The Right Angle: Boilers and By-Elections
14 hours ago
Thursday, April 23, 2009
Quote of the day
From the Daily Mash
"Later today the government will release details of a scheme where people can hand in their wallets and purses in exchange for a shiny, new wheelbarrow to carry their money around in."
"Later today the government will release details of a scheme where people can hand in their wallets and purses in exchange for a shiny, new wheelbarrow to carry their money around in."
Wednesday, April 22, 2009
European or National
“Nobody votes about the issues”, that was the basic complaint about the recalcitrant voters of those countries that voted 'No' in the Referenda. Giscard and Sarko, Cowan and al dismissed the votes pointing out that it was local issues (Anglo-Saxon capitalism, the Turks, and so on) not the European Constitution that was being voted on. Oh everybody pays lip-service to the concept of voting and participatory democracy. These are enlightened times, but they don't like letting the ignorant unwashed have their say. No, no, no, they say you vote for people who represent you. They are the people who should decide these things on your behalf.
And thus everybody loves the European Parliament. A paradigm of representative government. An amending chamber for rules and regulations that affect the world. The second largest democratic assembly on earth representing upwards of 450 million people, only the Lok Sabah in India is greater.
Here is the democratic representation of the European Demos. The Agora, the Tribune.
Well sort of. The problem is that nobody actually votes on European matters. If they did there would be no need of the constant taxpayer funded initiatives to create a European public space. Big posters abound “Europe my Country” they declare in some vague attempt to create a fellow feeling where none currently exists.
And what happens during the European elections. Except on the perhaps the green fringe people vote on national issues not on European Issues. Oh the well meaning manifestos of the political groups and European Political Parties, not to mention the European Political Foundations are completely meaaningless when it comes to electoral mathematics. Put it this way, who runs the election campaign? Is it a bunch of chaps and chappesses who spend their time flitting between Brussels and Strasbourg, or is it the hard nosed politicos back in the national capitals? Of course its the party bosses. And their calculus is nothing to do with the European Union.
It is not in the interests of any party that has aspiration, make that realistic aspiration to government, to highlight the importance of the European Union in making legislation. They would be cutting their own throats.
Think about it, what political party would go into a European Election campaign seriously highlighting the importance of the EU in the creation of legislation? After all only a year or so later the same people (MEPs often vanish during national elections – curious) are standing up infront of the same electorate trying to persuade them into voting again, but this time for national Government.
“Vote for me” says important political type
“Why?” says vaguely interested punter.
“Because I can change the world into a better place”
“No you can't” says punter.
“What do you mean?” says politico, clearly hurt and aggrieved, “vote for me and I will water into wine, or sand into sugar”
“Rubbish” laughs punter, “You said only in June 2009 that the EU is really important these days and that nigh on 85% of new laws and regulations are written there. You said that in reality these days if you want to change stuff you have to be involved at a European level. You said that all trade matters, all agricultural matters, almost all environmental matters, many training matters, well most policy is now run from Brussels that was why we had to vote for the European elections. So tell me what are you for Mr Prime Minister?”
You see the point. Elections are run by national parties, national parties have a vested interest not to highlight the European elections.
The only parties that d talk about European issues are oddly either the Greens, who despite broad Geographical spread have limited electoral impact, and the increasing crowds of more Eurosceptical parties. They of course talk about Europe, but almost (Libertas notwithstanding) from a national perspective
There is no real European public space, unless you count that bit next to the European Parliament near Place Luxembourg – but there again that's a wind tunnel.
Update
Cross posted here (Thanks Joseph, I thought I had mucked them around too much).
And thus everybody loves the European Parliament. A paradigm of representative government. An amending chamber for rules and regulations that affect the world. The second largest democratic assembly on earth representing upwards of 450 million people, only the Lok Sabah in India is greater.
Here is the democratic representation of the European Demos. The Agora, the Tribune.
Well sort of. The problem is that nobody actually votes on European matters. If they did there would be no need of the constant taxpayer funded initiatives to create a European public space. Big posters abound “Europe my Country” they declare in some vague attempt to create a fellow feeling where none currently exists.
And what happens during the European elections. Except on the perhaps the green fringe people vote on national issues not on European Issues. Oh the well meaning manifestos of the political groups and European Political Parties, not to mention the European Political Foundations are completely meaaningless when it comes to electoral mathematics. Put it this way, who runs the election campaign? Is it a bunch of chaps and chappesses who spend their time flitting between Brussels and Strasbourg, or is it the hard nosed politicos back in the national capitals? Of course its the party bosses. And their calculus is nothing to do with the European Union.
It is not in the interests of any party that has aspiration, make that realistic aspiration to government, to highlight the importance of the European Union in making legislation. They would be cutting their own throats.
Think about it, what political party would go into a European Election campaign seriously highlighting the importance of the EU in the creation of legislation? After all only a year or so later the same people (MEPs often vanish during national elections – curious) are standing up infront of the same electorate trying to persuade them into voting again, but this time for national Government.
“Vote for me” says important political type
“Why?” says vaguely interested punter.
“Because I can change the world into a better place”
“No you can't” says punter.
“What do you mean?” says politico, clearly hurt and aggrieved, “vote for me and I will water into wine, or sand into sugar”
“Rubbish” laughs punter, “You said only in June 2009 that the EU is really important these days and that nigh on 85% of new laws and regulations are written there. You said that in reality these days if you want to change stuff you have to be involved at a European level. You said that all trade matters, all agricultural matters, almost all environmental matters, many training matters, well most policy is now run from Brussels that was why we had to vote for the European elections. So tell me what are you for Mr Prime Minister?”
You see the point. Elections are run by national parties, national parties have a vested interest not to highlight the European elections.
The only parties that d talk about European issues are oddly either the Greens, who despite broad Geographical spread have limited electoral impact, and the increasing crowds of more Eurosceptical parties. They of course talk about Europe, but almost (Libertas notwithstanding) from a national perspective
There is no real European public space, unless you count that bit next to the European Parliament near Place Luxembourg – but there again that's a wind tunnel.
Update
Cross posted here (Thanks Joseph, I thought I had mucked them around too much).
Towler elsewhere
A couple of posts over there
So why bother with the European Elections?
Really, I am serious. OK I know that most of you who may turn up here are the sort of people who, by dint of that single fact are interested in the June polls. But what about everybody else. Why should they bother?
Worse still, this little bit of slightly silly rhetoric is merely a mirror of reality. After all the latest Eurobarometer poll reads pretty grim reading those of us who do give a damn. According to the Commission’s figures frankly things are looking pretty grim. Across the whole EU 27 only 34% are planning to vote at all. That is appalling. In Germany the prognostications are at 43%, in the UK a pitiful 22%. Worst of all are the figures for Luxembourg and Belgium at 64% and 70% respectively. Not to bad you say. Well yes, other than the fact that 30 and 36% of the citizens would prefer to break the law than endorse anybody in the elections.
As Margot Wallström herself pointed out in a letter at the end of last year to the Constitutional Affairs Committee of the Parliament, a low turnout damages the legitimacy of the Parliament itself, and she said of the “entire European project”. When quizzed on the specifics of this of course she couldn’t or wouldn’t respond with any real figure, but the point is still moot, and she, one of the more honest members of the Euro elite at least recognises the problem.
Oh yes everybody in Brussels knows that the slow collapse of turnout since the first election to the Brussels Assembly in 1979 is bad news. Everybody recognises that it looks bad, but that is mainly from a PR perspective. The hundreds of millions of Euros being thrown at MTV and so on in a desperate attempt to raise figures are about this. But whether the philosophical aspect has been considered at the top table I very much doubt.
At what point, at what level of participation does the European Parliament become illegitimate? Democracy requires participation for it to have legitimacy. Lack of engagement does not mean that the elite can presume consent. The referenda in France, Holland and Ireland should at least have put paid to that idea. What they suggest is a deep disillusion with the whole project, an deliberate disengagement with the governors by the governed. The response of the elite to those referenda just confirms that consent is not required for the European leviathan to keep lumbering on. The great problem and fear is that when there is such sparse contact between these two things then something has to give. History is littered with unhappy examples.
The good news? Eurobarometer is rubbish. It informed the world that the people of Holland supported the old Constitution by about 60-40. Two weeks after they had voted 63% against. Genius.
So why bother with the European Elections?
Really, I am serious. OK I know that most of you who may turn up here are the sort of people who, by dint of that single fact are interested in the June polls. But what about everybody else. Why should they bother?
Worse still, this little bit of slightly silly rhetoric is merely a mirror of reality. After all the latest Eurobarometer poll reads pretty grim reading those of us who do give a damn. According to the Commission’s figures frankly things are looking pretty grim. Across the whole EU 27 only 34% are planning to vote at all. That is appalling. In Germany the prognostications are at 43%, in the UK a pitiful 22%. Worst of all are the figures for Luxembourg and Belgium at 64% and 70% respectively. Not to bad you say. Well yes, other than the fact that 30 and 36% of the citizens would prefer to break the law than endorse anybody in the elections.
As Margot Wallström herself pointed out in a letter at the end of last year to the Constitutional Affairs Committee of the Parliament, a low turnout damages the legitimacy of the Parliament itself, and she said of the “entire European project”. When quizzed on the specifics of this of course she couldn’t or wouldn’t respond with any real figure, but the point is still moot, and she, one of the more honest members of the Euro elite at least recognises the problem.
Oh yes everybody in Brussels knows that the slow collapse of turnout since the first election to the Brussels Assembly in 1979 is bad news. Everybody recognises that it looks bad, but that is mainly from a PR perspective. The hundreds of millions of Euros being thrown at MTV and so on in a desperate attempt to raise figures are about this. But whether the philosophical aspect has been considered at the top table I very much doubt.
At what point, at what level of participation does the European Parliament become illegitimate? Democracy requires participation for it to have legitimacy. Lack of engagement does not mean that the elite can presume consent. The referenda in France, Holland and Ireland should at least have put paid to that idea. What they suggest is a deep disillusion with the whole project, an deliberate disengagement with the governors by the governed. The response of the elite to those referenda just confirms that consent is not required for the European leviathan to keep lumbering on. The great problem and fear is that when there is such sparse contact between these two things then something has to give. History is littered with unhappy examples.
The good news? Eurobarometer is rubbish. It informed the world that the people of Holland supported the old Constitution by about 60-40. Two weeks after they had voted 63% against. Genius.
5 years?
Today, if you are lucky enough to be a member or staffer of the EPP-ED (yup that nice crowd that includes the Tories) you are invited to an afternoon soiree celebration the publication of this little tome. (It is amazing how many books are coming out inthe run up to the elections as all the members desperately spend their money - use it or loose it is the cry).Joseph DAUL
Chairman of the European People's Party (Christian Democrats)
and European Democrats in the European Parliament
has pleasure in inviting you to a cocktail
(in honour of the Five years of European Union Reunification)
Tuesday, 5 May 2009 - 17.30-19.00 hours
WIC restaurant - Winston Churchill building
Strasbourg
Chairman of the European People's Party (Christian Democrats)
and European Democrats in the European Parliament
has pleasure in inviting you to a cocktail
(in honour of the Five years of European Union Reunification)
Tuesday, 5 May 2009 - 17.30-19.00 hours
WIC restaurant - Winston Churchill building
Strasbourg
The book is subtitled "Anti-totalitarian courage and political renewal" which seems a little bit ironic given the invitation.
"the five years of European Union Reunification".
"The Five years"? Which five? Answers on a postcard please.
Thursday, April 16, 2009
À la recherche du temps perdu or Dolly as Madeleine
"Comme au moment où je goûtais la madeleine...". [
Update and apology
I apologise for taking this post down. But on reflection I feel that it was intemperate, unedifying and impolite.
So I am sorry if you have come here under false pretences, that is that there was something worth reading here.
Sorry again.
Update and apology
I apologise for taking this post down. But on reflection I feel that it was intemperate, unedifying and impolite.
So I am sorry if you have come here under false pretences, that is that there was something worth reading here.
Sorry again.
Friday, April 10, 2009
Bizzare language alert
In reference to the pub broadcast last night by Nigel Farage,
I saw this tweet
New feminist phrase meaning pub,
Katserina, what is your problem?
