Sunday, 30 November 2008


Damian Green MP, arrested by police.
This Damian Green affair has certainly created quite a hullabaloo in certain circles, and exposed the betrayal of our system of Governance.

To start with, the whole furor began when the Tory MP was arrested for passing on leaked information to the press, and as Richard North on the EU Referendum blog HERE, HERE, and HERE, has not hesitated to remind us, that had this generally 'wet' MP who is not known for any form of radicalism, used this leaked information to ask some difficult questions in Parliament, he would have been protected by his Parliamentary privilege - the press and media could then have published the information as they would have been reporting events in Parliament.  But it did not happen like that.

This whole affair has revealed that if a Member of Parliament feels it is more expedient to pass on information directly to the press, rather than use his Parliamentary privilege, then there must be something seriously wrong with Parliament and its authority if its members now feel it is not the place to debate and raise matters of concern.

Another serious matter, and one that has really got our MPs in a flap, are the alleged actions of the Commons Speaker, Michael Martin, commonly referred to as "Gorbals Mick",  whose duty it is to protect Parliamentary privileges and the interests of all the MPs of all political persuasions.  When he gave consent to the police to search and confiscate documents and notes from the office of Damian Green MP, as is claimed, then he himself broke the code of conduct and a long standing custom that the Speaker remains impartial.  MPs of all the political parties in the House of Commons feel let down by Speaker Martin and that he is no longer willing to protect them, as is his duty.

Now fancy that, MPs in an uproar because the person whose duty it is to defend their interests and protect them has abandoned them.  Before they start ranting and raving too much, maybe they should do a little reflection about their role and place in the order of things.

They in turn are voted into office by the people who put them into Parliament to, guess what?  Er - um, protect the interests of those who voted for them of course.  This, over our many sad years of EU enslavement, is a principle they themselves have either forgotten about or abandoned, being in Parliament for many of them is a nice way of life with lots of perks, so they would rather not rock the boat, just do as their political masters say and bugger the people.

Their masters, who in turn have been elected and placed into high office, also do not want to rock the boat, and they, as the lower ranks do, obey their masters in the EU and again it's a case of bugger the people, who have well and truly been abandoned by their elected representatives and are no longer protected by them against the foreign power of the EU.

But oh deary me when the same thing happens to them.  There is a great gnashing of teeth and the wailing of tormented political souls - as they bleat that those who are supposed to protect us have abandoned us to the mercy of the police.  Well, it's about time they learned what it is really like to be let down by those you expect to protect you, we have been having to put up with this sort of betrayal since 1973.  The chain of defence has been well and truly broken.


Derek Bennett and the Euro Realist newsletter.
There is a ritual in the Bennett household that has been going on since 1997, the last Sunday of every month is newsletter day.  That is the day given over to copying, stapling, stuffing and labeling and stamping the paper version of the Euro Realist newsletter ready for posting.

Each month, starting in the afternoon after a pint in the pub and a bite to eat, we get get down to the serious business of working on the newsletter which takes most of the afternoon and is usually done by early evening.

So this Sunday there will not be much blogging, but look out for the December edition of the Euro Realist in the sidebar from tomorrow.  In the meantime, here is something on the EU Referendum blog for you to have a look at.

Saturday, 29 November 2008


Nigel Farage campaigning at the Rally for a Referendum outside Parliament.

UKIP leader Nigel Farage MEP has raised further fears of Britain's slide towards a police state over the arrest of Tory immigration spokesman Damian Green.

In an action that looks more appropriate to the bad old days of the Soviet Union than a modern liberal democracy, the Metropolitan Police used counter-terrorism officers to raid Mr Green's homes and offices and to hold him for nine hours on suspicion of "conspiring to commit misconduct in a public office" and "aiding and abetting, counselling or procuring misconduct in a public office".

Their excuse was a call from the Home Office to investigate the leaking of sensitive information revealing that the government knew about the employment of illegal immigrants and that Home Secretary Jacqui Smith had warned the Prime Minister of a possible rise in crime during a recession.

A junior official at the Home Office was suspended from duty and arrested on 19 November but was subsequently released on bail without charge.

Nigel Farage said: "When the police start arresting politicians for doing their job then we're well down the path to a police state.

"Finding out what the government doesn't want you to know they're doing is the very job of an opposition politician."

The arrest of an MP and the raiding of his offices is unprecedented in the investigation of government leaks.

It is well known that opposition MPs often rely on the leaking of information embarrassing to the government of the day and though there have been many inquiries, the police have rarely been involved and internal investigations have usually ended with the officials thought to have been responsible for the leaks. Even then, successful prosecutions in such cases have been very few.

The government has denied being involved in the arrest of Mr Green. However, it begins to look sinister alongside the steady increase in public surveillance over the past 10 years and Labour's apparently insatiable appetite for collecting information on citizens, together with its planned introduction of ID cards.

The police action has been justified on the basis of a little-known common law statute. But what does it say about Britain today when newspaper headlines might read "Opposition spokesman arrested"?


Anthony Coughlan of the National Platform in Ireland.
The letter below is being sent today to all Irish Deputies  and Senators in connection with the proposal to re-run the Lisbon Referendum  in order to get a different result.

It is accompanied by copies of the two submissions made to the Oireachtas Sub-Committee on Ireland's Future in the EU  by Anthony Coughlan  on behalf of this organisation  

The National Platform EU Research and Information Centre
24 Crawford Avenue
Dublin 9

Tel.:  00-353-1-8305792

Thursday 27 November 2008

Dear Deputy/Senator,
The top officials in Foreign Affairs sold Taoiseach Brian Cowen and Minister Micheal Martin a pup when they persuaded them on the morning of the Lisbon referendum count last June that they should not respect the people's democratic vote by accepting that Ireland could not ratify Lisbon because the voters had rejected it.

That would have been the end of Lisbon and opened the way to a better Treaty. 

Instead the Government urged its EU partners to continue with their ratifications on the assumption that Ireland would re-run the referendum, overturn the June result and so enable Lisbon to come into force for all 27 EU States, without the slightest change being made to the Treaty text. 

Since then the Taoiseach has worked with the other EU Prime Ministers and Presidents to isolate Ireland with a view to imposing on the Irish people and the peoples of the other EU countries the EU Constitution which was rejected in 2005 by the peoples of France and Holland, and which the Lisbon Treaty brings into being indirectly. 

A second Lisbon referendum must be on exactly the same Treaty as the first.   If Lisbon is altered  in any way it becomes legally a new Treaty which must be ratified  again from scratch by all 27 EU States.  The same must happen with any proposed new Treaty Protocols. 

Unlike Protocols, which are legally parts of treaties,  Declarations and Decisions are  mere political statements that would not change the legal text of Lisbon one iota. 

Their sole purpose would be to deceive people into thinking that the Treaty has been changed to reflect their concerns and to justify the democratic outrage of re-running the referendum to reverse last June's result.
If Taoiseach Cowen should fail in such a re-run, he would have to resign and his Government may be forced to go to the country in  an election.

Fine Gael knows this and will be anxious to encourage Fianna Fail on this course of folly.  While Fine Gael's leaders will back a referendum re-run, they will calculate the political fall-out of a second Government defeat.

If the Government should succeed in ratifying Lisbon and turning Ireland into a region of an EU Federation whose Constitution would have primacy thereafter over the Irish Constitution, it will destroy the historical legitimacy of the Fianna Fail Party and open the way to new movements in coming years to re-establish Irish national democracy and independence.

The EU Prime Ministers and Presidents should not seek to impose this Lisbon Constitution on the peoples of our continent against their wishes and by denying them referendums on it, as they agreed privately among themselves to do.   Its rejection by the peoples of France, Holland and Ireland should be sufficient to show them that Europe's peoples do not want it.       
The prudent course now for Ireland and the EU as a whole is to delay ratification of Lisbon until a UK general election, which would give the people of Britain and our fellow countrymen and women in Northern Ireland the chance to vote on this hugely important Treaty.

If Lisbon has not come into force before the UK election an incoming Conservative administration will be committed to putting  Britain's ratification of the Treaty on ice, holding a referendum on it in the UK and  recommending a No vote to it. That would give the people of another EU country the chance to vote on Lisbon, who would certainly reject it too, while the EU continues in being on the basis of the current Nice Treaty. 
Ireland can keep a permanent Commissioner under the Nice Treaty by the simple expedient of the EU Prime Ministers and Presidents agreeing to reduce the number of Commissioners from 27 to 26 and allowing the High Representative for EU Foreign and Security Policy to attend meetings of the Commission on behalf of the country whose national holds that office, currently Spain. 

This is the course that will be adopted if Lisbon remains unratified.  It is wrong therefore to suggest that we need Lisbon in order to keep a permanent Irish Commissioner.

What Europe really needs is a more democratic, more accountable and less centralised EU, based on a short slimmed-down Treaty that all can read and understand.

We do not need the Lisbon-based EU in which 15 States can out-vote and make laws for 12 as long as the 15 contain 65% of the EU's total population. This power-grab by the Big States would double Germany's relative voting weight in making EU laws from its present 8% to 17%, increase France's from 8% to 13% and increase Britain's and Italy's from 8% to 12% each, while halving Ireland's vote from 2% to 0.8%

The EU does not need a Treaty which provides that Ireland and other EU States will lose the right to decide who their national Commissioner is - their present right to "propose" and decide being replaced under Lisbon by a right to make "suggestions" only, for the incoming Commission President to decide, in whose appointment the votes of the  Big  States will be decisive. 

What is the point of Ireland being promised a Commissioner permanently under Lisbon if the Irish Government can no longer decide who he or she will be?  Under the preent Nice Treaty such a change would not occur. 

How can it be democratic to impose the Constitution of an EU Federation, separate from and superior to its Member States and run on most undemocratic lines, on 500 million Europeans, without allowing them a say in such a constitutional revolution by means of referendums? 

This would turn  their countries into provinces inside such a Federation and turn themselves into real citizens of a post-Lisbon EU, with  European citizens' rights and duties that would be superior to their rights and duties vis-à-vis their National Constitutions and States.

Enclosed for your information are two submissions made to the Oireachtas Sub-Committee on Ireland's Future in the EU on behalf of this EU Research and Information Centre.  They show why Lisbon is a bad Treaty for both Ireland and the EU. They also show the way to a changed, more democratic EU, which is the kind of EU the peoples of Europe want.

We appeal to you to oppose any Lisbon referendum re-run.  If the Government is so foolish as to press ahead with that, we urge you to do all you can to defeat it, for Ireland's sake and Europe's.
We call on all genuine democrats who voted "Yes" last June to  raise their voices against the democratic outrage now being planned.    

Yours faithfully
Anthony Coughlan


Peter Roberts of the Drivers Alliance comments on the Ofcom ruling.
Ofcom has delivered a knock-out blow to the aspirations of Manchester’s authorities hoping to introduce the world’s largest congestion charging zone.
In a ruling today, Ofcom ruled against an advert sponsored and paid for by the DfT and local authorities in Manchester saying:
“The advertisement was therefore in breach of Section 4(b) of the TV Advertising Code.”1
Peter Roberts of the Drivers’ Alliance said:
“It is clear from Ofcom’s ruling that the voters of Manchester have been fed nothing less than propaganda by their councils and the Department for Transport. This advert and the information on which it was based were paid for by the taxpayer are now proven to be biased and designed to elicit a vote in favour of the scheme.
How can the voting public retain any trust in those behind the referendum and TIF bid when they have sought to manipulate the result through propaganda and misleading advertising.
The ballot must still go ahead, and we urge the people of Greater Manchester to vote NO.”

Friday, 28 November 2008


Impoverished Bulgarian pensioners protesting.
I picked this snippet up from the Daily Telegraph a couple of days ago and have only just got around to mentioning it.

The whole idea and concept of the European Union is one of the noble idea of the richer member nations helping out their poorer European neighbours. However, of course, it don’t work like that and when adding in the real underlying reason for this virtuous edifice, which is the creation of one massive new nation called Europe, what is left can best be described as an unmitigated mess.

It’s sea of corruption and vested interests, it has created a Europe of ‘me first’ nations and has never taken into account human nature and the fact that opportunists and scallywags will get in there and take liberties with the EU’s grand ideals.

The poorest nation in Europe is Bulgaria, and if the EU was working to its principles it should be receiving EU funds to help improve the lives of its poorest people, of which there are a lot in Bulgaria, including their pensioners as seen protesting above. But of course, as mentioned, it don’t work like that. The problem is EU money in Bulgaria, which was never noted for its honest ways, has been vanishing into black holes, and no doubt a number of corrupt pockets.

Because of these “widespread spending irregularities”, the EU has decided to strip Bulgaria of £187 million in EU funding and unless the Bulgarian government does not sort out these problems of corruption and organised crime, the EU has threatened to remove £289 million of aid next year.

Considering the UK, along with Germany, is one of the EU’s largest net contributors, British taxpayers who are currently struggling to make ends meet, or get life saving drugs on the NHS, and whose pensioners are living in an increased state of poverty, are paying for this Mafia corruption and widespread losses in the EU and for our money to just vanish.

Ok, so the EU thinks it has Bulgaria sorted, now what about all those other EU-wide scams and widespread losses? All this amounts to yet another, of the many, many reasons why we would be much, much better off out of the EU.


Elizabeth Hazell, gave it her best shot.

Fighting elections in large metropolitan areas is never an easy task for UKIP, but on Thursday 27th November, UKIP activist Elizabeth Hazell, known as Liz to her family and friends, gave it her best shot in the by-election which was held in the Birchills Leamore Ward in Walsall.

In what can only be described as a crushing defeat by the Tory campaigning tank in the borough, Labour’s candidate, Richard Worrall, lost one of Walsall’s safest Labour wards to the Conservative candidate, Kamram Afteb.

Ex Councillor Worrall (he’s the one with the funny hat!), whose endless array of letters constantly blight the letters pages of the local free press with his unwanted opinions on just about everything, seems to be making a habit of loosing elections.

He lost his Council seat in the St Matthews ward, which used to be a Labour seat and is now Tory. He tried to regain it but failed, so he moved on to Brownhills, where he then lost another two elections, moved back to St Matthews and lost again – twice – and now this fiasco. He really is making a habit of losing once safe Labour wards, he should be renamed as the Jonah of the Labour Party in Walsall.

Our UKIP team put in a valiant effort, every house received a UKIP election address from Liz, but elections are seldom fair or reflect all the hard work and effort put in by the campaigners. The Tories went out hard for this ward, and their work paid off, but it seems unfair that the BNP, which is not the most savoury of political parties, got 9o votes to Liz’s 52. They didn’t even seem to get their act together until the tail end of the campaign. I think people hold their noses and vote BNP on the basis they are the nastiest party they can find just to shock the three main parties – I can think of no other reason unless they are out and out racists.

One interesting point which Liz commented on was that the predominately white area of the Beachdale Estate only saw just over 270 people voting, for a large estate that is truly dreadful. The majority of the votes came from the mostly Asian Birchills area, and the Conservative candidate was Asian, so you have to hand it to the local Tories for playing such a canny game. And to Liz, bad luck, there is always next time.

The big question now for the Walsall UKIP campaigners is, shall we do this again when the next by-election comes along in Rushall Shelfield due to the sudden, and very sad death of the well liked Councillor, Cath Mikklewright?

The results of the by-election were:
Kamran Aftab (Conservative) 764
Richard Worrall (Labour) 661
Malcolm Moore (BNP) 90
Christine Cockayne (Liberal Democrat) 72
Alan Davies (Democratic Labour) 69
Elizabeth Hazell (UKIP) 52
Paul Booker (Green) 34
The voter turnout was 19.6%

View the Walsall MBC WEB-SITE posting of this by-election.


Jeffrey Titford MEP, comments on milk and egg prices in the EU.
The third Agriculture and Fisheries Council of the French EU presidency convened in Luxembourg on 27 and 28 October.  Topics under discussion included the CAP health check, milk quotas, the illegal timber trade, a school fruit distribution scheme and the European Commission’s Green Paper on agricultural product quality.
Milk quotas are a particularly hot topic with more than 500 milk producers from Belgium, France, Germany and Luxembourg itself having taken part in a major demonstration outside the Council meeting.  Under the CAP health check, it is proposed that there should be a 1% increase in quota per annum until 2014, when the quota system should be scrapped altogether.
The European Milk Board, the organisers of the protest believes that the proposals are too far reaching and is arguing for the retention of quotas after 2015.  The present situation, they say, is leading to a collapse of the market brought about by “organised over-production”.  Most agriculture ministers are thought to support the phasing out of quotas but there is a possibility that some member states may be allowed a degree of flexibility.
Milk prices are low and have been a particular problem in Germany, where farmers made a protest over the summer by dumping most of their milk output down drains or onto their fields.  They even took to mailing parcels of milk to Agriculture Commissioner, Marian Fischer Boel.  After receiving 1900 such parcels, Ms Fischer Boel waved the white flag and issued a statement advising the farmers that their concerns were being taken seriously.  However, when push came to shove and German dairy farmers asked for £236 million to offset low prices and soaring production levels, she firmly said No.
This seems to be yet another area of agriculture of which the EU is making a real pig’s breakfast, with farmers at the sharp end once again suffering the worst of it.
Nanny State
With its nanny state hat on, the Commission is also planning to introduce an EU wide scheme to provide free fruit and vegetables to school children.  The proposal would allocate some £71 million per annum for the purchase of fresh fruit and vegetables for schools in those member states that choose to adopt the programme.  The government in each state would have to match the money spent by the Commission from national funds.   Britain may not take part in this scheme as our Government dislikes match funding.
People tend to forget that it is the member states that fund the EU, so match funding in effect means paying twice for the scheme.  Fruit producers in this country could miss out on this bonanza.  However, if we did take part, has anyone given any thought as to the way this proposal would distort the market?   No doubt there are many producers of fresh fruit and vegetables already supplying schools who face the loss of a major customer overnight, unless they can get a piece of the action, which is probably unlikely as the EU tends to be dominated by big business which will no doubt want the lion’s share of this project.
Will the scheme allow farmers to supply their own country’s needs?  No doubt it will all have to go out to tender and, in this country, we would have a competitive situation with Continental farmers who don’t have such a heavily regulated agriculture sector.
However laudable the expressed intent of the scheme, it is another extension of the power and role of the EU in how we run our country.  It now wants control of what our children eat.  It has been my experience, having brought up four children and an ever growing number of grandchildren, that the more you try to encourage a child to do something, such as eat fruit and vegetables, which they instinctively don’t like, the more they resist.   This truism of child development could render the whole project rather counter-productive.
Telling Granny what to do
The Commission’s Green paper on agricultural product quality seeks to open debate through a consultation about how to help farmers to make the most of the quality of the food and drink they produce.  The Green paper is divided into three sections dealing with:
1. Baseline production requirements and marketing standards.
2. Specific EU quality schemes such as geographical indications, traditional specialities and organic farming.
3. Food quality certification schemes.
The consultation period lasts until the end of 2008, which seems a suspiciously short period of time.  The whole thing sounds like an expensive exercise in telling granny how to suck eggs.
The European Parliament will tackle the CAP health check and all the deliberations of the Agriculture and Fisheries Council next month.  I can hardly wait!

Thursday, 27 November 2008



It is hard to believe that Woolworth, which is almost a shopping institution, has collapsed is an early victim of this dreadful recession.  

Many people of slightly more mature years, including myself, will remember being dragged around 'Woolies' as we all called it by our mothers.  We remember it old wooden flooring and its cafeteria where we were always taken for a cup of tea and a bun.  As a teenager going to school in central Birmingham one of my delights at the end of a school day was to head straight for the Woolies store in New Street and by a quarter pound of warm Sun Pat peanuts, which would be put into a paper bag.  I would then sit on the bus on my way home stuffing my face and by the time I got to Walsall all that would be left was a greasy paper bag.

Surely Woolworths can't have gone under?  Is there no justice in the world?  How come the greedy banks which brought about their own downfall get bailed out with van loads of taxpayers money, while a national icon such as Woolies, is left to its fate?  This is not right, and what is our Government doing about it?  Still pandering to the EU is the answer.

Wednesday, 26 November 2008


Shami Chakrebarti of Liberty.
Remember Tuesday 25th November 2009, imprint that date upon your memory for all time because historically it is important, it is a day of utter shame for our nation, a day when Britain ceased to be a civilised nation - so remember it well.

While most people will remember these days for the financial turmoil that has been going on all around us, while many reporters and historians will be recording the fact that this current Labour administration has placed Britain in the deepest mire of debt it has ever known, it should most importantly be remembered as the day Britain ceased to be a free liberal democracy and became a police state.

Yes, this was the day when Britain's first non-wartime I.D. cards were introduced for a whole tranche of the population.  It may be subtle, it may be for a section of society that many British people would not be too bothered about, but the introduction of I.D. cards for foreign students, foreign residence and foreigners who marry British subjects will all be issued with, and expected to carry, an I.D. card.  For this section of society there is no freedom and no liberty, and soon these measures will creep into the lives of those born here too.  When that happens the Government will be in total control over all of our lives.

As pointed out in a letter to the Daily Telegraph, Tuesday 25th November, a whole raft of libertarians who were signatory's to this letter, including Shami Chakrabarti of Liberty, pointed out the harm these I.D. cards will do.  They predict a lot of influential Americans who come to live and spend time here, will have any incentive to reside here removed, and they will upsticks and go, they will return to where they are valued, taking their money and artistic influence with them.

This truly is a sad day, sad to know we have such a brutal Government who has set its mind on destroying our freedom and liberty, sad to know that there is an army of civil servants prepared to work on this method of destroying our freedom, and sad to know that we have become the equivalent of a banana republic with the people being watched and monitored and up to its eyes in debt.

Tuesday, 25 November 2008


Derek Bennett receiving his 1st prize award for his fireplace design 1990.
Time has been really short today due to me having to drive to Peterborough and pick up 60,000 UKIP newspapers for distribution in the West Midlands (that will keep our UKIP activists out of the pub for an afternoon!), then off to a UKIP meeting in Stafford, leaving no chance for blogging.

However, five minutes of my time before I put my head on the pillow and wander off to the land of Nod.  So, the big story is the cut in V.A.T. from 17.5% to 15%, big deal- do they really expect this to save the nation from the fiscal crash that is going on all around us?

The topic of V.A.T. was the very thing sat set me on course to become a confirmed EU-sceptic and anti-EU campaigner.  If you remember, at the end of 1990, when the treacherous Europhile element in the Conservative Party set about destroying Margaret Thatcher and one of the best Prime Ministers of the twentieth century, after she was ousted and the dull, grey John Major enthroned, a short time after to get rid of the the unloved Poll Tax the Major Government introduced the Council Tax at a much lower rate, but increased V.A.T. to 17.5% from 15% - slap bang in the middle of a recession which was created because we had joined the Exchange Rate Mechanism, which was in readiness for the euro.

At the time I was running our small family fireplace business which was really struggling to survive the recession, so I wrote to the Chancellor requesting V.A.T. should be reduced, not increased and suggested taking it down to 8% or 10% to give us a chance.  When I was told 15% was the lowest the EU would allow that set me off on a long EU-sceptic path that has led to me standing in elections and the writing of this blog all these years later.

This then, is the very innocuous nature of our EU membership.  The Government has lauded the fact V.A.T. has been cut to help or struggling businesses, but in reality it is no where near enough but he is not allowed by our EU unelected masters to take it to a more sensible level, or even get rid of it for a much fairer system of purchase tax, nor does he dare mention the fact he is stymied by the EU.  In fact his announcement to save the UK from the effects of the global recession was a sham and will do little, if nothing at all, for the benefit of the British people as the EU will not allow it.

In fact he has increased petrol taxes, which will hit the poorest the hardest.  Drivers Alliance have written a little about this.

Monday, 24 November 2008


Derek Bennett, the Euro Realist editor, describes his perfect Prime Minister.
Sunday used to be a day of rest, but these days Sundays for many are no longer a special day. The stores and supermarkets are open and people are rushing around as much as any normal weekday, and I have been out campaigning in the Local bye-election and have not had time to do any blogging.  So, to compensate here's an article I wrote earlier in the Euro Realist newsletter describing my perfect Prime Minister.  Do you have any comments on this subject too?

Gordon Brown had been drooling over the possibility of being the Prime Minster of this fair land since he and Blair stitched things up in the early nineties, when they infamously dined in the trendy Granita restaurant. From then on he spent all those years brooding behind the Chancellor’s door at No 11 Downing Street waiting for his moment, and when it came what happened? It all went pear shaped.

After just over a year in the post he had so desired, long waited for and drooled over, he is now one of the most disliked Prime Ministers of the last hundred years. People see him as dull, out of touch with what is relevant in their lives, and of course, they bear a lot of grudges regarding many of the things he did as the Chancellor of the Exchequer. It was he, after all, who did a state assisted Robert Maxwell when he plundered our pensions, he created no end of stealth taxes and then posed a “prudence” itself - but now the chickens are coming home to roost.

Teflon Tony got out just at the right time. His ten years in office may have looked good, but appearances can be deceptive. Like a slick car salesman he sold Gordon Brown what looked like a nice shiny, fully working motor car, but when you inspected the paintwork and under the bonnet, there lay a clapped out engine and a rust riddled body. Gordon Brown looks like the Prime Minister left in the lurch and the looser he is.

When you rummage back through history there have been some Prime Ministers with exceptional qualities, and some who miraculously turned up at exactly the right time just as the nation needed their particular skills. What would have been the outcome of the Second World War without Churchill? There have also been some who, like Blair, will be remembered for what they said rather than what they did. Harold Wilson falls among this category - he of the “White heat of technology” who then caved into the backward and labour intensive ways of the trade union movement who dominated the way the country was run. There was also Harold Macmillan who had the added bonus of being a lucky Prime Minister by being in No10 at the right time. It was he who told us “We have never had it so good” back in the 1950's - those balmy days of half a century ago were a good time to be alive in Britain. We had won a war, our factories were in full production, unemployment was low and ordinary people were beginning to enjoy all the things once reserved for the privileged. People were buying their own homes, cars, fridges. T.V's and all sorts of other items they once never thought they could own. The problems were the loss of our wealth, which had been sacrificed to defeat Fascism, and also the loss of our Empire which had created that wealth - hence our attraction to the increasingly tempting Common Market.

