Is Hoon frit?

I haven't written about the I Want a Referendum campaign as of yet. An oversight on my part. Good luck to them.

What is very wierd is what has happened to their planned poll in the Labour seat of Aberconwy. Here is their press release of yesterday,

The Welsh I Want A Referendum campaign has today made the decision not to hold its referendum in the constituency of Aberconwy on the advice of the Labour Party Chief Whip who has informed the campaign that local MP Betty Williams has been very poorly.

I Want A Referendum UK Chairman Derek Scott said: “On the advice of the Chief Whip, we have decided not to hold the referendum in the Aberconwy constituency because Betty Williams has been very poorly, and are now looking at an alternative constituency in Wales where we hope to run the campaign through February. We wish Mrs Williams a very speedy recovery.”

The referendum on the revised EU Constitution is being staged in constituencies across the UK to give voters the chance to have their say on this key issue of democracy and the handing over of greater powers to Europe.

A deecn thing to do, but a significant hit on their resources. The money has already been spent on advertising and organisation. But fair enough. But what is this?
Betty Williams isn't ill at all. According to PA,

Her most recent bout of serious illness came when spinal surgery necessitated a spell in a wheelchair in 1998.
"But that was 10 years ago," she said.
"I'm perfectly healthy.

Seems a little like Labour black ops here.

Then we have the Hoon's treatment of the four Labour supporters of the campaign. Having giving a tongue lashing at a Labour backbench meeting, it appears that the four, Frank Field, Kate Hoey, Graham Stringer and Gisela Stuart are also to be carpetted by what a bunch of senior MPs called the PLP Committee. It looks as if they are to be Mr Brown's own 'whipless wonders'.

The EU as a concept and an ethos

In the Treaty debate Labour's Sir Stuart Bell (Middlesbrough) told the House today,

"We have not given any powers away to the European Union, we have pooled our sovereignty, we have pooled our competencies and we have done that in our national interests and in the interests of the EU as a concept and as an ethos."

What does he mean by this? If competancies are the powers to do stuff and we have pooled them then they are no longer ours by right therefore we have given away powers. Internally contradictory and logically flawed.

And what the hell is the EU as an ethos?

Another Labour figure to be revealed as having failed to register interests

Small birds tell me that a Privy Councillor will be busted as failing to reveal an interest in an industry recently given a great boost by goverment announcements.

Watch this space.

Britain to join the Euro This year?

Now here is a very interesting piece of speculation from Chris White of the Brussels newspaper EU Reporter.

But we have been tipped by a senior banker in Luxembourg that he economic crisis facing Europe “is bigger than anyone is prepared to admit”. “The banks are desperately short of money,” he added, referring of course to euro zone banks.

In short: the euro zone needs Britain. There couldn’t be a better selling point for a change of fiscal strategy than, coincidental, firstly with the arrival of the reform treaty as the EU constitution is now known – secondly with the onset of a campaign to put former British Prime Minister Tony Blair in the driving seat backed by Nicolas Sarkozy and Angela Merkel, the German Chancellor and the vision of former Chancellor Gordon Brown riding to the rescue of the euro. In a rather long-winded interview with the BBC’s Radio 4 Today programme recently Gordon Brown highlighted that the British economy was strong with a global reach while America was in recession and the euro zone unable to reduce interest rates because of galloping inflation.

This makes a fascinating backdrop for the highly controversial summit of the EU’s euro group made up of France, Germany, Italy and the UK to be held in London at the end of this month.It gets more interesting when, as we were told by the UK’s permanent representation to the EU, Chancellor Alistair Darling is “to host” a preliminary meeting in Paris the day after tomorrow January 17.

While the British media focus on the protests from other member states, particularly Guy Verhofstadt, the Belgian Prime Minister, at the ‘arrogance of four large member states’ meeting apart from the 23 other member states it is, perhaps, more interesting to consider the agenda. There isn’t one.

At least, the agenda, if fixed has not been announced. The official reason for the meetings is described as “in response to the global financial crisis how will we respond. It is also curious that no decision had been taken as late as tonight (Tuesday) on whether the President of the European Commission would be invited.

Chris Davies is one of the brighter British MEPs and he quickly changed his slant – if not his position – as we debated the issue with him. Keen to promote Britain’s membership of the euro he had done the research and highlighted the question of Gordon Brown’s five economic tests.