I saw this tweet
"Katserina: UKIP says "vote for us and we'll keep the pubs open." Maintaining the phallocentric locations for male dealings! Super!"
New feminist phrase meaning pub,
"Hey chaps, fancy going down the phallocentric location for male dealings for a pint?"
"Now there's a cracking idea."
Katserina, what is your problem?
Is Charles Jencks an anti-semetic bigot?
Or is he just a fashionable fool?
I ask because I went along to the Barbican Debate last night. Discussing 'Ethics in Architecture' Charles Jencks, the leading critic and sometime designer made the following comment in reference to architechture in Isreal - in particular the responsibility of architechts for the building of the Isreali settlements on the West bank,
I ask because I went along to the Barbican Debate last night. Discussing 'Ethics in Architecture' Charles Jencks, the leading critic and sometime designer made the following comment in reference to architechture in Isreal - in particular the responsibility of architechts for the building of the Isreali settlements on the West bank,
Now personally I found this an astonishing statement, what do you think?"There is less ethics (in architecture) in Isreal today than in Nazi Germany in the 30's"
Thursday, April 09, 2009
Wednesday, April 08, 2009
Tuesday, April 07, 2009
Now there is a surprise
Reuters are reporting a shocking developement in the world of climate change,
Cripes get out the sandbags at once.
But wait a minute a headline like that is pretty scary, what is behind it? Reuters asked 11 members of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. 9 of whom sugested that their previous work was correct. Well that is a shocker isn't it.
Evidence be hanged it seems. Especially when there is a scary headline to promote.
EU: Earth warming faster
Global warming is likely to overshoot a 2 degrees Celsius (3.6 F) rise seen by the European Union and many developing nations as a trigger for "dangerous" change, a Reuters poll of scientists showed on Tuesday.
Cripes get out the sandbags at once.
But wait a minute a headline like that is pretty scary, what is behind it? Reuters asked 11 members of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change. 9 of whom sugested that their previous work was correct. Well that is a shocker isn't it.
Evidence be hanged it seems. Especially when there is a scary headline to promote.
Thursday, April 02, 2009
Liam Donaldson, the obverse king of the swingers
As ambitions go, the orangutangs desire to be like us was fair enough. He had, after all reached the top, and he had, or at least so he belived had to stop. And that was bothering him.
But the song wouldn't have worked quite so well if it had had a refrain thus,
Which is essentially what people like the chief medical officer, Sir Liam Donaldson want to happen. What we are talking about of course is the attempts to 'denormalise' people. A habit of the safety fanatics. Simon Hills perceptive piece makes the point very well today,
Well, like the Prussian Guard, I do not wish to live for ever. I wish to live well.
But the song wouldn't have worked quite so well if it had had a refrain thus,
"I wanna you to be like me
I wanna you to talk like me
Walk like me, too
You'll see it's true
Someone like you
Can learn to be
Like someone like me
Can learn to be
Like someone like me
Can learn to be
Like someone like me!"
Which is essentially what people like the chief medical officer, Sir Liam Donaldson want to happen. What we are talking about of course is the attempts to 'denormalise' people. A habit of the safety fanatics. Simon Hills perceptive piece makes the point very well today,
"What Sir Liam Donaldson and his ilk are saying, in other words, is that in order to be a part of society, we have to be like them. That is to say we should be slim, non-smoking cyclists who like rambling and other wholesome pursuits. Our aspirations should be nothing less that aiming to live for ever."
Well, like the Prussian Guard, I do not wish to live for ever. I wish to live well.
Bournemouth Council skewered by the TPA
An excellent piece of work today by the Taxpayers Alliance fiollowing up a local Independent Councillor, Ron Whittaker.
And this is a Tory Council?
"CASH-strapped Bournemouth is spending a staggering £200,000 a year on a
transport manager who should cost just £50,000.
At a time when services are under threat and council staff are being made redundant, the council is paying four times more than necessary for transportation services manager James Duncan.
As a senior management post, this job carries a fixed salary of £50,603,
plus pension and National Insurance.
But Mr Duncan is employed through the agency Penna plc, which charged the council £206,014.65 for his services for the period January 29, 2008 to February 1, 2009. "
And this is a Tory Council?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