The PM’s that followed those heady days of the 1950's all looked to the Common Market as the future. Harold Wilson began the conversion from imperial to metric to show willing to get us in, but it was Heath, who had been Macmillan's chief negotiator in earlier times, who sadly succeeded where others had failed. From that fateful day our freedom, and all that was given during two world wars, was lost.

What would have happened if instead we had not had, Heath, Wilson, or anyone else during those vulnerable years when we had won a war and lost our place in the world, but someone with foresight and vision, a person whose loyalty to the nation was without question and could visualise a rebuilt Britain proud, happy and committed to its long standing friends and allies in the Commonwealth - what if we had elected the perfect PM? Does such a person exist, and what would qualify someone to be our perfect PM?

Of late, watching the rise of David Cameron's star, the sinking of Gordon Brown’s ship and the sheer incompetence of Calamity Clegg's increasingly inconsequential Liberal Democratic Party, I have been wondering what is needed for someone to make a perfect Prime Minister. It would certainly not be from the C.V's of the three above named gentlemen. So, what is the criteria? Should the perfect Prime Minister be male or female? Should they be black, white, Asian or of some other ethnic background? Should even their sexuality come into it? In reality those things should not matter, there are other more important priorities.

To me the perfect PM should have one priority above all else, that is to serve the country, the people of Britain and our Monarch. That person should always put the interests of our country first and to that end would be willing to work tirelessly and, possibly, for little reward.

The perfect PM should put substance before spin, I always thought (in my dreams) that if by some fluke I found myself as the PM, I would have considered myself a huge success if people only vaguely recognised me. That would mean I had not interfered in their lives and they would have had greater freedom to live the way they wanted without state interference. Sadly, these days Prime Ministers and others of the political elite don't think like that, to them they are only being successful if they are making new laws, changing legislation and dominating how we live - that is not freedom - it's oppression.

The perfect PM should take great pleasure from having low tax returns allowing people to keep more of the benefits of their labours. It should be up to them how they dispose of their incomes, not for the state to remove substantial sums of their earnings to squander on grand projects. A perfect PM would want smaller Government.

What other attributes should a perfect PM have? He/she should be at ease with people from all parts of life. That person should not have to look down on anyone, nor have to grovel to a higher authority - although the PM should always show respect for the Monarch. The perfect PM should be a good negotiator and have an eye for opportunities, that person should also be willing and capable of forging alliances with other nations globally, but should never forget the most important thing of all - the matters taking place in the UK. Sadly, too many Prime Ministers get carried away with creating an image of being a world statesman and forget who it is they are there to represent - which is the British people.

The perfect PM should have not only a kind and generous nature, but a ruthless one too. Sadly, the mantle of leadership brings unpleasant duties with it, being squeamish is a luxury a leader cannot afford. As Churchill once stated: “An iron fist in a velvet glove”.

The perfect PM should have a great knowledge and respect for our history, for the things that made us what we are today. Our traditions and way of life should be sacrosanct and put above petty bureaucracy and political correctness. Tony Blair and his New Labour cronies hated our past and our traditions. In the years since 1997 our Parliamentary democracy and constitution has come under constant attack from the people whose duty it was to protect them. The treasonous push to remove the oath of allegiance to the Monarch is part of that sustained attack.

There is one last enduring quality that my perfect PM should possess, that is loyalty to this country, to its people and those who serve. Any PM with those attributes would never, ever, consider enslaving this country to binding treaties made on foreign soil in the interests of foreign ambitions - no PM who cares for this country would have ever signed us up to the Common Market, allowed it to take gradual control over our lives or given it the power to override our laws and customs. No Prime Minister worth his/her salt would have ever considered signing up to the EU constitution or the Lisbon Treaty as did Brown. Sadly, since Ted Heath, every single Prime Minister has done all the things a perfect PM would never do. The only conclusion I can come to - not one of our Prime Ministers over the last half century has been perfect.

Who would be your perfect PM, is that person a Member of Parliament, in industry, local politics or someone you know - any thoughts?

Sunday, 23 November 2008


'I believe that banking institutions are more dangerous to our liberties than standing armies. If the American people ever allow private banks to control the issue of their currency, first by inflation, then by deflation, the banks and corporations that will grow up around the banks will deprive the people of all property until their children wake-up homeless on the continent their fathers conquered.' Thomas Jefferson 1802

Saturday, 22 November 2008


Ever been to Malta, that rocky little outcrop in the Mediterranean between the toe of Italy and North Africa? If you have, or ever get the chance, you will soon find out that everyone there speaks perfect English, they also have their own Maltese newspapers published in English too. Added to that, they all speak Italian as well. You really have to hand it to the Maltese as they are proficient in three languages – Maltese, English and Italian, a good number of them speak other languages too. Yet here in the UK, half of Britain’s ‘yoof’ struggle to speak their own language, let alone any others.

This has just reminded me of a joke about a blonde who wanted to learn to speak Spanish in an afternoon. When the language school told her this was impossible, she burst into tears and said: “I’m going to Benidorm tomorrow, what am I going to do?” She was told not to worry as most Spanish spoke English, all she needed to do was to speak s-l-o-w-l-y and she would be ok.

She gets off the plane and heads for the bar. Seeing a blonde barmaid she says very slowly : “Helloo---nice---day---innit.” The blonde barmaid replied: “Yes -- wot – can -- I -- get—yer?” I’ll – ‘ave – a Babysham – ta.” She replied. The barmaid said: “That’s – my – favourite – drink – too.” The Blonde asked: “Where – do – you – come – from – then?” The barmaid replied: “Birmingham” To which the blonde saiad: “Oim – from – Birmingham – too, -- so – what – are – we – dooin’ – speaking – Sannish?!!”

Yes I know, that joke’s a bit tortuous, but whatever sort of mangled English you speak, it’s generally understood wherever you go, not just on the continent of Europe, but the whole world too.

So, getting to the point, why is it that the great and glorious bastion of European integration, that vast and wonderful melting pot of European unity, has to have a multitude of translators in the European Parliament, even for some of Europe’s more obscure languages such as Gaelic, despite the fact the Irish all speak English anyway?

The 27 member nation EU has officially recognised, and translates, 23 languages. This does not just involve 23 translators, there has to be a translator for each language to another language. So, there has to be a translator from French to German, French to Spanish, French to English and so on. Then there has tobe translators from German to Spanish, German to English, German to Welsh – yes, I did say German to Welsh, as the EU has now just agreed to translate speeches into the Welsh language too, although it has not been classed as an official language.