On the telephone to Strasbourg it was possible to sense Mr Davies’ brain whirring. He provided us with the five tests in a flash by email. They are:

Are business cycles and economic structures compatible with eurozone interest rates on a permanent basis?

If problems emerge is there sufficient flexibility to deal with them?

Would joining the euro create better condition for firms making long-term decision to invest in Britain?

What impact would entry into the euro have on the UK’s financial services industry?

Would joining the euro promote higher growth, stability and a lasting increase in jobs?

Well what about that then? The pound has dropped 10 percent against the euro surely making a switch more favourable? Leaving for the moment the second
question would joining the euro create better conditions for firms making long term decisions to invest in Britain? No company wants to invest in a country with volatile exchange rates. That one is a no brainer.

What impact would joining have on the UK’s financial services? EU legislation, introduced since the five tests were drawn up, allegedly in the back of a taxi by the then assistant to Brown Ed Balls, now govern all, or most aspects of financial services across Europe. The fifth question is subject to the fundamental reason for holding the Paris and London meetings in the first place. Both the UK and the eurozone are desperate to protect jobs and would be happy with simple, straightforward stability. But what of the second question?

Nicolas Sarkozy has been banging on recently about France having more control over EU interests rates and therefore over the European Central Bank. We have been reporting on this fundamental French position for ages but now the president has come clean.

The bank of England was given a questionable independence by Gordon Brown as Chancellor. As Chris Davies thoughtfully concluded: “Britain is the worlds fifth largest economy. If nothing else membership of the euro would put the UK within the world’s largest.”

He might have added that the UK has the second largest economy in Europe
after Germany. But as Gordon Brown said on the Today programme Germany has been, and still is, in recession.

Nicolas Sarkozy has famously told the French people to think like Anglo-Saxons and to speak English. France, as we have reported, is in a parlous economic state.

As we spoke Chris Davies suggested that opposition in the UK would be so huge that the idea we were presenting was fatuous. But then, professional that he is he pondered out loud on the telephone: “The Conservatives are fuzzy on the reform treaty. That issue has the Conservatives on the back foot. That issue has gone quiet. Gordon Brown needs some sort of fight. Joining the euro would take everyone’s mind off the constitutional issues.”

He disagrees that Tony Blair is favourite for the presidency citing Anders Fogh Rasmussen the former Danish Prime Minister as a more likely candidate. We
disagree. The EU may have changed but there is a long tradition of appointing candidates from large states to such new and important posts.

Besides, you don’t have to be an economist to ask where are the European banks and the eurozone economy without the fifth largest economy in the world. It would certainly suit New Labour to see Tony Blair, recently converted to Catholicism, as the first president of the EU and right now the negotiating chips are all in Gordon Brown’s pocket.

EU ID?

Admiral Lord West has given a definitive, but oddly confusing response to a question from Lord Pearson,

Lord Pearson of Rannoch (UKIP) Hansard source
asked Her Majesty's Government:
Whether they have held any discussions with other European Union member state Governments on the eventual introduction of a harmonised European Union identity card and registration system; and, if so, whether they support this proposal.

Lord West of Spithead (Parliamentary Under-Secretary (Security and Counter-terrorism), Home Office) Hansard source
We have held no such discussions as there is no proposal for a harmonised European Union identity card. Twenty four out of the 27 EU member states currently have their own national identity card schemes, and whether they issue identity cards to their own nationals is a matter for the individual member state.

In December 2005, during the United Kingdom presidency of the EU, a set of council conclusions was agreed on the minimum security standards for national identity cards issued by member states, but these are not binding on member states. The EU Lisbon treaty will bring the format of national identity cards within Community competence, such competence already existing in relation to the format of passports.

Which confuses chaps like me. Sentence one of the response is categorical. "There is no proposal for a harmonised European Union identity card". Phew we can all breath a sigh of relief, but hold on, what's this in the second paragraph?
So in answer to Pearson's question, are there plans, well yes there are, and not only that they were UK Government suggestions.

What is more the plans reside within the Constitution/Reform Treaty. That phrase 'Community competence' translates in Eurospeak as 'Exclusive power' as opposed to shared or national competence. So where does it say this in the Treaty? Article 63, part 3 tells us,

3. If action by the Union should prove necessary to facilitate the exercise of the right referred to in Article 17(2)(a), and if the Treaties have not provided the necessary powers, the Council, acting in accordance with a special legislative procedure, may adopt provisions concerning passports, identity cards, residence permits or any other such document. The Council shall act unanimously after consulting the European Parliament.

So what was agreed in Council under the auspices of Charles Clarke,

Common minimum security standards for national identity cards - Council conclusions
The Council adopted the following conclusions:
"Recognising the mandate given to Member States by the Hague Programme and the 13 July 2005 Justice and Home Affairs Council;
Recognising the importance of ensuring the security of travel and other identity documents;
Recognising that the mandate relates only to security standards, not to any domestic uses of national identity cards and that no legally binding standards or timetables
are being imposed;
Without prejudging the issue of the possible legal basis for a measure harmonising minimum security standards for national identity cards and without affecting the right of each Member State to decide whether or not to issue national identity cards and whether to use biometric identifiers;
Recognising the priority to be attached to compliance with the standards established by the European Union in Council Regulation (EC) 2252/2004 on passports, and the draft regulations amending legislation on visas and residence permits. These standards are a reference point for those to be developed for identity cards;
Building upon the work already done on security features for passports, and bearing in mind the need for interoperability based on ICAO standards;

The Member States of the European Union, working together on an intergovernmental basis:
1. Have decided to accept the following interim conclusions of the experts working in the Committee created by Article 6 of Council Regulation (EC) 1683/95, which will be followed by more detailed technical standards in due course:
• as regards the security features other than biometric identifiers: to use the same
minimum standards on materials to be used, ink, printing techniques, etc. as those
established for passports, adapted to the card form of the identity card; and
• as regards the biometric identifiers: to use as a starting point the technical
specifications established for the integration of biometrics in the passport in accordance with Regulation (EC) 2252/2004.
2. Have decided to work towards putting in place the following minimum standards relating to the security of issuing processes:
• applicants should appear in person at least once during the issuing procedure for identity cards;
• applications should be verified by authorised personnel against existing databases
which should be regularly updated, for example, civil registers, passport and
identity cards databases or driving licence registers;
• monitoring of the issuing process is recommended, including where processes are
carried out by sub-contractors, and this should include regular audits;
• in principle, no single member of staff should carry out every part of the issuing process for an individual; and
• secure storage, transport and transmitting of data and components of documents should be ensured.
3. Have decided to further their cooperation by exchanging information on a regular basis on their national practices, taking into account the experiences of Member States regarding electronic identity cards."

So when Admiral West talks of these things being voluntary he is right, today. But whether they will continue to be voluntary after the ratification of the Treaty I really cannot tell, but that ominous phrase 'Community Competence' suggests not.

Murphy's Law

The Guardian today has flagged up a speech to be made later at the LSE by the quisling Europe Minister, Jim Murphy. (Aside - and it must be my age showing, why must everything be reported as happening before it does, wouldn't it be an idea for the press to agree that for one day they will not report the news, in order that articles could get back into kilter with events. It would be rather good to open the paper, turn on the radio, whatever and receive the news that has happened, rather than a spun account of stuff that might happen. Too often the media swallow the spinners tales of forthcoming events only for us to discover later that so and so did not in fact say such and such at all. Of course by that time the news agenda has moved on to the next day's news that hasn't happened so no corrections are made and we are left none the wiser. But I digress).

The blithering numpty is starting his campaign to get the Constitution/Treaty ratified without reference to the people of our country. In it he makes a couple of ad hominem attacks on Eurosceptics (something that EU Referendum blog expands upon in full tilt, pointing out that the over egged complaints of many Eurosceptics allows the European institutional elite and their satraps to ignore the serious ones).

I will however look at the substance of Mr Murphy's claims,

"We rely heavy on membership of the EU single market of 480m consumers," he is expected to say. "More than 3m British jobs ... and 60% of our trade would be
directly affected. Foreign direct investment would also be hit".

Which is not what his Lord Malloch-Brown said on December 18th,

My Lords, we believe that 3 million jobs in the UK are linked directly and indirectly to the export of goods and services to the EU.

The difference is subtle but there. You see they are making the plainly ridiculous assumption that leaving the EU would mean that the countries of the EU would stop trading with us. Plainly mad, as the balance of payments for the third quarter of 2007 is the national statistics office puts it,

"A deficit of £11.8 billion was recorded with the EU compared with a deficit of £10.9 billion in the previous quarter".

What is also interesting is that Murphy has increased the amount of trade the Government believes is predicated on membership of the EU to be 60%. This is 5% more than only last month, (Malloch Brown again) ,

"Britain's trade with the European Union has grown from just over 40 per cent of
our total trade in 1973 when we joined to around 55 per cent today".

So by my maths we have £165 billion in credits and £185 billion in debits making a total trade of £340 billion, 5% of which is £17 billion. Thus what Murphy is claiming here is a £17 billion increase in trade with the EU in the last month.

I wonder what psychedelic hat he pulled that particular statistic from?

Then he makes a further claim,

"Nor would we get any regional funding from the EU (which totalled £10bn between 2000 and 2006)."

The the hell does he think that money comes from, Malta? That is our money which is given back to us, or at least some of it is given back to us.

The fellow tells us he wants a "mature debate", but if this his starter for 10 then he better do better than that. A collection of obfuscation, playground attacks and inventive statistics is not what I would describe as a "mature" starting point.

I see he has a page on his website called 'Politics for kids' well quite.

What on earth did she think?

Some wag sent me the link to the Amazon page for Oona King's memoires as a suggested Christmas present. Ho Ho Ho
But I foolishly glanced at the reviews and saw this,

"King describes the hell it is to be accountable to constituents. People recognise you in the supermarket and tell you their problems. She gets deluged with post".

God the pressures of office, I am not sure how she could cope. And what does this reviewer suggest that we the unwashed should do in the presence of our political masters?

"You learn from this book how to deal with MPs. Don't be tempted to tell them your problems, ask them what it's like in the House of Commons or advise them what needs to be done to save the country. People give them far too much importance, which is unfair. Just give them unqualified praise if it's appropriate, and seek to change your own world in the tiny ways you can".

I sometimes wish we could restrict the franchise.

Hate speech

The red mist descended as I read this little piece of ad hominem attack in the Telegraph on Saturday,

"David Hamilton, a Labour member of the Commons defence committee, said: "It's outrageous that a bunch of public schoolboys are attacking the Prime Minister when serving soldiers are fighting two wars.""

I will tell you what is outrageous. It is the use of undisguised class hatred to defend an incompetent government and a Prime Minister who treats the nation's service men and women with undisguised contempt.

Now some might disagree with the retired top brass's tactics, or even their deeper strategy, but to claim that these men, who have given their entire professional lives to the armed services are to be banned from commenting on the present parlous state of our armed services because they went to public schools is disgraceful.

Lets have a look shall we at the record of service of our public schools,

Admiral Lord Boyce went to Hurstpierpoint College,
Their roll of honour counts 114 men from the WWI alone,
Lord Guthrie went to Harrow school which lost 644 in WWI, 344 in WWII and won 19 VCs.
Air Marshall Lord Craig, went to Radley College,
WWI Killed: 219 Old Radleians, 7 teachers
Decorations: 1 VC, 57 DSOs, 2 DSCs, 117 MCs, 1 DFC and 4 AFCs
WW2 About 1800 were in the Services
Killed: 220 Old Radleians, 3 teachers
Decorations: 28 DSOs, 13 DSCs, 78 MCs, 24 DFCs, 6 AFCs, 239 mentioned in despatches, 1 GC
1945-2005
Killed: 4 (One in each of Korea, Cyprus, Northern Ireland and Falklands).
Lord Inge is an old boy of the Wrekin College which has 45 on its WWI memorial and 100 on its WWII memorial, and has this year unveiled a new memorial for those who have died since 1945

Mr Hamilton is a former miner whose proudest boast is that he was gaoled during the miner's strike. And pray sir, what gives you the right to denigrate the service and sacrifice of an entire class, a class whose casualty rate was the highest on the front because they understood what it means to lead from the front? You are not fit to lick their boots.

A final thought should go to one of the commentators on the Telegraph article,

"Tell David Hamilton that I'm not a public schoolboy; I'm not even a grammar schoolboy. In fact I went to a secondary modern and now I'm an Infantry Lieutenant Colonel serving in the Middle East who agrees with and supports everything that that so called "bunch of public schoolboys" is saying.

