Another brick in the wall?

Cameron and Sarkozy have signed a deal to share military resources. It was kept pretty much off the public’s radar until it was a done deal. Did parliament get any say so?

It seems Cameron has locked the UK into it for the next 50 years. It is not clear if it can be got out of.

It is doubtful if any of the UK’s politicians will ever seriously try.

Cameron is busy trying to spin it up into great news and it is for the pro EU political elite.

It is difficult to reconcile this with his earlier bluster about not signing away any more of the UK’s sovereignty without a referendum. But this will be yet another instance where a slight change in the newspeak name of the thing magically utterly transforms it, so an old promise can be safely ignored and discarded. He is taking a leaf out of Gordon Brown’s book, on the Labour Party election lies manifesto.

What it actually is is a tacit acknowledgement that thanks to his incompetent butchery of the UK's defence capability the UK is no longer capable of acting effectively on the world stage without support.

What it actually means is that the UK can now no longer act militarily, in many respects, without France’s agreement.

A mutual defence pact is one thing, even military co-operation, or joint expeditionary forces - but signing over a veto on when you use your military to a foreign power is a whole other ball game, more akin to treason.

Not that UK politicians have not been happily signing away sovereign power for decades, so he can reasonably expect the supine UK electorate to put up with that as they have done with so much else that more self respecting citizens would do something about.

Sadly it is probably unlikely there will ever be a tea party movement in the UK.

What is Cameron’s agenda? One suspects ever closer European integration and the construction of a seed of a EU military. How long before a "money saving treaty" with Germany comes along?

Then there is the argument that can now be used by the political elite that If co-operation works in this areas then why not others? They will then subtly suggest, as they so often do, that it will allow ‘Europe’ to be more ‘independent’ of the US.

US politicians still somehow happily seem to imagine the EU is an unmitigated good thing for the US, despite plenty of evidence to the contrary. Is it that they think they know the nature of the beast? It wasn’t so long ago they thought it was a good idea to fund the Taliban...

Education in the UK continues it’s inexorable slide under New Labour

At one time the British education system was one of the leading ones in the world and arguably helped pioneer the concept of universal education.

Sadly, this is no longer the case.

In the stewardship of the present government and confirming what many believe but has always been strenuously denied by New Labour it now seems our world standing has slipped out of the top ten.

The Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development produce an international study. The Programme for International Student Assessment (Pisa). They assess the performance of 15 year olds and are published every 3 years. The UK’s marks are not good – a definite ‘could do better’.

The UK avoided participating in the 2003 round of tests and their chickens are coming home to roost now. The latest assessments now place the UK, previously in the top ten, 24th in maths and 17th in literacy.

According to the Progress in International Reading Literacy Study, the fact is the reading performance of 10 year olds in England has fallen to a world ranking of 19th.

Government ministers have tried to spin away the results, attempting to claim the rankings were not comparable with previous years. But a spokesperson for the OECD refuted this insisting the comparisons were "perfectly legitimate".

If the Government were actually serious, or even capable, of managing the education system they should look at scrapping all of the meddling changes and targets they have introduced over the last decade or more - Before them we were in the world top ten, now we are not. It speaks for it's self.

Noted public figure notices that the UK Government does not deliver on it’s promises.

You would think that a seasoned pressure group campaigner would be a little less naive.

Sir Jonathon Porritt, a leading environmentalist, is complaining that ‘soaring’ speeches made by Gordon Broon Breeks, at the Nu-Lab party conference, about making the UK a global leader in fighting alleged anthropocentric Global Warming; "make Britain a world leader in tackling climate change", were not backed up by action.

Hello! Exactly what else was he expecting? This is a man who will not even honour his party’s manifesto pledges. This is a party that was promising to ‘save’ the NHS over a decade ago. That spoke of instant fines for antisocial behaviour where the police were going to march offenders to the nearest cash point – Yeah right.

That is exactly what this party does – make ‘soaring’ speeches and memorable sound bites.

Sir Jonathon should do the decent thing , not call them on it and let it get forgotten and buried, like previous ‘soaring’ speeches, under other, newer, ‘soaring’ speeches promising the earth. Just like the electorate is expected to do…

UK Teachers becoming reluctant to teach theory of evolution

It seems that teaches in the UK are becoming more and more reluctant to include the theory of evolution in science classes.

