Monday, January 23, 2012

The Moneyball loses it again

This blog's favourite Labour MEP, Hairy Moneyball is at it again.

In a rambling post she manages to show both arrogance ignorance and misplaced pride. It is all about how she still holds a flame for Tony, and how she wishes that he had managed to introduce the Euro,
It was, therefore, a tragic shame that Tony Blair did not take us into the Euro. Apart from giving Britain a place in the world, it would also have sealed his legacy, a legacy which became so damaged by the Iraq war. As a strong Blair supporter, I believe he deserves to be better remembered than seems to be the case at present. This may have been the reality not just something on my wish-list if Blair had found the courage to put our country well and truly at the economic and political heart of Europe.
You are quite right Hairy, he would be hated even more, quite something to wish for for your unrequited love.

Where she really starts to go off the wall is on her description of Britain's place in the world, which she links to what she sees as a UKIP position,
Outside the Euro with David Cameron we really are not much more than Norway. I have never bought the UKIP argument that it would be good to be like Norway. Excellent country that it is, it is not really significant in the scheme of things, does not take part in major international decisions and appears to be content to sit at home avoiding power and responsibility.

As a British patriot, I do not want the Norwegian option for our country which ruled the waves only 100 years ago. I want to be where it matters. That is at the heart of the European Union with a seat at all the tables and the power due to us as one of the second largest EU member states after Germany. In order to be where we should be, Britain has to be a member of the single currency. It’s as simple as that. We ignore this at our peril.
Lets have a look at this, particularly at those comments about Norway.

The charges are
1) It is insignificant.
2) It 'Does not take part in major international decisions',
3) It 'appears to be content to sit at home avoiding power and responsibility'
 If I were Norwegian I would probably take issue with this.

1) For a country with half the population of London, smaller than London it does alright. It has an enviable  standard of living (Its GDP is second highest in the world). It has a successful fishing industry,  it is high (6 in the world) on the Transparency (Corruption Index) index, the Economists Democracy Index has it No 1. So maybe a country to look at and learn from, making it significant.

2) Norway, unlike the UK takes part in things like the WTO, we are represented by the EU. Otherwise ist is a active participant in the following international organisations,
International organization participation: ADB (nonregional member), AfDB (nonregional member), Arctic Council, Australia Group, BIS, CBSS, CE, CERN, EAPC, EBRD, EFTA, ESA, FAO, FATF, IADB, IAEA, IBRD, ICAO, ICC, ICRM, IDA, IEA, IFAD, IFC, IFRCS, IGAD (partners), IHO, ILO, IMF, IMO, IMSO, Interpol, IOC, IOM, IPU, ISO, ITSO, ITU, ITUC, MIGA, MONUSCO, NATO, NC, NEA, NIB, NSG, OECD, OPCW, OSCE, Paris Club, PCA, Schengen Convention, UN, UNCTAD, UNESCO, UNHCR, UNIDO, UNITAR, UNMISS, UNRWA, UNTSO, UNWTO, UPU, WCO, WHO, WIPO, WMO, WTO, ZC
 3) Yesterday, Norway gave 350 of its servicemen medals for their involvement in the Afghan conflict. Norway is famous for it involvement in 25 separate peacekeeping operations since 1945. It was instrumental in various conflict for bringing about resolution, Sri Lanka for example.

So Hairy's contemptuous ignorance of the position of Norway is one thing. Her confusion about Britain is of a different dimension.

I wonder if she can explain what she means by this?
one of the second largest EU member states after Germany
Eh? One of the second? Not 'four of the second', or even 'the second', but 'one of the second?'

Because I cannot wrap my head around it.

This sort of stuff is risible,
Given that the UK economy is so tied up with the Eurozone and Britain gains considerably from the EU single market, being in or out of the Euro makes little difference economically.
So the ability to set interest rates is of little import? The ability to use various monetary tools to suit the situation faced by the UK is unimportant. So in which case why should we join?

She has no liking for this country of ours, no care for it, no concern for it and certainly no belief in it. Shame really.

No comments: