Friday, 31 July 2009

ANNE HAS AN I.D. CARD

Anne Palmer, who has been campaigning against the EU and I.D. cards for many years writes:

I already have an ID card with may name and ‘number’ on, and if that was enough information to take me through a full scale war it is good enough for “today’s” world. 

I kept the card as a souvenir and a reminder that we would never have to have an ID Card again because we were told we would never need one now in PEACE TIME. If I am FORCED to renew it, as if I am a prisoner that needs watching all the time, for foreigners to hold every little bit of information on me, I will give my name and number and that is all. 

I simply cannot remember any of my background because you see, we, as a family were bombed out, I remember my school was bombed and I had to walk a long way to be taught in what was named “The Wood Sheds” that belonged to another school that had escaped the bombing. When we were bombed out again, I was sent to live with relatives for a while in OLDHAM. No one is alive that can help me with further details, and I simply do not want to be reminded of those times either. 

We live in peace allegedly, although our forces have recently been fighting in two wars to help bring “DEMOCRACY” to those Countries. That’s a laugh when we here in the United Kingdom of Great Britain, have no democracy left and a Government that is obeying orders of foreigners. The first time I came across the suggestion for all EU member states to have ID Cards, was in COM (2000) 257 final Brussels 3.5.2000 pages 10 and 17 of that document under “NEW”. “Adoption by the European Parliament and Council of a package of REGULATIONS on a Uniform Format for the EU passport, identity card and residence permit”. The heading on page 10 is “Improving the quality of life of citizens”. How taking away people’s freedoms, the ability to track every movement, the need to know any slight changes and to pay for them possibly prosecuted if the Data Base is not kept up to date is ‘improving the life of’ prisoners, sorry citizens, I do not know. It proves that the Government we thought at one time governed us, is only obey orders of the European Union. Obviously, the debate on ID cards must have taken place previously for it to have been in that COM Document. Why doesn’t this Government say, “we are having to have ID cards because our Masters in the EU say so?” 

Sharing my details that may be listed on a EU Wide Data Base is an affront to my privacy and dignity and without dignity there is no freedom. All those that fought and died in World War II died in vain. We will have gone from the freedom we fought for, to a Police State, all because the two Political parties with the help of others that served in the UK Parliament, “WELCOMED” anything that the EU proposed. How many times when new EU Regulations are proposed and debated, have I read that in the end “conclusions” they all ‘WELCOME’ the proposals!

Proof sadly, once again this week that ID Cards did not prevent terrorists killing two policemen in Majorca and ID Cards will never stop suicide bombers.

I will never carry another ID Card only to be stopped and asked to “produce” as we were in wartime. We are not at war, we are supposed to be at peace. I will never give details for a Data Base. My mind is a blank and I am too old to care a jot what people we have voted for and pay wages and expenses to yet cannot govern this once wonderful country, but only obey orders of foreigners, think. As for not putting our National Flag on the proposed (EU) ID Card in case it ‘offends’ others, just the proposal to have an ID cards OFFENDS ME! 31.7.2009. 
I’ve already had an ID Card. September 2008. Anne Palmer.

I have not asked for an ID Card
It is voluntarily compulsory I’m told,
But I am tired, worn out and crabby,
How can I be a terrorist when so old?
I am certainly not paying to have one,
For I’ve had one before you see.
A card with my name and a number
The same free one again will suit me.

Long after the war had finished,
The authorities did finally agree
There was no need to have an ID card
For all our people at last were FREE.
The time had come to walk down a street
Without being stopped by police,
Free movement at last, no black out, 
Free from restriction was such a release.

That war was truly real terrorism,
With bombs raining down day and night,
To our Anderson shelters we’d scuttle,
To tremble in fear at our plight.
So many died for our freedom,
Children and small babies too,
I remember how others were separated
Through the use of ID cards, do you?

Having ID cards didn’t protect us,
Just as ID cards won’t protect us now,
We fought in that war for our freedom,
To no stranger would we obey or bow.
I don’t want an ID with my face on,
No film star can I be taken to be,
For Gee! I am so old and ugly
Who would want to gaze upon ME?

So many details ‘they’ want off me,
When for my ID card I’d have to go,
Where I lived, where I was born, etcetera
Why should strangers now want to know?
These details are not just for our folks,
They’re to be shared with one and all, 
Allegedly secure on a Data Base,
Yet millions went missing, I recall. 
Sadly, I am so old and I cannot remember,
Where I have been in the past,
So confused, bemused and befuddled
THEY would regret it was ME they had asked!

Thursday, 30 July 2009

ICELAND DOES NOT NEED THE EU

These are funny old times for this blogger, as you will have noticed from recent postings I am having to spend quite a bit of time running back and forth on hospital visits and have not been spending as much time as usual scanning the press for interesting news items - which was how I missed an interesting item from Monday's Daily Telegraph by Ambrose Evans-Pritchard.

When clearing out some newspapers I had missed earlier in the week I saw the headline: 'Iceland turns the corner, saved by its currency and unfettered by the EU'.  How did I manage to miss such a headline as that?  

Ambrose Evans-Pritchard is one of the best writers on economic matters in the press at the moment and he certainly ain't no lover of the EU (it always puzzles me how anyone can love it).  In his article he writes how the Icelandic currency, the krona, has fallen by half against the EU's euro and how it is proving good for business in Iceland.  They have Japanese tourists now visiting the island, and buying Icelandic goods.  Their cafe's are packed and aluminium production has risen to record levels.

From the doom and gloom of last autumn when Iceland's banks and financial institutions collapsed, things are definitely beginning to look up.  He wrote that everything seems normal, people who lost their jobs in banking have found new work and the krona has acted as a buffer.

Ambrose wrote: "Those who point to iceland as a scarecrow exhibit of what happens to a small country caught in  a financial storm without the shield of euro membership have the matter backwards, as will become ever clearer over the next two years."  He expects the Iclandic economy to shrink 7 per cent this year, which is much better that Ireland at minus 9.8 per cent and he predicts Iceland's recovery to come sooner.

He also predict that although Iceland has applied for EU membership as many see it as a "safe port", by the time their referendum on membership comes in two or three years time EU membership will not look so appealing as unemployment in the EU will have exploded by then, and who will need that?  Iceland does not need the EU - nor do we in the UK.

Wednesday, 29 July 2009

WHERE HAVE ALL THE CONSERVATIVES GONE?

Back in the early sixties there was a dreary song that lamented: "Where have all the young men gone", now Simon Heffer writing in the Daily Telegraph (Wednesday 29th July 2009), laments where have all the Conservatives gone?

With the headline, 'Cameron is likely to win, but don't expect a Conservative government', he repeated this bloggers feeling that the Conservative Party, despite it still being there in name, no longer exists in reality.  

I made this comment on the Conservative Home web-site following an article in which one Conservative activist expresses his findings that he has just discovered that UKIP is now a serious threat, it's taking votes and winning Council elections because one time Conservative voters are switching to UKIP which has policies more akin to their views than Cameron's counterfeit Conservative Party.  This is a point Heffer picks on and commented on the volume of ex-Conservative voters changing to UKIP and says: "for hundreds of thousands of them are predisposed to vote UKIP if a candidate is available".

In answer to the question, 'where have all the Conservatives gone?', using the words of the ballad, 'to UKIP everyone'.

UNHEALTHY IDEA

At a time when I am having to spend a considerable amount of time doing hospital visits due to my father in law, Fred, being laid up due to a fractured hip, the headline in the Daily Mail (28th July 2009) jumped out at me.

 As you may know from the posting linked above, my father in law has had his hip operation cancelled several times since being admitted on the 17th July, including, yet again, yesterday due to lack of theatre space - or whatever other excuse the hospital makes up on the day.  Sadly, thanks to our rash involvement with the European Union, it looks as if things are due to get even worse from this weekend when the EU's Working Time Directive kicks in.

This will restrict doctors, what few we have due to constant shortages, to working 48 hours a week only.  Considering the so-called swine flue panic and the usual influx of weekend drunken injured youths, the health service is heading for total collapse.

However, don't panic, the doctors pressure group Remedy UK has devised a cunning plan, it's calling for special measures to by-pass the cut in minimum hours the EU is imposing - brilliant! Sadly, they seem to forget who is in charge these days, and that privileged goes to the EU, not our own elected Government.  It's just a shame that anyone should have such an unhealthy idea as to thinking we can do as we please in the EU controlled empire we are now inflicted with.

Tuesday, 28 July 2009

WHAT'S THE POINT OF VOTING CONSERVATIVE?

You really do have to feel sad for those poor deluded Tory souls who have been desperately, forlornly, and hopefully hanging on in the Conservative Party who have faithfully stuck with the delusion that David Cameron will save the nation from EU domination and the madness of Labour control.  Sadly, their dreams, aspirations and hopes must have been shattered on Monday 27th July 2009 when they read the Daily Mail and the Daily Telegraph - at long last they would have realised what many of us discovered many years ago - the real Conservative Party no longer exists.

On the front page of the Daily Mail was the news that David Cameron, the say nothing, do nothing and act vague leader of that once great party, intends to turn on the very people past Conservative leaders aimed to support - the hard working middle classes.  According to the Mail he intends to screw this once loyal band of Conservative voters by collectively taking £1 billion in taxes from them to repair public finances.  Sadly, he will soon find this hard put upon group will rebel, they will either quit the country for another part of the world that values them taking what little wealth they have with them, and those that remain will at last begin to start looking around for another party to vote for, which logic tells us will be UKIP which will be waiting for them with open arms.

Just to ensure the nail was well and truly driven into the Tory coffin, in another front page headline of Tory doom, the Daily Telegraph announced that the Tories are planing to make newly built roads tolled.  This then will not only ensure that they drive away their traditional supporters thanks to the tax hammering they intend to inflict, but they are also going to put the brakes on any potential supporters, who are sick of Brown and his useless Labour henchmen, from heading in the Tory direction.  Nice one Dave - a double whammy to ensure total failure.

It is already proven that road tolling in the UK is a complete none starter, just ask Peter Roberts of the Drivers Alliance (pictured left), he was the chap whose Number 10 Downing Street petition with 1.8 million votes was the largest and most successful petition yet.  They should also ask Mike Nattrass MEP who is currently supporting a group of irate Walsall residents who are about to suffer increased noise and pollution due to new motorway widening on the M6 around junction 10 to cope with the increase in traffic.  the irony of this is whilst all this is going on just a few miles away is the little used M6 toll almost sitting idle and losing money because no one wants to pay to use it.  To most motorists and especially the hard pressed haulage industry, the M6 toll is an affront and a rip-off - they already pay a fortune in vehicle licence duty (now used for general taxation) and not only excessive taxation on every gallon of petrol and diesel, but also VAT on the whole lot which is a tax on a tax.  And Cameron really thinks road tolls are the answer?

This blogger gave up on the Conservative Party back in the early nineties when I realised the Conservative Party had abandoned not only traditional Conservatism, but the whole country too due to its unhealthy obsession with the EU.  Surely it will not be long before those who have hung on in vein for all these years will quit too.  After all, what is the point of voting Conservative when that party died many years ago.

Monday, 27 July 2009

A PERSONAL GRIPE

Linda Bennett and her father, Fred English, at Walsall Cenotaph.
If the postings on this blog seem a little less frequent and a little shorter than normal, it is due to what little time I have being otherwise used for trolling back and forth to Good Hope (No Hope!) hospital in Sutton Coldfield to visit my father in law, Fred English who, up until the time of this posting, has languished in a hospital bed for the last eleven days with a fractured hip.

This is where the personal gripe comes in.  Fred is a truly great character of the old school, the sort they don't make any more.  At 84 years of age he was one of those who did his duty for King and country during the Second World War and served in the Royal Navy in the Pacific on a ship called HMS Euryalus, which was Dido class cruiser and a sister ship to HMS Belfast which people can visit today, as you can see in the photo when Fred visited her not that long ago.

Despite what he has done to serve his country, despite the fact he worked hard all his life, paid his taxes and saved for his retirement, he now lies in a hospital bed awaiting an operation that despite the continued promises that it's going to be done "tomorrow", sadly tomorrow never seems to come.

The nurses are brilliant and care for him, and because he can't move they have to do everything for him including the degrading job of sticking him on a bed pan, which he hates. As he has still got all his marbles he has a laugh, joke and a bit of banter with the staff, but the fact he seems to be forgotten about and abandoned by the system in this NHS hospital is not much fun.

He should have been operated on within a day or two of being admitted, and if he had been he would now be up and around (with some difficulty no doubt) and taking up less time for the nursing staff. It's almost as if the system, because of his age, does not care for him, it considers he is old, doddery and forgets that even up until a few weeks ago he was a fit and active man taking care of himself.  It is because of this I worry so much about the talk of assisted suicide.

In recent weeks this topic has come to the fore, even the Nurses Union have changed their stance from opposition to neutral.  How soon will it be before assisted suicide becomes euthanasia?  How soon will it be that instead of the roll of the medical profession to save lives, but to dispose of the lives of those society no longer has any value for?  It will be then the old, infirm, the seriously ill and those with limited mental capabilities who will learn to fear, not rely on, our medics and members of their profession who will will become killers rather than life savers.  

Those who promote 'Living wills' or assisted suicide are playing a dangerous game, one that they may regret in their dotage when a man in a white coat approaches them telling them not to worry, it will all be over soon.

Sunday, 26 July 2009

79% SAY NO TO ID CARDS

This is a press release from the ant-ID card campaigning group, No2ID, which has pointed out the results of the latest public opinion on the introduction of ID cards. They are a waste of money say 79% of those polled.

Support for the Government's national identity scheme has all but vanished. A YouGov poll commissioned by the Sunday People shows that 79% of the public think the money earmarked for the ID card scheme is better used on something else. This figure is a complete reversal of public opinion since the scheme was launched by David Blunkett, and a triumph for opponents.

This latest collapse in public support follows attempts by Ministers to spin ID cards as 'voluntary', with no real change in the underlying programme. Regulations were approved last week to bring in fees, fingerprinting, lifelong compulsory notification and penalties for everyone registered on the ID database. From 2011, this would include everyone applying for a passport according to those plans.

Phil Booth, National Coordinator of NO2ID said:

'The game is up. The ID scheme is exposed as a bureaucrat's luxury that can now only be imposed by bullying and subterfuge.'

'We don't trust Whitehall to 'manage' our identities and we don't want it to spend massive amounts of tax money to do so. If the Prime Minister wants to look responsive and decisive he will shut down the programme on Monday morning.

Saturday, 25 July 2009

NIKKI REVEALS ALL

New West Midlands MEP, Nikki Sinclaire, found out the real plans for the creation of a fully federalised nation of the European Union at a EU Parliament committee meeting. She writes:

"Jacques Barrot the EU Justice Commissioner outlined his remit of the Stockholm Programme in which he called for ‘citizenship in the fullest sense of the word’ seemingly from the cradle to the grave by introducing EU Birth and Death certificates. He was speaking to the Civil Liberties, Justice and Home Affairs Committee in Brussels.

Births and deaths have been registered in the UK since 1837 and held by the Registrar General and collected by local registration officers. In 2007 changes were made to the system and Birth and Death Registers were no longer written by hand. Instead, this information is now held on a central online database.

New UKIP MEP, Nikki Sinclaire, who is a member of the committee, said “I was stunned when the Commissioner outlined this proposal. They are not even pretending anymore, it is now full steam to a full Euro super state with a single register for all EU citizens’ births and deaths – what about the protection and respect for national identity?” Nikki also criticised Commissioner Barrot, for his blatant disregard for the voters in Ireland as he talked about the 'When' the Lisbon Treaty would come into effect not if."

Friday, 24 July 2009

NORWICH NORTH

It was on the cards from the outset that Labour were going to get well and truly walloped in the Norwich North by-election, it was just a matter of waiting for the day when the results were announced to see how hard they had been hammered. Around lunchtime we found out.

The Tories Chloe Smith managed to turn a Labour majority of around 5000 into a Tory majority of 7348, a swing of 16.5% from Labour to Conservative. The Labour Party and Gordon Brown are in real trouble now and this result will probably ensure that the General election won’t take place until the last possible date in May 2010, which will be a repeat of the John Major moment which put an equally defunct Tory administration out of its misery.

Despite the outrageously biased BBC doing everything to talk up the left leaning Green Party and completely snubbing the UK Independence Party, UKIP’s Glen Tingle still managed to come a respectable fourth with 11.85% of the vote, beating the Green candidate by 718 votes. A very satisfying two fingers to the BBC from an electorate that was not conned by the Biased Broadcasting Corporation.

There were twelve candidates standing in the by-election, the results for the top five were: Chloe Smith, Tory, 13591. Chris Ostrowski, Labour, 6243. April Pond, Lib Dem, 4803. Glen Tingle, UKIP, 4068. Rupert Read, Green, 3350.

On the same day of the Norwich North by-election two UKIP candidates were elected in local by-elections. Peter Reeve who is the UKIP Regional Organiser for the Eastern Region had a double victory by being elected onto both the district and county council in the Ramsey by-election, and in Shropshire UKIP’s Derek Armstrong took three quarters of the vote in a two horse race in the Broseley town council election in Shropshire. On the whole a good couple of days for UKIP – despite the best efforts of the BBC to skew the vote.

STILL BIASED

Despite a flood of complaints for its appalling bias against UKIP in the Norwich North by-election, the BBC has continued with its utter contempt for its long suffering licence fee viewers who only a few weeks earlier had given UKIP a massive vote of confidence nationally by putting the EU-sceptic party in second place during the European elections. The BBC still insisted upon pushing the Green party which only achieved one MEP compared to UKIP's thirteen.

In its Radio Four six o'clock news programme on the eve of the Norwich North polling day it gave mention to the Greens twice, pushed the story that the Labour MP, who resigned after being sacked by the Labour Party, was really just a victim and that the Conservative Party may just win this by-election. There was no mention of the UKIP candidate Glen Tingle who has been actively campaigning in the constituency.

Because of this bias anti-EU campaigner, Jerry Wraith, has made a formal complaint to Scotland Yard accusing the BBC of criminality due to its biased reporting. His letter to Detective Superintendent Magnus Gudmundsson is reproduced below.

BBC PRO-EU BIAS: NORWICH NORTH BYE ELECTION

I refer to complaints made about the BBC's apparent lack of coverage of the UKIP campaign in the Norwich North bye-election.

The typical response by the BBC to a complainant is as follows;
“Thanks for your e-mail regarding our coverage of UKIP.

Especially when there are a large number of candidates - 12 in Norwich North - the broader interests of the voters would not be served by giving equal coverage to each and every candidate, irrespective of their chances of success. So when editors are deciding how much coverage to give, relatively, to different parties and candidates in any election, one of the key factors they look for is "evidence of past and/or current electoral support" in that electoral area.

On that basis, in Norwich there is clear evidence of support for the three main parties as well as for the Green Party and therefore those parties will be getting similar levels of coverage. Similarly, there is evidence from the recent elections that both UKIP and the BNP have some support in at least parts of the constituency and they will also, proportionately, be given an appropriate level of coverage by programmes covering the by-election.

For example, 'Look East' looked at Glenn Tingle's candidacy on 15 July and Radio Norfolk did a piece on him the following day. UKIP leader Nigel Farage's visit to the constituency also featured on 'Look East' and 'Look East Special' on 20 July.”

This response clearly and undeniably confirms that the BBC decides how much time it gives to the various candidates based on the BBC's own interpretation of the “importance” or otherwise of each candidate. The BBC is therefore not only guilty of grossly manipulating public opinion and pro-EU propaganda but it is clearly manipulating the results of elections by choosing the air time and prominence of its favoured candidates.

As the BBC's formal position is that the views of UKIP leader Nigel Farage are “extreme” it is not unreasonable to suggest therefore that he and the UKIP candidate Glenn Tingle would not be given a fair representation on BBC programmes compared to candidates from the parties they themselves have highlighted above. Indeed, this is allegedly confirmed by the independent candidate, Craig Murray, who allegedly posted the following statement on his web site: 
'... They are also excluding UKIP. While I disagree with them fundamentally, they also plainly have a right to be heard. The BBC is trying to define the field of political debate and choice.' 

Hence, the BBC is not being impartial and is promoting candidates who stand for pro-EU parties. As these parties stand for the abolition of our parliament in Westminster in favour of governance of the UK by un-elected foreign EU commissioners, the effective loss of our voting rights, the unrestricted right of 500 million “Europeans” to move into the UK plus a plethora of other disadvantages all at a cost of nearly £14 million/hour to the UK economy it is clearly these parties which are the “extremists”. The BBC is therefore not operating within its Charter and is misusing licence payers money to promote its own extremist pro-EU agenda instead of properly “informing” the public as it is required to do as a “so called” independent broadcaster.

I therefore ask you to consider this as a formal complaint against the BBC and as a request for the Metropolitan Police Service to investigate the BBC's actions with regard to the alleged fraudulent misuse of licence payer's money.

Yours sincerely

J Wraith.

ANDREW SYMEOU HAS BEEN EXTRADITED

Andrew Symeou who is a victim of the EU arrest warrant, who was in the vicinity of a murder when on holiday in Greece, and was subsequently accused on circumstantial evidence by the Greek authorities, was finally extradited to Greece on the morning of Thursday 23rd July, 2009.

In a message on face book to all who supported Andrew against this EU outrage, Sophie Symeou said: "It is with regret that I have to inform you that Andrew was extradited to Athens this morning. The House of Lords decided not hear the case as they felt it could be dealt with in Greece, they decided to ignore the issue of police corruption and brutality which happens too often.

Andrew will now be in prison pending a bail hearing which will hopefully be sometime next week. Obviously this has devastated our family, however Andrew remains positive and philosophical, as he knows that the truth will prevail in the end, our hard work avoiding extradition for the last year has made Andrew's case much stronger.

Thank you for continuing to support the group,
Sophie Symeou."

UKIP MEP, Gerard Batten, had been campaigning against the extradition of Andrew with the full backing of UKIP and its members. Sadly, by signing up to the EU arrest warrant the British Government has abandoned the British people to face injustice in foreign courts, in many cases for so-called offences which are not crimes in this country or, as in Andrew's case, may be based on suspect evidence.

Wednesday, 22 July 2009

FAT CHANCE IN FRANCE

According to a snippet in the Daily Telegraph Business section, Wednesday 22nd July 2009, small businesses and road hauliers are demanding the EU Commission bring action against the French against the large number of blockades in that country.

The Telegraph reports that they are demanding up to £6 million in compensation for British carriers who have suffered losses to their businesses due to the actions of the bolshy French. The moment their farmers are threatened with a cut in the Common Agricultural Policy (CAP), or their fishermen threatened with reduced quotas, the next thing you know they are out on the roads setting up blockades leaving massive tailbacks into Dover and chaos on the Continent. Now this group of businessmen want to achieve what the British Government has never managed to do, they want the EU Commission to step in and take action against the French government whenever their fishermen and farmers take action. 

Even if the EU Commission steps in and begin to fine the French government for the actions of a section of its upity people, it is doubtful the French will take much notice or that their government will pay the fines, life will continue as normal leaving fat chance in France of any change of attitudes in their revolutionary spirit.

Tuesday, 21 July 2009

HORIZONTALLY LEFT

The minute you mention just how biased the pro-EU and Labour supporting BBC is, it gets all prissy and its reporters become defensive trying to discredit those who complain about their biased reports rather than actually looking at themselves and their left leaning organisation. The truth always hurts and the BBC hierarchy has buried its head well and truly in the sand to avoid any pain.

Digging into the BBC sand bunker even deeper is Ben Stephenson who is the controller of BBC drama commissioning. He has had the gall to say that the corporation, which lives off the back of its long suffering licence fee payers, who have no option but to pay this BBC tax, should encourage “peculiarly, idiosyncrasy, stubborn-mindedness, Left-of-centre thinking”.

According to its royal charter the BBC should be unbiased and independent in all matters, its duty is to report but not persuade. Obviously to the upper echelons of the BBC the charter is all bollocks. (I don’t usually swear on this blog but this is a frustrating exception).

A prime example of BBC bias comes courtesy of the Norwich North by-election which is currently taking place. Literally weeks ago public opinion came out against the EU, or so the electorate thought when it gave the highest vote to the Conservative Party (which has given a false impression it is anti-EU), the UK Independence Party (which is genuinely anti-EU) and other parties which also express doubts about the EU. The Labour and Lib Dims did badly.

So, here we are, our new MEPs have hardly had time to find their way around the European Parliament, the Euro election dust has still not settled, and what is the BBC doing in Norwich North? Pushing the pro-EU Green Party which only managed to get one MEP elected compared to the Conservative’s and UKIP’s 13 each. If that’s not bias I’m the six o’clock news.

Naturally, the chaps and chapesses from the BBC, all of whom would have found their jobs in the pages of the left leaning Guardian newspaper, are having great problems with the Norwich by-election. They know that Labour is in for a real hammering and there is little they can do about it, they obviously don’t want either of the top performing Euro election parties, the Tories and UKIP to do well, so the next best thing for them is to come out with all guns blazing for the Green Party instead, despite the fact the public at large only give that party scant support.

In fact the BBC has been so biased in this election UKIP, despite the mass of support given to it in recent weeks, has hardly got a mention in all the BBC reports. If the BBC were to lean any further to the left it would be horizontal!

Monday, 20 July 2009

INJUSTICE

One of the reasons I became involved in politics was through a sense of injustice and betrayal – I began to realise that membership of the European Union was both an injustice and betrayal of the British people.

Normally I am quite a placid and easy going sort of chap, I would much prefer to be sitting in a pub enjoying a pint of real ale and convivial company than pounding the streets delivering leaflets and pestering people on their dorsteps, but I do this because, like many others, if we don’t injustice will be allowed to prevail.

Every time I see or read about injustice I get frustrated and angry, and yesterday (Sunday 19th July 2009) my blood began to boil when I read the front page of the Mail on Sunday: “5m motorists to lose crime victim payout’.

This is yet another, of far too many penny pinching and spurious ideas, to be launched by this nasty little defunct Government we are blighted with in this once fine land of ours today.

The idea is that anyone who has been caught speeding or committing a motoring offence could find that if they become victims of crime any compensation due them will be cut. So, if you are a woman driving along and fail to notice a little visible speed sign and get flashed by one of the proliferation of oppressive speed entrapment cameras and pick up a sixty pound find and three points on your driving licence, then shortly after become the victim of a serious rape attack, you will be delighted to know that your lapse will ensure that your expected victim compensation payment of £11,000 will be cut by £1,650. In effect the Government will be fining you £1,710 for a piddling little offence and bugger the trauma you may be going through. The injustice the Government plans to torment you with should you be gang raped is even worse as the compensation is higher the compensation due will be cut even more by £2,025.

The same applies across a whole array of victim compensation payouts, if you are brain damaged in an attack you can expect your 5 mph over the limit to cost you £26,250 at best and £37,000 at worst. Is your anger at the sheer nastiness of this Government rising yet? I know mine is.

The bit that really gets my ire is that as generally law abiding motorists we are targeted by a vast array of specialist equipment, at enormous cost, to catch any of us committing minor offences – which all will own up to and pay our fines without quibble. However, those who commit violence and criminal acts against us stand little chance of being caught, and if they are they will generally be treated leniently and their rights protected whilst we suffer the injuries these real criminals inflict upon us yet are victimised for minor offences for which we have paid our dues to society fully.