Your readers may be interested to learn that I met Mr Hamilton on visit he made to Afghanistan (I had to return to Kabul as our AOR was too dangerous for him). A more opinionated and ignorant man would I think have been difficult to find.
Give servicemen back the right to speak out freely and then you'll hear the truth.

Do they teach press officers maths?

Or at least Press Officers in the Department for Children, Schools and families.

In response to a DCFS report that shows that 1 in 10 children are now going to private schools, an unnamed departmental spokesman has said,

"the "overwhelming majority of pupils" - almost 93% - still attend state schools.
In terms of raw numbers, 2,000 fewer pupils were being taught in private schools, he said.
"The overwhelming majority of parents are clearly satisfied with the state education system," he said.
"New research from Keele University shows that nine out of 10 are happy with their children's schools.
"The state school system is continuing to deliver for parents, regardless of their wealth or background, with record results across the board."

They are clearly happy, where the hell has this prize idiot been? He obviously hasn't met a parent recently.
They are not happy, more like they have been taxed so hard by this blasted government that they cannot afford to escape to private education.

So there we have the authentic voice of Britain's elite today. If you are rich all shall be yours, if you are poor then you can have substandard public services and we will take your compliance with the system (enforced through penal or economic servitude) as your acquiescence.
A shower the lot of them.

Is Hain thick? Or merely dishonest

Peter Hain, the permatanned, boyo from South Africa has been off my radar for a while. After all it has been a while since he was wittering about how wonderful the EU Constitution. But today, today I am almost forced into the venerable community of swearbloggers by his astonishing claims.

"Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, Peter Hain today revealed that his commitment to see more people move from benefits into work was strengthened by seeing statistics from a number of countries around the world showing that being out of work is not only bad for the health and well being of parents, but of their children as well".

Well bend me over and fire pellets at my posterior.

"Since taking up this job, I have been shocked by the statistics I have seen about the impact that living in a household in which the parent or parents do not work. The notion that life without work - whatever the level of income through benefits - is a stress-free experience is not just wrong, it's dangerous".

No Mr Hain, people like you are dangerous.

"A study published in the British Medical Journal showed that the death rate from all external causes for children of parents classified as never having worked or as long term unemployed was 13.1 times that for children of professionals".
"Also the prevalence of psychiatric disorders among children in families whose parents have never worked is around five times greater than those with parents in professional occupations.
"And while overall the rates of deaths from injury and poisoning in children have fallen in England and Wales over the last 20 years, they have not for children in families in which no adult is in paid employment.
"This is shocking and underlines for me even more starkly why our crusade for full employment in our generation is so important".

And Mr Hain gets paid by the taxpayer! It took a study in the BMJ to wake him up to this basic fact of life. So how about making being unemployed just that little bit less of a lifestyle choice? Hows about cutting regulation on small businesses, rather than making employing people more expensive. If you really cared about the unemployed you would do something that would allow the market to employ more of them rather than tie its hands with increased costs and more and more absurd regulations. But no. What is it you plan to do?

Oh yes, increase the public sector, your client state. Further leaching off the wealth generating aspects of our country into the dead hand of intervention. Damn it, Mr Hain, but you are either thick, blind or dishonest. I have met you; I am sure you are not blind. I have heard you before; I am sure you are not stupid. So by a simple piece of deduction you must be dishonest.

Now where do I find a number for the local tumbril service?

It doesn't rain

According to an AP report out today from the AA's Insurance wing, the summer floods will have a serious impact upon premiums,

"The group said six months of weather related claims had finally taken their toll on home insurance premiums, with the floods in Yorkshire and the South Midlands costing the industry an estimated £3 billion.
The average cost of home buildings insurance rose by 3% to £215.51 during the three months to the end of September, the largest single increase since the group launched its index in 1994.
At the same time, home contents premiums increased by an average of 2% during the quarter to around £149.99.
John Close, insurer relations director at AA Insurance, said: "We now see the result of that devastation reflected in premiums as insurers meet the cost of drying out and repairing homes as well as temporary re-housing of families while their homes were made habitable once again".

They went on to say that the cost is estimated in insurance claims alone, to be £3 billion.