Not as you might initially imagine because of fundamentalist Christian objections.

No. Apparently it is much more because teachers are worried about Moslem objections.

Accoring to a Professor at the Institute of Education, London, Moslems are less likely to accommodate the theory of evolution within their belief structure than Christians. A much greater percentage are Creationists than amongst Christians. The large increase in Moslems in the UK means that there are many more pupils and parents with more extreme creationist views.

One can’t help wondering if teachers would be quite so concerned about the views of, say Christians for example - and if the real driver behind their concerns is not political correctness and fear of being unjustly accused of being institutionally prejudiced, culturally insensitive, or racist, in some way, if objections are raised to their covering the subject.

Straw to call for new laws to protect homeowners who defend themselves

In a move to be announced by the UK ‘Justice’ Secretary, Jack Straw, in his conference speech, telegraphed by ‘sources close to him’, it seems Nu-Lab are at long last apparently planning to ‘reform’ self-defence laws in a way that "better balances the system in favour of victims of crime".

“This will be aimed at ensuring that those who seek to protect themselves, their loved ones and their homes as well as other citizens have confidence that the law is on their side,"

Where have we heard this before?

Oh yes - familiar stuff this - A 2004 review of the self-defence laws, following Conservative pressure resulted in...

...absolutely no change whatsoever, any changes being ruled out by Blair on the grounds that the existing legislation was ‘sound’. Right, almost as sound as a cracked bell.

So what has changed since then? Well we know that Gordon would like to Tar Dave the Chameleon with Tony Blair’s brush and steal some of ‘the party formerly known as the Conservatives’ clothing (and votes). So a good sound bite then.

To be fair, it could be that Mr Straw may have actually had genuine second thoughts on the matter, after reportedly being involved in four ‘there but for the grace of god…’ ‘have-a go’ incidents, including chasing and restraining muggers near his south London home.

So we know the Justice dude kicks ass then - Judge Dread eat your heart out…

It remains to be seen what actual practical difference, if any, this may make. But the sheeple may well dimly remember the sound bite, even if nothing more comes of it.

Will Sachem Brown agree to sell another Island to the Europeans

Does anyone here remember the Wappinger Confederacy or the Manna-hata, a tribe of native Americans who lived on the east coast of what is now the USA who were part of it?

What about Peter Minuit? He was born in Wesel on the German Rhine probably of Huguenot Walloon descent.

Now in 1624 when the Spanish invaded and occupied Wesel. Minuit escaped to Holland. He went to the Dutch West India Company's colony of New Netherland and became Governor.

One of his first actions was to legitimize European occupation of the territory, he called together the native sachems and agreed a purchase of the island that the settlement of New Amsterdam had been built on with trinkets and cloth valued at 60 guilders, then worth about 112 pounds (0.7 kg) of silver.

It has been suggested that the Sachems were not absolutely clear as to exactly what they were agreeing to at that meeting.

As many of you will be aware that Island is now known as Manhattan Island, part of New York City in the USA.

There is a modern day parallel here - with another Island. One off the North West coast of Europe. Known as Britain.

The thing is that most native American Sachems, or chiefs were not royalty, or kings. They were chosen by the community - elected - and there were usually multiple chiefs, both peace chiefs and war chiefs. The Chiefs were effectively elected and only loaned their power by the people of their tribes to be used on their behalf.

Rather like, as a (not quite) random example, British members of Parliament.

They are not Princes in their own right. They do not own the country by right. They are elected.
Any power they hold and wield as an MP is only to be used on behalf of the electorate and is loaned for a limited period of time by the electorate.

It is not transferable; they cannot confer it on any other person, or bodies. If MPs and Prime Ministers want to give away or sell those powers, the citizens powers, on loan, held by them in trust, then they need to go back to the citizen and specifically ask the citizen’s permission. That is known as a referendum.

Yes Sachem Brown that means you and your fellow political class Cronies. You have no right to give, or sell, those powers to Brussels; they are not yours to give.

You promised not to without a referendum, now for once honour your party’s tarnished word.

The Manna-hata should have been more careful of what they were agreeing to - so should we.

Now three bedroom home sellers in England to be forced to pay for HIPs

The UK Government is now feeling confident enough to start forcing sellers of three bedroom homes to pay for Home Information Packs from September, practically indistinguishable in effect from a new tax on offering a property for sale.

There was not too much fuss from four bedroom homeowners and now Nu-Lab are picking off the three bedroom property owners, having first allowed the impression it may not happen - once any objections to that have died down it is likely to be the rest of the market.

What they call defeat in detail.

Nu-Lab were probably mindful of rumblings of discontent from trained inspectors who had been expecting to milk the market for big bucks and were complaining about the poor return they were getting on their training so far. Having a whole new class of 3 bedroom cash cows to milk should sweeten them up.

NU-Lab’s Communities Minister Baroness Andrews is trying to claim that:

"HIPs and EPCs can help families to save hundreds of pounds off their fuel bills, and cut a million tonnes of carbon a year,"

Yeah - and a pair of scissors will help you ‘cut your electricity bills in half’ too.

HIPs could only actually save a purchaser money if the purchaser pulls out of a sale because they think the bills are too expensive and a purchaser can find out exactly the same thing, at no cost to anyone, by just asking to see the bills.

The government funded and created tool the Energy Saving Trust, claims the average consumer (weasel word) could cut their fuel bills by (more weasel words) as much as £300 a year if they follow the recommendations in the EPCs.

One wonders how much it might cost the average consumer to actually follow those recommendations and how long it would actually take to recover the expense in fuel savings…

The Baroness went on to try to claim HIPs, “have the potential” –

Weasel words that mean they might not actually do it at all then, like ‘Up to’ in a diet ad, prefacing ‘6 inches off your waist’

- “to reduce the millions of pounds wasted by consumers when buying and selling a home, by increasing transparency and competition in a process that hasn't changed for a generation.”

What is it about Nu-Lab? If anything is over a few years old they seem to think it needs to be junked and replaced - including the democratic process.

The fact is of course that EPCs are EU imposed requirement largely as a result of pressure by the green lobby - but much of the political elite would prefer the citizen didn’t dwell on that, or even know it.

They also probably would prefer it if you didn’t dwell on the fact that the EU only requires their subject states to ensure they are carried out every 10 years.

So why have Nu-Lab gone so far over the top? So much further than the EU required?

Well, apart from the fact that it will add to the client population dependant on the state, energy assessors will be required to log details of the properties into a central database that will hold records for 20 years.

Now the Valuation Office Agency, which is responsible for council tax valuations, has apparently applied for access to that database.

So crafty old Gordon Brown is effectively actually charging home owning sheeple something between £400 and £600, at current estimates (expect them to rise soon), to fund Government compliance with an expensive EU requirement - and also supply all the information required to reassess their council tax bills.

And he can claim green credentials for doing it!

No matter what you think of his morals or the reliability of his promises you have got to admire the man’s, truly breath taking, devious cunning…

UK Police Chief calls for price controls, tax hikes - and increases in police powers

The government campaign, publicly spearheaded by NU-Lab’s John Grogan, to raise extra revenue on alcohol gathers pace and now they have got Nu-Labs ‘politicised policemen’ weighing in amongst others.

The Chief Constable of Cheshire, Peter Fahy, (surprise, surprise) wants yet more police powers to stop drinking in the street and is urging his political masters to increase taxation on alcohol and raise the legal drinking age to 21.

Jon Stoddart, the Chief Constable of Durham Police, is supporting his ‘suggestions’ as “sensible” and the Chief Constable Northumbria Mike Craik is also calling for hikes in taxation on alcohol.

Maybe if these highly paid (evidently ineffective when it comes to drunks) police managers actually bothered effectively enforcing the existing applicable laws in those locations where it may be needed, before demanding new ones they might have more credibility.

Chief Constable Fahy amply demonstrates his authoritarian anti free market tendencies by also demanding the Government set price controls on alcohol. Calling for a high minimum price to be set for alcohol that it will be illegal to reduce, or discount.

"The supply of alcohol should not be left to the market," he liberally remarked…

This man is actually rather scary. This is a precedent we should never allow to be established.

UK Government survey claims majority in favour of rubbish bin tax

Very few householders in the UK can be unaware of the State campaign to levy extra charges for rubbish collection. The Government wants to get local councils to impose new "incentive" charges on homes throwing out the most rubbish. There was talk of having chips fitted to rubbish bins to monitor how much rubbish was thrown out.