When it comes to this Government injustice is hardly the word, they are a bunch of political deviants who are now acting criminally against the electorate.

Saturday, 18 July 2009

ICELAND APPLIES FOR SELF DESTRUCTION

Are Icelands Northern Lights showing a question mark over the country?
News has it that Iceland, which has always been a self sufficient and independent little nation, with a natural geothermic supply of heating for uts homes and an abundance of fish in its waters, is considering surrendering its freedom by joining the EU.

This is sad news that the leaders of this northern land of legend think it can fair better in by being subservient EU members than standing on its own feet. This must be a double blow to the people of Iceland from their leaders after the economic disaster which struck them after the Icelandic leadership made some disasterous economic decisions leaving the country in hock to the IMF.

Some see EU membership as a belated way out of the mire of their own creating as they can expect bailouts from the EU - which in reality are bailouts from the countries that fund the EU, i.e Germany, Britain and Holland.

Not all Iclandic people are too happy with this and acording to the Daily Telegraph the balance between the ‘Yes’ and ‘No’ camps is fifty fifty, which will be critical when it comes to a referendum in 2012 - as long as negotians work out. It seems the politicians in Iceland are split too.  It is sad to say that Iceland has applied for self destruction.

EU Referendum has also commented on this news item.

Thursday, 16 July 2009

A PLAGUE OF POLITICIANS

The Palace of Westminster where MPs live in a dream.

Kids sitting at their desks at the turn of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, be they scruffy little urchins from the back street slums of what we now call our ‘inner cities, or from village and town schools, would have looked at the maps of the world on their classroom walls and seen that a great swathe of the planet was marked in red to denote the British Empire. No matter how lowly, or how grand their backgrounds, they must have had a certain pride in the power and influence of their country. It was most probably for that reason so many of them went willingly to war in 1914 and again in 1939 to stand up for, and keep, our place as a power in the world.

Britain, in those distant times of around a century ago was a fully united Kingdom, our heavy industries from Scotland, the Midlands and in the south thrived, we were a centre for exploration and innovation and our towns and cities were flushed with municipal pride. We all know those days were hard and short lived for many, but it must have been a fantastic time to be alive too for those who cared about this country – and it was all done, and run, by a handful of civil servants and politicians.

What of today’s Britain where our global influence has diminished, our Empire is nothing more than a distant memory and a bit of red ink on some ancient fading map? Most of our heavy industry has gone, we produce a fraction of what we did in those days, we import our cars, our trains and our ships are made on foreign dockyards. Although still a member of the Commonwealth, sadly we were forced to betray those real friends when we joined the Common Market. These days most people work in none productive jobs in offices, shops, stores and supermarkets, our only remaining real wealth creators are in the financial sectors and even they are under threat from a doubly whammy of the banking crisis and proposed EU financial regulations. What a sad state our beleaguered nation has become.

Yet despite this plummeting in fortunes, despite the fact we don’t even govern ourselves any more due to the actions of various treasonous British Governments giving our sovereign power away to the EU, we have one growth industry – the political industry which churns out mass produced legislation on an industrial scale.

As stated our Empire was run efficiently and profitably with a handful of civil servants, our elected political classes were fewer, many in town halls across the land did their bit unpaid, yet in today’s run-down Britain we now have 29,000 politicians and staff, at a cost of half a billion pounds – for what? These scary figures have been calculated by the Taxpayers Alliance who reported that this growth has taken place over the last thirty years when the numbers were a close to a tenth at just 3000.

We have council officers and staff on eye watering and extravagant salaries, MEPs who have none or little power whose only real role is to give the EU a fa├žade of democracy. They vote through so much legislation they can’t keep track, or pace, with what they are voting for. We have neutered MPs who live in a dream in the wonderful setting of the Palace of Westminster, whose power and influence has been stripped from them whilst they and our Government Ministers still consider themselves of great importance, yet are powerless to run the country without contravening EU rules and bureaucracy. There are pointless politicians spouting little but hot air in the Scottish Parliament and Welsh and Northern Irish Assemblies, along with their own political entourages. Even our councillors these days are paid. There was a time only a few years ago councillors did their service for the community unpaid and had great pride in the work they did for their towns and cities. Now they are paid and want to be on their council cabinets to give them an air of great importance, despite having to wade through vast swathes of local bureaucracy whilst at the same time doing less then those unpaid souls who served before them.

This country is now facing a great and devastating plague, a plague of politicians who soak our money and inflict a mass of bureaucracy upon us and blight our lives with unnecessary laws. To deal with this plague we first have to inoculate ourselves from its source – the EU. Once we are free of it we can then begin to rebuild and cull the political classes who are nothing but a hindrance to our well being as a nation. We will never see our world maps in our schools covered in red ink again, but we can, at least, see them without the EU blue flags of occupation and its noose of gold stars.

Tuesday, 14 July 2009

COULD THE ECB DESTROY THE EURO?

One of the regular Daily Telegraph columnists, Ambrose Evans-Pritchard, who writes in the business pages, has recently reported on the problems facing the European Union’s artificial currency, the euro, due to the actions of the European Central Bank (ECB).

Under normal circumstances currencies come about after the formation of a single nation, not when a number of diverse and disparate nations decide to commit fiscal suicide and create a single currency for all.

Writing in the Telegraph on Monday 13th July 2009, Mr Evans-Pritchard predicts: “Without a radical change of strategy, the ECB risks pushing the weakest states into a debt-compound spiral that can only end in bond crises and/or the disintegration of Europe's monetary union – whichever comes first.”

He points out the warning from the International Monetary Fund (IMF) which is predicting the eurozone to contract by 4.8 per cent this year. This, he warns, could result in deep damage next year as “Europe remains mired in slump even as the world recovers.”

It seems that Spanish public debt could rise from 36 per cent in 2007 to 90 per cent of GDP by 2011. He warns that “anything above 100 per cent is courting fate” He goes on to report that even German finances are falling apart.

Despite the economic problems being global Ambrose Evans-Pritchard warned that the ECB is “compounding the effect” by not joining the other nations such as the USA, Japan, the UK, Switzerland and Canada in quantitative easing. He also mentions Tim Congdon’s warnings that the eurozone money figures are “horrifying” and that the “senior people in the ECB (and the Fed) have little organised understanding of debt-deflationary processes initiated in late 2008.”

He concludes that Britain’s problems have been created by the Government which the people will soon be able to sack, but asks: “How can Europe’s voters sack the ECB?” Sadly they can’t unless they can convince their governments that the whole EU project is a bad idea and leave. Sadly, all of Europe’s politicians, including our own, listen to each other rather than those who elect them.

Monday, 13 July 2009

SPOOKING UKIP

Lord Pearson of Rannoch.

Quentin Letts writing in the Daily Mail reported on a question posed in the House of Lords by the UK Independence Party Peer, Lord Pearson of Rannoch.

The UKIP Peer put down a Parliamentary question asking the Government if ‘the Security Service has been or is active inside or towards the United Kingdom Independence Party or any of its members’. Quentin Letts said the question asked was: “Were the spooks or police collaborating with European Investigators in relation to UKIP?”