Strike one against the homeowner. Local councils then had to operate the clean up, and due to the EU's Landfill Directive they are raising a tax on the thousands of tons of rubbish that has had to be shovelled up.
As a result of flooding in Hull, 8,160 tonnes of 'flood damaged bulky item waste' was put into landfill. As it was deemed 'contaminated' it was unsuitable for reuse in any way.
The standard rate of tax is £24 per tonne, so we might assume taxation costs of £195,840.
The council has also pointed out that they also had heavy staffing costs.

The Government did, indeed offer assistance to councils, but the £14 million pledged across the country is a sticking plaster on a £ 3 billion sucking chest wound.
Thus water bills and council taxes will have to rise to cover the costs.
Strike two against the homeowner

And to grind peoples faces further in the mud we have this wheeze.

"PEOPLE who went to extraordinary lengths to help their communities during the summer floods are to be honoured with an official Government reception...
Prime Minister Gordon Brown expressed his support, saying: "I want to recognise and pay tribute to the magnificent people who helped their communities in response to the unprecedented floods earlier this year.
"I am proud to support this initiative to recognise our local flood heroes – people who inspire us all and who are among the thousands of Britain's everyday heroes."

So they will throw a cheese and wine party, while raking back hundreds of thousands of pounds in tax, due to a misapplied Euro Directive.

Out.

Faking it

UKIP TV are on the ball with this paeon to the James Purnell, Culture secretary who was airbrushed into history last week.

Lord Mandelson of Soho or 'Darling, do you think I look good in ermine?'

The Times reports today that Commissioner Mandeson will be enobled as part of Blair's post resignation honours. (Well put it this way he ain't getting a gong from Gordon).

A friend of Mandelson said: “It will be like an honorary title and he won’t get involved in the day-to-day workings of the House of Lords. He wouldn’t want to anyway. But I’d expect him to make an appearance when things get spicy. I don’t doubt it will be controversial.”

He will no doubt all those other former fonctinaries ofthe EU Institutions who speak and vote on EU related matters in the House of Lords without having to mention their financial remunerations (pensions) from those institutions, (Article 9, Para 2 pg 83)

"Where the official is in receipt of a retirement pension or an invalidity allowance, the Appointing Authority may decide to withhold an amount from the pension or the invalidity allowance for a given period;

but who are, by the EU's code of conduct required not to do anything which might damage the interests of the institutions, (Article 10 b, pg 83)

"The severity of the disciplinary penalties imposed shall be commensurate with the seriousness of the misconduct. To determine the seriousness of the misconduct and to decide upon the disciplinary penalty to be imposed, account shall be taken in particular of:
(b) the extent to which the misconduct adversely affects the integrity, reputation or interests of the institutions,

And what fun indeed he will have got into the Lords in time to talk and vote on the new Constitution. One of the "spicy" things his friend must have been referring to.

Four legs good, Two legs bad

Richard Corbett is, well how do I put this, a dull greying figure who has spent his life chasing through the intricacies of the Co-Decision procedures, the Comitology procedures, indeed the Parliament's rules of procedure.

He is also fanatically opposed to UKIP, running countless stories on his UKIP Watch blog and his own blog. Any failing, real or perceived by any UKIP member big or small is grist to his mill.

So it brings me great pleasure to out the wretched, dry-boned, Antwerp-dwelling, faux Yorkshireman for what he is a stinking, money-grubbing hypocrite.

You see the picture up there, it is our Richard and two of his chums, two very senior Parliamentary officials. The poster is an ad for their new book,

It came with this email,

"Dear All,

Tomorrow will be the launch of the 7th Edition of "The European Parliament". There will be a book signing by the authors next to the Forum Bar between 11am and 3pm and copies of the book will be on
sale.

Best Wishes,

Office of Richard Corbett MEP
Member of the European Parliament for Yorkshire and the Humber

The point is, and this is a point that Mr Corbett is well aware that any exhibition organised in the parliament is governed by ComArt rules. These rules forbid the sale of articles in the Parliament.
He is flogging the book hard - the entire Parliament has been spammed three times about his precious book (I must point out that the book is an invaluable guide to the Parliament) and he is personally making money out of breaking the rules. I do not know if there is a special clause saying - 'No sales in Parliament (expect for notorious federasts)', maybe there is. But at the very least this breathtaking hypocricy.