forces might do better out of it for instance

Pensions, as an example. One would want to make sure it was kept up, for the benefit of elderly relatives and friends. Also you never know you might need it yourself, what with the former Chancellor making raids destroying the value of pension funds, best be on the safe side there.

Ditto for most of the important stuff. Those who actually make the effort to do it are likely to operate on the principles of enlightened self-interest to some extent.

You would have to watch that the Government didn’t try to loose details of some of the worst unpopular wastes of money in some innocuous budget. So you would need to drill down into the categories in some detail.

This could be done by post (forms from the library or post office, completed ones to a freepost address) or via the internet.

As they say Tax doesn’t have to be taxing…

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

Quote of the day

“ There is danger from all men. The only maxim of a free government ought to be to trust no man living with power to endanger the public liberty.”

John Adams