Astonishingly, rather than an outright denial, or a confirmation, all that came back from Lord West who is a Home Office Minister was, ‘no comment’.

He then said that MI5 is prohibited from ‘doing anything in furtherance of the interests of a political party’. As Quentin Letts pointed out, it was “not quite an answer to Lord Pearson’s question”.

Mr Letts theory is: “The Government states that European Union membership is in the national interest, UKIP disagrees. Might not MI5, applying logic, therefore say it should put a tail on UKIP’s wilder elements?” Considering that a large number of UKIP members are of more mature years and the members of ‘Young Independence’, which is the under thirties sector of the party are mostly young people either studying or have degrees, it takes some imagination to consider that UKIP has any wilder elements – unless this UKIP supporting blog is considered wild?

This leaves the question, are those of us who are generally interested in protecting British interests, being monitored by MI5 which in turn is acting on behalf of those in Government who are acting against our interests by surrendering our sovereignty because in reality they are protecting their own interests

Sunday, 12 July 2009

HELPING GLENN

The reason there has not been much activity on this blog was due to trolling off to Norwich to help the UKIP Parliamentary by-election candidate, Glenn Tingle's campaign.  

A number of campaigners from the Midlands descended on North Norwich and helped shove leaflets through letter boxes and speak to the locals.  Generally the feedback is good although, as with all elections, you come across some negative vibes - fortunately these were few and far between.

The biggest obstacle when campaigning for UKIP is getting past the years of brainwashing that the EU and Government has been putting out - some people (fortunately not many) actually believe the years of hype and spin that that we can't afford to leave the EU and if we did the nation would crumble, even cease to exist - despite the fact that this is what will happen if we remain in the EU.

One group of people I came across sitting outside their homes on this particular sunny day in North Norwich were typical of what we have to get past if we are to succeed in our campaign to save the UK from EU domination.  I had leafleted a number of houses and then spoke to the three people enjoying the sunshine.  The near neighbour sitting with them, when I said I was with UKIP that she had already voted by post and it hadn't been for UKIP, her friends said they never bother to vote but then began moaning about immigration.  I responded that as the EU has open borders and that everyone living in any EU member nation has as much right to live and work here as anyone born here.  They couldn't believe or take in that we could do nothing about this as long as we stay in the EU, or that the EU is taking over policy on asylum and immigration.

Despite telling them the facts they still can't believe that we as a nation are becoming increasingly powerless to govern ourselves on these and many other issues.  The neighbour then chipped in how we need the EU for our jobs and trade.  I had to explain that this was far fro the case and EU membership was not only costing us £40 million a day in membership fees, through its mad bureaucracy, directives and regulations it was costing us jobs and that the figures given for trade with the EU were a sham.  In reality when you take into account the real total of our exports to the EU we are being asked to surrender 100% of our sovereignty for around 10% of trade, which is far from a good deal.

After I put her right about why our post offices are closing due to EU postal directives, the very serious threat now facing the City of London due to the EU's proposed rules on regulating the markets and a few other facts, the response I got was: "I don't want to talk about it anymore."  The problems is that not talking about it has got us into the mess we are in - hence the reason I have driven almost 400 miles there and back to help Glenn Tingle.

Thursday, 9 July 2009

BNP NOT ON THE BLOC

When the European Parliamentary election results came in on the night of Sunday 7th June, the extreme left wing BNP, which up till then had been talked up by the BBC and other press and media, despite getting their leader Nick Griffin and one other elected, actually had a pretty bad night.

After all the hype of how well they were going to do their vote was just not there, not even in many of their strongholds such as Stoke-on-Trent where UKIP achieved the highest vote overall. Despite the jubilation amongst their members that they managed to get their first two MEPs elected, in fact the election was really a disappointment for them.

Now they have had another disappointment in the European Parliament as well. To have access to funding and for their MEPs to get on the various committees, they have to be part of a multi-nation grouping with a minimum of 25 MEPs. It has been reported that they can’t form a group and no other grouping will accept them, which means they will now have to sit in the “unattached” group in the European Parliament.

Because of this they will not be able to be on any committees, they will not have access to additional EP funds of up to £1 million a year, nor will they be allowed to have a party office or administrative staff. All they will get is their basic allowances and travel costs.

It seems they tried to negotiate with others who are normally considered to be of like minds in the Parliament, such as the French National Front, the Belgian Vlaams Belang, Hungary’s Jobbik party and Ataka from Bulgaria, but irony of ironies – and I love this bit – these other parties were worried that the BNP’s reputation would lead to isolation. BNP are definitely not on the bloc.

THE LORDS AND THE LISBON TREATY

An extract from the Lords.
EU: Lisbon Treaty

1 July 2009 : Column 218Question

Asked By Lord Howell of Guildford

To ask Her Majesty’s Government what discussions they have held with the government of the Republic of Ireland on a second referendum on the Lisbon Treaty.

The Minister for Europe (Baroness Kinnock of Holyhead): My Lords, the June European Council discussed and agreed the guarantees that the Irish Government wanted in order to address the concerns of the Irish people about the Lisbon treaty. The European Council conclusions say that the decision,

“gives legal guarantee that certain matters of concern to the Irish people will be unaffected by the entry into force of the Treaty of Lisbon”.

Those guarantees do not change the Lisbon treaty; the European Council conclusions are very clear on them. The Lisbon treaty, as debated and decided by our Parliament, will not be changed and, on the basis of these guarantees, Ireland will proceed to have a second referendum in October.

Lord Howell of Guildford: My Lords, I thank the Minister for that reply. Again, I greet her and warmly welcome her to her role as Minister for Europe after her excellent maiden speech last night. I should like to ask her about the guarantees. She says that they are legal, but in fact they have no legal force at the moment. They would have to be incorporated into some future treaty if they are not to be incorporated into the Lisbon treaty. Can she explain how that process is going to work? Which treaty will they be put into and when will this occur? That information would help us a great deal.

Baroness Kinnock of Holyhead: My Lords, what we have in the guarantees will become binding in international law when the guarantees are translated into a protocol at the time of the next accession, which presumably will be when Croatia or Iceland comes in. Before that protocol can be ratified by the UK, Parliament must pass a Bill. As I said, Parliament will rightly have the final say.

Lord Tomlinson: My Lords, I welcome my noble friend to her new role and ask her a simple question. Does she agree that the role of the United Kingdom in relation to an Irish second referendum is to keep its nose right out of it and let the Irish people make their decision?

Baroness Kinnock of Holyhead: My Lords, I thank my noble friend for that helpful question and of course I can only agree. The point is that we have not pushed or pressed or bullied the Irish into this referendum, as some have suggested. They decided that it was a process that they wished to go through. They consulted and are consulting and, as I said, a referendum is to be held in October.


Lord Tebbit: My Lords, can the noble Baroness tell us when this Parliament will have an opportunity to debate and vote on the arrangements being made for the Republic of Ireland, which clearly have an effect on this kingdom?