It is highly contentious and has met with much public resistance, including popular petitions.

Basically more stealth Taxation - brought to you by the Original Taxmeister himself the PM Gordon Broon, disguised as Green measures.

Imagine the surprise the other day when DEFRA released the results of a poll it had carried out purporting to show that 52% of the population were avid for the new tax to be introduced. How did the phrase those questions?

A DEFRA spokesman stated the ‘findings’ of the survey would be taken into consideration by ministers in waste disposal developing policy. You just bet they will. One wonders if they will give similar weight to petitions against the proposal, or surveys that might show less public enthusiasm…

Curious that a government department produces a survey that supports the Government line on such a contentious issue…

The police really do seem younger every day.

It used to be said you can tell you are getting older when the police start looking younger.

A teenager could be forgiven for worrying about advancing old age, based on the fact that a Police Force in the UK (Thames Valley) have decided to recruit two 16 year olds.

Granted they are community support officers, not actual police officers. Never-the-less the uniform is very similar - and no doubt intended to be, the less observant members of the general public are likely to take these youths of police officers.

One sees this sort of thing in fiction and now Thames Valley are apparently intent on creating their own version of the ‘Bow Street Irregulars’.

The Police ‘Union’, the Police Federation, pointed out that "These children are going to be put in a uniform the public believe to be of a police officer and be expected to take on responsibilities on the streets,"

HIPs Inspectors complain they have been hard done by

It seems that there is much perturbation on the Home Inspector Forum website. Inspectors are attacking the Government for failing to fully implement the scheme. They are bleating that they may face financial ruin if the delay in implementing HIPs (Home Information Packs) continues.

An inspector from Eastbourne, East Sussex, complained that if they could earn their training fees back they would count themselves lucky and get out of the business. Another felt they had wasted £4,000.

All true - and normally most of us would probably have considerable sympathy for anyone who had suffered as a result of State incompetence.

In this case though – sympathy somewhat lacking.

We are all acutely aware that when this EU inspired stupidity was first mooted it looked like it would be a licence to print money for the so-called inspectors and a convienient means for the State to spy on households, for tax raising purposes.

The people who ‘trained’ up to be inspectors clearly did so in that belief - and they must have known they would be milking people selling their homes, thanks to yet more pointless state forced unnatural regulation in the honest lawful exchange of property between individuals.

So to hear these inspectors complain that their parasitic careers may now be still born and that their ‘investment’ in training may have been wasted is not exactly guaranteed to elicit sympathy.

From the point of view of a homeowner it looks more like natural justice.

Let’s hope it puts off any likeminded individuals who might hope to profit from honest citizens by participating in some future state oppression of the populace.

Finally a ‘main stream’ UK party making vaguely libertarian noises

Finally the Tories are making some vaguely libertarian noises about reducing red tape and subjecting bloated Whitehall empires to annual rounds of ‘deregulation’.

It remains to be seen if such a thing could ever actually really happen.

Needless to say the Socialists in the form of Nu-Lab’s John Hutton are trying to talk it up as a lurch to the right and a fatal mistake. Well they would wouldn’t they, it is one of their areas of weakness.

Now whist it is clear Nu-Lab love regulation for regulation’s sake and would really prefer that citizens had to ask their permission (and preferably have to pay to do so) to do anything - why is reducing regulation suddenly ‘right wing’? Given that Broon has been making noises claiming to be about to do exactly that for ages.

Presumably the response would be an Orwellian it means what we say it means.

Could it be that this is the first sign of sense from Dave the Chameleon’s ‘the party formerly known as the Conservatives’ and it is actually worrying the Broon party machine?

After all with all this talk of the 'Broon bounce' and a big Nu-Lab lead in the polls, Broon must be cursing that he may find it difficult to take advantage of the chance of a snap election, with the “don’t mention the EU Constitutional referendum” albatross hanging round his neck.