When you actually start to look at the numbers and the vast array of combinations of translations, the EU has to have a vast army of translators at its disposal at enormous cost to the taxpayers, who are paying for this multi-lingual farce.

So, as just mentioned, Welsh is now the latest language which will need transaltion, and the Welsh Assembly have confirmed that its Welsh language translators have their bags packed and are raring to go. That means there will have to be a new Welsh speaking platoon to join the linguistical army in Brussels. There will be Welsh to Estonian Welsh to Gaelic, Welsh to Maltese, Welsh to Polish, Welsh to…… well, it goes on and on.

And the cost of all this? You may well ask, it currently costs a billion euros a year to translate all these languages, that’s £841 million in real money. What for? To ensure that all the EU's edicts, regulations, directives and masses of bureaucratic gobble-de-gook gets put into a language that everyone can understand to make it legal. Meanwhile, in the real world, the masses are becoming ever more frustrated by the EU, its costs, secrecy, its isolation and anti-democratic nature – and we are paying for it. As the Welsh would say: ‘Now there’s expensive boyo’! It really would cost us a great deal less if we quit the EU.


The organisation campaigning against police state I.D. cards, No2ID, has commented that after years of little more than hot air from a sequence of Home Secretaries, we're finally getting to see the fine detail of what "ID cards" will really mean to the average person. It may be quite a shock to those who haven't been paying attention.

It is not just the sheer amount of personal information that you will be required to surrender – a wake-up for any remaining who thought this was a simple card – it is the threats that will be used to force compliance. You could have £1000 penalties sent to you by e-mail if IPS thinks you've been bad – and why might they think that?

If you fail to turn up at a time and place of their choosing; refuse to be fingerprinted, photographed or hand over documents (e.g. birth or marriage certificates); fail to tell them you've moved house for 3 months.

And anything that *they* reckon is "deliberate or reckless" provision of incorrect information could lead to 2 years in prison. Welcome to a lifetime of state identity control...

Phil Booth, NO2ID  national coordinator said:
"So the state 'managing' your identity boils down to telling them everything there is to know about you, under threat – and coughing up time and again for the privilege.

"This must be a wake-up call for everyone who bought the line that ID was just a simple card."

To read the consultation click HERE.  For more information go to No2ID.

Friday, 21 November 2008


In the days when Britain was debating whether it was a good thing or not to join the Common Market, as it was quaintly called in those far flung times, and when Premier Ted Heath did away with the niceties of debate and negotiated one of the worst deals possible, just to achieve his ambition of enslaving the UK to what we now know as the European Union, one of the things the British people were told at that time was the cost of our groceries would come tumbling down – fat chance!

As a young man in those heady days of the late sixties, working in the tonsorial arts (I was a barber), as it was a topic of the times I used to have an occasional conversation with my customers about the merits, or otherwise, of joining the Common Market. The one thing I could never get my head round in those days was the workings of the Common Agricultural Policy, the CAP. This struck me as seriously weird, farmers would grow things which would then be put into store, rather than sold, until the prices were right. I was told this would stop the fluctuations in food prices and protect the livelihoods of farmers.

As much as it was explained to me I could still never quite grasp it, but to bequite honest, as a young chap in my early twenties, whose only ambitions in life were to jump into my little Triumph Spitfire and to gad off somewhere to have a beer or two in every pub in the Midlands, and to chat up any young ladies in the vecinity, hey, who gave a toss about the Common Market and its weird CAP.

It was not too long after Heath took us in, without a debate or referendum on the issue, and fed us a pack of lies about the illusory benefits of membership, that we began to see the effects of the CAP. Vast grain mountains sprang up, wine lakes appeared, butter was stockpiled and many other foodstuffs filled barns and storage units to the rafters – all because of the Common Agricultural Policy. And while this was going on our food prices, which we were promised would reduce after membership, continued to climb. These days, thanks to the wonders of the CAP, the average family now has an additional £25 or more on their grocery bills courtesy of it.

In reality the CAP is an abomination, it has never worked and can never work, so why is it still with us? Ask the French, or more precisely ask the French leadership who live in utter terror of their farmers. These French peasants who run outdated little smallholdings, farms and vineyards, turn into rampaging tyrants the moment any French, or other EU leader, even whispers the word “reform”. The next thing you know is tractors are blockading roads, barricades are set up, there is the ritual burning of lorry loads of foreign sheep, ports are blockaded and general mayhem takes over. Added to this, although France, like Britain is a contributor to the EU budget, by the time they get their CAP subsidies back, unlike us poor saps in the UK, they finish up getting back about the same as they put in, viola! Or as they say in France, “Good, innit”!

The CAP, which should be renamed the ‘Costly Agricultural Policy’, accounts for 40 per cent of the EU budget, and something ought to be done about it, but every time there are negotiation to do something about it the French usually scupper it, as we have just seen in the latest negotiations to try to sort out the £42 billion the CAP now costs us. According to the Daily Telegraph that adds up to a cost of £300 per year for every British family.

The idiotic thing is, every time those of us who can’t see any point in EU membership whatsoever, say it’s time we said adieu to the EU, one of the twits that support it comes out with the tired old whinging line: “Oh, we have to be in or we will be isolated”. No, we are isolated in the EU, just as Hilary Benn, our Minister for the Environment, Food and Rural Affairs found out when he was well and truly isolated within the EU, when the interests of the French, Germans and Italians turned against him. It was, as the Telegraph put it, their “Vested” interests that blocked any chance of reform to European Farm subsidies – not any common sense or practical reasons, but hey, we are talking about the EU here where common sense is unknown.

There have also been what is described as “back door” measures which will allow France to recycle unspent farm subsidy cash worth £254 million every year into extra payments for their farmers – and little, overtaxed and struggling Britain, is going to have to pay for it. As I may have mentioned once or twice before, all the benefits are out of the EU. We can kiss the CAP goodbye, reform our agricultural policies to suit our needs and we can reclaim our fishing grounds. There is no sense for the UK remaining in the EU at all - it’s all a load of CAP!

Thursday, 20 November 2008


Derek Clark with his wife Jane, and Joyce Nattrass

On Wednesday 19th November, 2008, the UK Independence Party MEP for the East Midlands, Derek Clark, highlighted the European Union’s response to the growing problem of piracy on the high seas. Needless to say, when you read Derek’s letter which was published in the Daily Telegraph on Wednesday 19th November, 2008, which is reproduced below, you will see how bothered the EU is about this serious problem which will add vast costs to the shipping of our goods and how little it cares for the well being of seafarers.

“Sir - A month ago MEPs in the European Parliament adopted, with a huge majority, a proposal to downgrade piracy (report, November 18) from an act of war to a simple criminal act.