Baroness Kinnock of Holyhead: My Lords, of course Parliament will have the opportunity to debate all the issues and the guarantees that I mentioned earlier. There is nothing in the guarantees that was not debated and discussed by Parliament. The guarantees that we have on taxation, on the rights of defence, in particular, and on the right to life were the key concerns and were discussed by Parliament and by others who have ratified the treaty.

Lord Dykes: My Lords, I endorse the warm welcome for the Minister in this, her first Question Time, and wish her well for the future. Is not this absolutely and totally a matter for the Irish people, unlike last time when there was huge outside interference from British and other Eurosceptics? Does she agree with me and an article in the Irish Times of 17 June that last time none of the consequences of rejecting the treaty was properly debated,

“but they have been dramatically brought home to voters since then ... there has been a substantial shift ... to the Yes side since last autumn”?

Baroness Kinnock of Holyhead: My Lords, I thank the noble Lord for his important intervention. The European Union has listened carefully to the Irish people and has respected the position of the Governments and the parliaments of the countries that have ratified, too. That is an important point to make.

Lord Anderson of Swansea: My Lords, I give a warm croeso to my noble friend, who seems totally at home in your Lordships’ House already. Will she confirm that there was in no way some sinister manoeuvre on the part of the European Union, but that this was a specific request by a sovereign Government—the Government of the Republic of Ireland—to which the Council of Ministers responded positively?

Baroness Kinnock of Holyhead: My Lords, I thank my noble friend. We were giving the Irish Government what they wanted, which was to address the concerns that people had about the Lisbon treaty. It is another important step towards bringing the treaty into force.

Lord Pearson of Rannoch: My Lords, I welcome the noble Baroness to her new position and, indeed, commiserate with it, but will she tell your Lordships, and through your Lordships’ House the Irish people, what happens if there is not another accession treaty for Croatia, Iceland or any other country? What then is the position of what she calls the binding guarantees if they cannot be turned into protocols? Would she also be good enough to answer the question put by my noble friend Lord Tebbit, who asked whether your Lordships’ House and the other place would be able not only to debate these binding arrangements and/or protocols, or whatever they come to be called, but to vote on them?

Baroness Kinnock of Holyhead: My Lords, it will remain as I said: the binding guarantees will be in place until such time as they are transferred and become part of the protocol. That is likely to be in the reasonably near future and the Irish are agreed that they are comfortable with it.

Lord Hannay of Chiswick: My Lords, will the noble Baroness accept from these Benches, too, our congratulations on her first appearance at Question Time? Does she not agree that it is slightly baffling that such a fuss is being made about this matter when—I think that I am right in saying this, but perhaps she will confirm it—the obligations that this House endorsed in the Lisbon treaty are not being changed by one iota? Also, as every one of the guarantees and clarifications given to the Irish are either neutral for us or beneficial to us by entrenching subsidiarity and by making it clear that the European Union does not have the right to alter company taxation, is it not a little odd that there is not more cheerfulness around?

Baroness Kinnock of Holyhead: My Lords, I agree very much with the noble Lord and thank him for his comments. What he says is true: there is nothing at all contained in the guarantees that we have not seen. As I understand it, noble Lords debated and discussed these issues for 25 days in Parliament, so they will be much more aware than I am of the detail that was gone into. I am surprised that some Members are not aware that everything in the guarantees has been agreed by the Parliament of this country.

Lord Lea of Crondall: My Lords, if and when the Irish people accept these new arrangements, does my noble friend agree that the logical advice for the Conservative Party to take, not to mention UKIP, is that often given by Denis Healey: when you are in a hole, stop digging?

Baroness Kinnock of Holyhead: My Lords, I thank the noble Lord. Again, I can only reiterate that there are issues that have been resolved by the summit undertaken by the Council of Ministers, at which our own Prime Minister was present, and all these matters were discussed and resolved on the basis of ensuring that the Irish Government felt that the concerns of the people of that country could be addressed. Nothing in the treaty will change and nothing in the guarantees will change the treaty as your Lordships agreed it.

Lord Stoddart of Swindon: My Lords, I, too, welcome the noble Baroness to this House and congratulate her on her ministerial appointment. I never thought, when I first met her in 1970, that at any time I would be addressing her as “the noble Baroness the Minister”, but I am proud to be able to do so. To get back to the question—Noble Lords: Hear, hear! Lord Stoddart of Swindon: My Lords, would it not have been better if the Commission and the Council had accepted the Irish no and renegotiated the Lisbon treaty so that the guarantees that are now being given to the Irish could have been given to all of us?

Baroness Kinnock of Holyhead: My Lords, I did not expect to be addressing the noble Lord as a “noble Lord”, either. I reiterate that no one in the other member states of the European Union undertook any bullying or cajoling of the Irish on this matter. It was decided that it was in the interests of Ireland to try to pursue the concerns that the Irish have about their position in the EU and that is exactly what they have done. Other member states have facilitated that in whichever way they can, but again I say that it is the business of the Irish; it is their concern, not that of anyone here. I am certainly not saying that it is our business to tell them what they think is good for them.

Wednesday, 8 July 2009

COOKING THE GOLDEN EGG GOOSE

The longer we as a nation stay in the European Union the more imperative it becomes that we leave. Almost every day the news throws something up from the EU which highlights yet another EU related threat to our well being as a nation and another EU devised curbing of our right to govern ourselves.

On the front of the business pages of today’s Daily Telegraph (8th July 2009) is a headline which screams out: “EU reforms to take away UK voting powers”. This article written by Ambrose Evans-Pritchard relates to the EU’s meddling in the way it is “considering a voting structure for its new apparatus of financial regulation that would make it almost impossible for Britain to block measures, even if they pose a major threat to the City of London.” As Amrose points out.

He reports that the EU has set up three supra-national bodies with full-time staff to oversee banking, insurance and securities. The powers the EU will invest in them will be binding and will thus limit the UK’s own Financial Services Authority to simple “day-to-day” management.

The normal way things are usually done is by qualified majority voting (QMV) which gives each EU member country a weighting dependent on size, but according to Ambrose Evans-Pritchard the EU is “mulling a simple majority system, making it harder for the UK to mount a "blocking minority" with like-minded allies.” This would give the small nations equal voting rights as the larger nations such as Britain, France or Germany.

In the same edition Damian Reece commented on this and said that the “EU dog will not only bark but will take a bite out of the City”.

The City of London as a major trading centre has been under threat from various EU measures for a long time. It has been pointed out that if the square mile was a country in its own right it would rank quite highly, anything that threatens it as a trading centre threatens the whole wealth of the UK and the well being of every British subject. The irony is, out of the 27 EU member nations, only three of those nations are net contributors. They are Germany, Britain and Holland – if the EU through its insane addiction to bureaucracy and regulation destroys the City of London it in turn will impoverish the UK. That in turn will reverse Britain’s position of a net contributor to a dependent nation status. This is like cooking and eating the goose that lays the golden eggs. But who has ever considered the EU, its acolytes and drive it forward to show sanity or any form of rationality.