Despite the lack of political comment in this direction - A snap election could turn into a referendum and maybe a judgement on previous Nu-Lab manifesto lies. Uncomfortable for Broon

Foreign Office Minister advocates UK gives up Permanent Seat on UN Security Council

Former UN Deputy Secretary General and now newly minted UK Foreign Office Minister, Lord Malloch-Brown (what is it with Nu-Lab PMs littering the ranks of the not necessarily derserving high and mighty with namesakes?) is advocating the UK gives up it’s seat on the UN Security Council to the EU.

Nice to know the Foreign Office Minister has Parliament and the UK’s very best interests at heart then ;-)

After all, we can be 100% sure the EU would vote just the way we would want, in every set of circumstances, knowing how similarly the French and Germans see things to us, in all circumstances. Surely the French should be falling over themselves to give up their seat.

Day, Cold, Hell, In?

This was obviously in his master plan last October, while he was still the UN's Deputy Secretary General, when he advised EU diplomats in Brussels that the EU would eventually have single seat within the UN. "I think it will go in stages. We are going to see a growing spread of it institution by institution," He went on that he hoped it would happen "as quickly as possible. I'm a huge fan of it."

When confronted with this evidence the Foreign office argued that had made those comments before he was made a Government minister.

Oh well that’s all right then - So are they suggesting he lying then, to suit his words to what his audience wanted to hear - and does not still hold those views? Possibly quite a plausible argument when considering a politician’s words, but would you want to bet on it?

Or did his words reflect his true intentions and loyalties? If so where exactly are his primary loyalties?

With the UN or the EU?

Why would a PM who was loyal to parliament appoint someone like that?

UK Government considering imposing an age limit on drivers

Apparently the UK Government is considering imposing an upper age limit for drivers.

This in it’s self is clearly unfair, unjust and ageist, as whatever age limit chosen there are bound to be people below it who are too infirm for various reasons to drive safely and people above it perfectly able to drive safely.

Why they feel this ageist restriction may be needed is not clear. Under existing rules anyone over 70 must pass a medical check every three years, in order to retain their licence. If these are conducted properly this should be sufficient.

That the suggestion has been raised at all, speaks volumes about the arbitrary and authoritarian underlying nature of this Government.

Nu-Lab win UK by-election with slashed majority Conservatives beaten into 3rd place.

The honeymoon is not over, the Broon bounce is saves Nu-Lab’s rear end in the crucial UK by-election in London, Ealing Southall. Nu-Lab held the seat, but with a majority slashed to less than half.

This despite Dave the Chameleon and the politically ambivalent Tony Lit’s dog and pony show. The locals could have been forgiven for thinking Dave was moving in he made so many visits but ‘the party formerly known as the Conservatives’ was thrashed into third place by Ming-the-Merciless and his ravening hoards.

The winning candidate, Nu-Lab’s Virendra Sharma, touchingly claimed: "It is policies that win elections, not slick PR."

He is probably right - as far as it goes…

OK. There are plenty out there who would vote for a shop dummy with the right rosette on it, but policies and manifesto promises probably do still go a long way to convincing the more responsible and discerning citizen to vote.

That’s probably because enough voters still actually believe them - a triumph of optimism over experience if ever there was one.

EU admits UK’s so-called treaty red lines are worthless

On Wednesday Margot Wallström, the European Commission Vice-President, insisted that the European Charter of Fundamental Rights will apply to three quarters or more of British law because it is derived from EU legislation and Britain's "red line" opt-outs are worthless.

She said: "Citizens will be able to claim before the courts the rights enshrined in the Charter," "The Charter will be binding for the European institutions, and also for member states when they implement EU law, even if it does not apply to all of them."

The commission's legal service describe British opt-outs as "limited" as German studies indicate up top to 80%of national law now originates in Brussels.

Sensitive national legislation, such as Britain's opt-out on a Brussels directive that sets the length of the working week will, officials predict, be challenged in the EU courts because it implements European laws.

A legal source described the opt-out as “potentially very thin."

If Gordon Brown is foolish enough to ratify the EU Constitutional Treaty signed up to by Tony Blair he will soon discover the charter, including a "right to strike", will be enforceable in the European courts if trade unions seek to challenge the UK’s reforms of the 1980s.

According to the Daily Telegraph, a senior European Parliament source revealed that Euro-MPs are planning to sponsor early challenges to Britain's opt-outs.

"We are going to make sure that this issue is constantly before the European Court of Justice,"

"There is 30 years of EU jurisprudence to say there can be no two-tier system of European rights."