Once implemented it means that a naval vessel will not be allowed to blow pirates out of the water, as they deserve, but will have to arrest them and send them off to an international court, where, no doubt, they will plead "human rights".

Two months ago the Parliament enthusiastically adopted a report which will require all ships in EU waters to carry an electronic tag to record their movements and cargos. This information, relayed by the Galileo satellite, will be electronically stored in an EU data centre.

We all know how secure that will be. Just one corrupt operator and the pirates will have all they need to sort out the richest pickings, instead of relying on chance.”


Gerrard Batten highlights the enormous costs of EU membership

High flying Government Minister get all emotional about a lot of things, which they talk about with passion, but the reality is there is very little they can do about much of what they talk about because if they do, there is an 80 per cent chance, that they will be contravening EU laws. The EU now accounts for 80 per cent of all laws made here in the UK.

It is sad to say that our Parliament has now become so insignificant that at election times we are not voting for people to govern our country, to make our laws and defend us, we are simply voting for the people who will say one thing, then rubber stamp the orders of the unelected EU elite’s, who may contradict everything said by those who we elect.

The sad irony in all this is everytime it comes to matters of the European Union, these ministers and other elected MPs, either do their best to avoid talking about the EU – especially David Cameron’s Tories, or flatly deny that the EU is the root cause of the problem, as we have seen with the closures of our post offices. Yet they still, without fail, put their brains into neutral and repeat the worn out, and now much discredited, age old mantra that we have to be in the EU for the benefits it gives us and that three million jobs rely on it (despite that one being disproved seconds after it was first stated).

So, what and where, exactly, are the benefits of EU membership? UKIP MEP, Gerrard Batten, has been delving into the costs of EU membership in some considerabledetail, and if you read his REPORT which has been published by the Bruges Group. You will see from his research we pay one hell of a lot of our taxpayers money for these illusory benefits.

Using Government figures and statistics, Gerrard has discovered that for the equivalent of every single man, woman and child in this country, each and everyone of us pays £1077 gross or £915 net per annum to the EU for the privilege to have our sovereign Parliament undermined to the extent that it is little more than an attractive edifice in the centre of London which attracts the tourist – its occupants have virtually no power or control any more. We contribute our taxes, which is the equivalent for every person of £2119 gross or £1799 net per annum, for this appalling state of affairs whilst shed loads of our money are being sent to the EU with little question because we are not allowed to ask the question: “What benefits?”

Gerrard Batten’s article runs to over thirty pages, so give yourself time to read it.

Wednesday, 19 November 2008


Brian Mooney of New Alliance.
One of the anti-EU campaigning organisations is the New Alliance, which produces an excellent publication called 'Resistance', and is e-mailed out by Brian Mooney several times a year.  This simple two page bulletin covers a lot of ground and gives a great deal of information, it's well worth a read, so click on the links above.


Elizabeth Hazell, UKIP by-election candidate.
Electioneering is a funny old business, no matter how hard you work during a campaign the end results are always down to luck, timing and events.  

There is currently a by-election taking place in the Walsall MBC area of the of Midlands, our UKIP candidate is Elizabeth Hazell, known to all her friends as 'Liz'.  This morning (Wednesday 19th November) I have been out and about delivering election leaflets in the Birchills Leamore ward where the by-election is taking place.  This is going to be a hard battle for us in UKIP in this election as there are seven candidates in all in what is normally a very safe Labour ward.

The funny thing is, regarding luck and timing, there was a bit of luck this morning for an Irishman I bumped into.  I had just finished delivering Liz's leaflets to a small close off the main Bloxwich road when this Irishman asked me if I knew where the 'Doghouse' was.  The Doghouse is an Aladdin's cave of of a place, it's full if bric-a-brac, there are antiques mixed in with modern artifacts which just happen to look like antiques, it's the sort of place where you can spend hours poking around in corners looking at old and new paintings, tables, furniture and a whole load of other jumble.  

As I was due to move on to do another part of the ward I offered the Irishman a lift to save his legs as it was a bit of a walk to the Doghouse, and as we drove along we had a chat, naturally I told him about UKIP and the election - then I asked him what he was going to the Doghouse for.  Blow me down with a feather, he was after some imitation coals for his ancient gas fire - I have worked since 1971 in the fireplace business my father started in 1946 and the bits for the gas fire he wanted was for a range of fires we used to sell twenty or more years ago.  I knew he wouldn't have any luck at the Doghouse for what he wanted, so I gave him the details of a Birmingham company who deal in gas spares - and if they ain't got what he wants then he just ain't going to get it.  How strange life is putting people with these sorts of connections in the the same place at the same time.

However, back to elections, which quite often are a bit like these strange situations.  Sometimes everyone takes it for granted that there is no way a particular candidate can loose such a safe seat, then events can take a strange turn.  One strange turn is the leaking of the full BNP membership list.  They too are putting a candidate up in this by-election, although I haven't seen much sight of them (not that I would want to).  The question has to be asked, will this leaking, which seems very strange indeed, make any difference to their vote.  It is a sad fact that the BNP, as unpleasant as they are, often do well in strong Labour areas such as this.  

Our team are ploughing away and by election day, Thursday the 27th November, we should just about have the area covered with Liz's election leaflets.  It would be one hell of a surprise if she was elected or if we get a high vote in this area, especially as there are seven candidates, but there is always luck and as Harold Wilson said: "A week is a long time in politics". 


Jeffrey Titford MEP exposes the EU.
In a speech to the European Parliament today (18.11.08), Jeffrey Titford, the UK Independence Party MEP for the Eastern Counties has exposed what he believes is the true intent behind a new EU scheme to provide fruit and vegetables to schools.  Mr Titford pointed out that the scheme is the first step in taking control of what we eat, that each piece of fruit would have an EU label and the whole project would be supported by a major publicity campaign, which he described as 'propaganda'.
He also highlighted the market fixing that will be possible under the conditions of the scheme e.g. mandatory rules stiupulating that all the produce must come from the EU, which in the case of bananas, would prevent British suppliers who obtain their produce from the Carribean Commonwealth countries from taking part and provide French suppliers with a lucrative new market, as their bananas come from Guadeloupe and Martinique.

The full text of Jeffrey Titford's speech is as follows: Strasbourg 18.11.08
Mr President
This project is being dressed up as all about concern for the welfare of children. However, the real agenda is a disturbing mix of 'Nanny Brussels' control freakism, sheer naked propaganda and market fixing.
Nanny Brussels likes to be in control of everything, including what we eat.  Putting itself in charge of what children eat at school is the first major step in that process.  The propaganda angle is that each piece of fruit will have an EU label on it and the whole project will be supported by a massive publicity campaign.
In regard to the fruit market, I understand it will create a great many opportunities for mischief such as mandatory rules that all the fruit must come from inside the EU.  In the case of bananas, this could, at a stroke, rule out British suppliers who obtain their bananas from the British Commonwealth Caribbean countries and thus provide a lucrative new opportunity for the French islands of Guadeloupe and Martinique.
No more Nanny Brussels, thank you.