Like all parasites it will destroy its host and when that happens it destroys itself. As long as we stay in the EU, I the words of Private Fraser in ‘Dad’s Army’: “We’re doomed, all doomed.”

Monday, 6 July 2009

THE LAW ON TREATIES

Someone I know within the anti-EU campaign has been studying the Vienna Convention on Treaties in relation to the convoluted and extremely confusing document, which is the Lisbon Treaty, and has written to the UN leader about it.

In a two page letter to Ban Ki-Moon one section of the letter pointed out: “Having looked at the Vienna Convention on the Law of Treaties, I took particular note of Article 31, and in particular section 1, General rule of interpretation, Article32, Supplementary means of interpretation, Article 40 Amending Treaties, Article 49, Fraud and others up to Article 62. These articles are in this Treaty for a purpose. Long lasting Treaties should be honestly written and clear so that all involved can understand the true meaning of them for these are meant to be long lasting and binding, therefore great trouble should be taken in the drawing up of the Treaties-the previous now abandoned EU Constitution took longer than two years. All should understand fully in complete truthfulness and in complete understanding so that in the ratification and the people that they apply to can understand them fully.”

Many people in this country see the abandonment of our sovereignty and the handing over of governance to the EU to be illegal as it is treason – which there can be no denial. The trouble is trying to get any authority to take this seriously as those who hold the power to do so are the ones committing the crime of treason – it’s like asking a thieving policeman to arrest himself.

However, if you read the above section of the Vienna Convention and apply it to the Lisbon Treaty which was deliberately drawn up so that no one can understand it, the EU has actually committed a crime under international law as laid down by the UN.

It seems that Ban Ki-Moon nor anyone else from the UN bothered to responded to my friend, the letter writer, but what if Bank Ki-Moon found a sudden flood of letters quoting the above passage? would the UN be obliged to take the EU to task over the confusing wording of the Lisbon Treaty?

Just in case you are inspired to do a bit of letter writing, here is his address: His Excellency Ban Ki-Moon, Secretary General, United Nations, New York, USA.

Friday, 3 July 2009

THE TRUTH ABOUT COMPULSORY ID CARDS

The press and media have been taking Alan Johnson's recent statements about ID cards no longer being compulsory are being premature. Here is an extract from No2ID's latest newsletter. This anti-ID card campaigning group give a more sobering view. Read on.

The ID scheme has NOT been shelved, cancelled, or even significantly changed.

Once more government spin has triumphed and much of the media has got it wrong. The new Home Secretary Alan Johnson has not made any significant changes to the scheme. Compulsion by stealth is still the order of the day, just as it always was. Someone joining the ID scheme 'voluntarily' will still be placing control of their identity in the hands of the IPS for life.

The Home Office line remains the same. No compulsion (as the Home Office defines it) was going to be applied until almost everyone had 'volunteered' and then it was only a matter of rounding up a minority of resisters and marginalised people.

The Home Office's idea of "voluntary" is not the same as yours and mine. Since 2004 the scheme was (and it still is) to proceed by "designating" one-by-one under the Identity Cards Act 2006 other documents issued by official bodies -- in the first place passports.

Once a document has been designated, you won't be able to apply for one without also applying to be entered, for life, on the national identity register. If you don't agree to be registered it won't be that you are refused (say) a passport; you'd have voluntarily decided not to apply. There's no compulsion to have a passport. It is useful for travelling. But you aren't compelled to travel.

Or (say) to drive. Or to work as a security guard. Or with children. Or in healthcare. To get parole from prison. To practice as a lawyer. ... Any official licence, registration certificate or permit can be designated, and -- in the home office's skewed logic -- handing control of your identity to the Home Office's Identity and Passport Service will still be entirely voluntary.

That they were due for a confrontation with the airside worker's unions over designating new passes at Manchester and City Airports is an illustration of just how voluntary "voluntary" really is. But the fact they have now ducked that fight for political convenience suggests saying no does work - if you say it loudly enough.

It is still not too late for MPs to derail the scheme by repudiating the regulations due to be debated next week and detailed in the last newsletter. Only one of those statutory instruments has been dropped. If you have not done so already, please contact your MP HERE.

(NO2ID's lobbying guide, written for us by the former assistant of a very distinguished retired minister, is brusque but absolutely to the point). See Here.

Peers will also have a vote on this; so if you happen to know one (or be one), then it would be a good idea to alert friends in the Lords now that the matter is soon to come up.
Visit the No2ID web-site.

Thursday, 2 July 2009

ONE LAW FOR ALL

The reasons there have been no postings on this site for a few days is down to a visit to foreign climes, I have ventured across the border into North Wales as my old Mom, who lives in a village in Snowdonia, was in need of an eye operation at her nearest hospital which is around thirty miles from where she lives – but that’s another tale.

Being in Wales, as I often have to be to see my mother and do a few jobs for her, I have become aware of how there are now one set of rules for us English and another for the Welsh since devolution – it’s the same too for the Scottish. A typical example was this simple visit to the hospital, something that gets more frequent as your parents age. A couple of weeks ago we had to get Fred, my father-in-law to his nearest hospital one Sunday morning after a bit of a scare. Fortunately he was ok, but after several hours parking at the Good Hope hospital in Sutton Coldfield my fiscal resources looked less healthy than that of Fred after paying my parking bill. Not so at Ysbyty Gwynedd Hospital in Bangor – parking there is free as it is in all hospitals in Wales – free prescriptions too.

These little injustices, such as special privileges for those living in some parts of the British Isles, whilst others such as the English are discriminated against yet still expected to foot the bill for the special concessions in Scotland and Wales, set me thinking even more about injustice after reading a news item in the Daily Mail on the 27th June 2009.

This injustice, as do so many these days, comes courtesy of the EU, as the Daily Mail reported. It would seem our superior masters in the European Union want to force our British judges to, as the DM put it, “bow to Sharia law”. This would be for some divorce cases heard in Britain including family disputes such as the dispensing of wills. Sharia law always discriminates against female members of the family, rather than sharing equally between any brothers women beneficiaries are awarded less whilst brothers are treated equally. Under British law this would not happen – all would be treated as equals.

However, the EU in its wisdom, wants those facing family courts to be able to request the court to hear the case using the law of whichever country the couple have the closest links to. Courts would be forced to adopt the legal systems of all twenty seven member nations and even further afield, such as Sharia law.

To my mind this is sheer madness, I was always raised to accept there was one law of this land meted out equally to all who faced it no mater who you are, where you are from or what your religious views were. That, to me, was clear, simple and fair. These days fairness no longer matters. As the debate about the rights, or not to wear burqa’s rage, which is an insignificant argument as anyone should have the freedom to dress as they please as long as they are not bullied into it, the whole framework of our once blind justice is being dismantled whilst few seem to notice. The daft thing is, should the burqua debate end in court – what system of law will ponder the issue and will justice be given impartially? There should be one law for all which treats us equally – that law should be our common British law whoever you are as long as you live in Britain.