The think-tank Open Europe has research that indicates EU judges are not likely to be backward in applying the charter. Their Director Neil O'Brien said:

"The Court of Justice will decide for itself whether member states are implementing European law and interpret their national laws for them,"

"Trying to stop the charter changing our laws will be like trying to carry water in a sieve."

If Gordon Brown is getting a bit fed up by now, with always playing second fiddle to someone, or something else, then he would be wise to agree to a referendum on the constitutional 'Treaty' sooner rather than later. He did say he would if the red lines were threatened.

Gordon's first PMs Question Time

Yesterday was Gordon Brown, the new Uk Premier's first PMs Question Time. He Waffled on a lot for the political greenhouse that is Westminster - but he said very little that would actually engage the electorate - Disappointing.

He has used his first Commons statement as Prime Minister to talk about earth shaking stuff like:

Giving up the power to appoint bishops - That’ll make a big difference to my daily life.
Giving up the power to declare war – Parliament, a committee, or the PM. Again big deal, It won’t be up to me – probably looks good on paper though.
Elections at the weekend – are you kidding! We all have better things to do with our weekends without having to fit in staying local to vote: Leave them on Thursdays.

One suspects it he fondly imagines forcing us to vote on a weekend may increase turn out, or his vote, he is sadly deluded. Still it is daringly French isn’t it?

Maybe he is dimly aware that a lot of the electorate has gone one or two issue and don’t necessarily vote on party lines any more.

He is not keen on addressing the issue of Scottish MPs being able to vote on English matters, but English MPs not being able to vote on Scottish matters. Well he wouldn’t be would he ‘cos that would include him wouldn’t it?

He avoids the really important though - He is obviously really not at all keen on a referendum on the EU constitutional Treaty. He might have scored some brownie ;-) points with the electorate if he had the intestinal fortitude to call for one. That’s a cross party single issue (democratic principles) people a who are interested are unlikely to forget.

David Cameron, ironically echoing Tony Blaire’s “Let the people have the final say” (Or was that “The cheque’s in the post” or “Of course I love you”, I get confused) challenged the new PM saying of the Treaty "It should be put to the people,".

Brown, in a typically irrelevant to the rest of the country, Westminster type response, pointed out that only Ireland so far was having a referendum (conveniently ignoring the fact that most of the ‘treaty’ was so good it had already been thrown out once already by the French and Dutch) and anyway – Nur-nur-nur-nur-na - the last Conservative government didn’t have a referendum on the Maastricht Treaty, or any other treaties, so there!

Now Gordon. We all know that MPs and Parliament can’t be trusted with something like the Constitutional Treaty. We know we can’t really rely on the bulk of MPs to represent our interests in this, instead of the political elite’s interest - Also what the Conservatives may, or may not, have done in the past is not a legal precedent and we wouldn’t be impressed with the argument even if it was.

You need to ask yourself. If you foist this ‘treaty’ on the UK Electorate without a specific mandate will it actually ever receive any support from the people? Will you in the end be doing incalculably much more harm than if you were honest and called a referendum?

Local Tax in UK rises twice as fast as earnings

The average UK local, or council, tax bill has effectively doubled in the past decade, rising twice as fast as income.

A report by the Halifax Building Society reveals the tax has risen from an average of around £560 to £1,100.

The tax has risen three times higher than the rate of inflation, double the increase in average earnings. In Fact it is now 91% higher than when Tony Blair first took office, while average earnings have only increased by 51%

The Local Government Association (LGA), that represents councils in England and Wales, has dismissed the report, saying it was a rehash of old information.

Well yes… Some of it, by necessity, must be around 10 years old, or the information would not be there to make the comparison, something the LGA no doubt devoutly wishes were the case.

It certainly warrants being repeated again and again so the local electorate can keep it in the forefront of their minds during local elections. Again something the LGA would be keen to avoid.

The Halifax’s chief economist, Martin Ellis, said that they were just: “highlighting the point that there's been a big, big, increase and certainly much sharper than the increase in either prices, or average earnings”

Anna Pearson, of Help The Aged pointed out that: ”When you compare council tax rises with the meagre rise in the basic state pension, you can see why pensioners are having to deprive themselves of basic necessities to get by.