Tuesday, 18 November 2008


Some time ago, not long after I first ventured into the world of blogging, I wrote on this blog about the closure of our post offices and the European Union’s hand in this due to its ill conceived postal directives. I described the mass closures of our post offices due to EU meddling in our affairs as a “holocaust” of post offices. For this I was lambasted by a Labour supporting blogger calling himself the Political Penguin’, who though his parties acquiescence to the EU and acceptance to all the crap it foists upon us, has helped to create this problem. It is sad that the Labour Party which was elected to represent and support the British people, have abandoned us and simply obeys the mad dictates of the EU.

The current batch of post office closures are due to be completed by February 2009, but a further number were under threat which were allegedly reprieved by the Government. However, it would seem that despite the promised reprieve additional post offices are still set to go in what is described as them closing “in an unplanned way”.

Although the Penguin tries to ridicule this blog for using such terms as “holocaust of post offices”, it is hard to know exactly how else to describe it. Richard North on the EU Referendum blog warned that the reprieve of a further 3000 or so post offices would be going against the EU’s mad rules, it looks as if this Government, in yet another underhand and sneaky move, will be complying with our unelected masters in Brussels yet again.

Monday, 17 November 2008


What happens when you implement EU directives on postal services? Well, if you go out to your nearest post office, which may not be as closer as it used to be, you will discover long queues and total havoc.

Thanks to the opening of our postal services to competition due to compliance with the European Union’s rules, thousands of post offices around the country have been closing, and several hundreds more are due to close in the next few weeks. So, where do the customers go when one already busy post office closes it doors? They go to the next nearest Post Office that has escaped the wholesale slaughter and join even bigger queues.

Reported in the press on Monday 17th November, 2008, they put out the that almost quarter of customers at post offices are having to wait 10 minutes or more to be served. The research done by the watchdog, Consumer Focus also found that a third of post office staff are giving customers the wrong proof of postage or insufficient evidence for them to claim for lost or undelivered mail. This, presumably, is due to the additional pressure of work.

However, as usual, the press and media are quick to jump onto a problem and report it, but because they did not explain that the root cause of these problems all stem from idiotic directives from the EU, only half the story has been reported. Once again British membership of the EU has created an almighty problem and once again this proves that Britain would really be better off out of the EU.

For more on the lack of media coverage of our post offices, read THIS from the EU Referendum blog.

Sunday, 16 November 2008


ID cards will still cost if cancelled.
Identity cards have been a tool of police states and dictatorships, it is therefore sad to know that a British Government has been forging ahead with this Orwellian tool and seems quite happy to sacrifice the freedom of people whose right it traditionally was to be freeborn.

Foreigners coming to live in the UK from none EU nations are now obliged to have I.D. cards, and from next year so too will those who work at airports, much to their disquiet and protest from their trade unions.  This is a scheme which this Government is determined to continue with despite the unpopularity of these anti libertarians tools - and their enormous costs which increases endlessly.

In the Sunday Telegraph, 16th November, 2008, it was revealed that even if this, or any future Government comes to its senses, these nasty bits of plastic will still bear a cost for the British taxpayers.  

It was reported that the £5 billion contract, which has been given to Thales, a French company, stipulates that if it is cancelled at short notice it will be entitled to have its costs met.  This could run into millions of pounds, although for "commercial confidentiality" reasons the exact figures are not being given.  What happened to that old Parliamentary rule that one government could not bind its successors?  It looks as if we are all to be tied up and pinned down by I.D. cards.

Saturday, 15 November 2008


The Euro Soap story is launched in a new blog.
THE EUROSOAP is nothing but a really daft story based on what could happen if the EU continues as it is and the UK is fully consumed by a fully federal European Union.  The story was originally written in sixteen parts with a chapter published once a month in the Euro Realist newsletter, but now it has a new life as a blog.

When originally published some enjoyed it whilst others loathed it and thought it nonsense.  If you want to read it then click on the link above.  The tale is set in the future and is about the lives of ordinary people who struggle to survive in the run down region of the United States of Europe in which they live.  The ironic thing is, some of the predictions in the story when it was written between 1997 and 1998, have come true such as an EU-wide arrest warrant and a European police force.

It was originally written to show people in a humorous way what we could be heading for, hope you find it of interest - that is if you do read it.


Andrew Smith Eastern Counties UKIP MEP candidate with Marta Andreasen.
Attending the champagne launch of the Orbis building, the new headquarters for the offshore wind industry in Lowestoft on Friday 7th November, UKIP representatives Professor Stephen Bush and prospective MEP Andrew Smith were seemingly the only delegates who were opposed to the mad rush for wind turbines.  These turbines produce electricity for only around 25% of the time at a cost for onshore windmills about 50% greater than for our conventional power stations and more than double this for offshore wind turbines, according to the Royal Academy of Engineering Report on alternative electricity production processes. 
The difference is paid for by direct subsidy to the windmill operators and by the Renewables Obligation imposed on the electricity supply companies, both of which are passed onto the consumer.  Professor Bush, Emeritus Professor of Process Engineering and Manufacture at the University of Manchester said:

"Pursuing the Government's recently adopted target of an 80% reduction in our CO2 emissions by 2050 and the intermediate target of having one third of our electricity generated by wind in 2020, will put the lives and the livelihoods of the British people in terrible hazard. It will expose us all to power cuts and the dangers of relying almost entirely on the most costly and variable of energy sources, namely wind, and gas imported from politically unstable countries.
In contrast, UKIP advocates an immediate start on a long-term programme to build around 50GW of nuclear power capacity over the next 25 years, devoting the bulk of the nuclear decommissioning budget of £60 billion to this purpose through a new British nuclear company.  This programme would run alongside the 6GW new nuclear capacity likely to be built by the French company EDF, over the next 10 years.
This programme would give Britain a major, reliable, nationally owned energy resource to replace much of North Sea oil production. And this programme would also achieve a solid, bankable cut of over one third in UK emissions.
Prospective UKIP MEP candidate Andrew Smith added: "The Government's fantasy target of an 80% cut in emissions was seen apparently by all the speakers at this Lowestoft event as justification for the gigantic and ultimately futile diversion of our nation's resources to the pursuit of the delusion that climate change can be stopped by actions taken in this country. This is madness!"