Monday, 31 August 2009


As the days get shorter and the evenings darker, from tomorrow (1st September 2009) a darkness will fall upon us on the first day of the EU imposed ban on the sale of normal incandescent light bulbs that have served us so well.

No longer will be able to buy 100-watt clear or pearl light bulbs, nor the candle shaped bulbs that some light fittings require, from now on the only choice will be the so called energy-saving bulbs that emit a low light, and will make many light fittings in people's homes useless.  

In its usual ill considered and stupid manner, the EU has made this rash decision and as usual our feeble EU compliant Government have imposed this dark directive upon us taking the light out of our lives.  If the EU thinks this less than brilliant idea is going to save energy it has made a huge mistake.  The outcome will ensure that many good and serviceable light fittings will be scrapped, well before their time to be replaced.  Added to that, most people will increase the number of light fittings in their homes to gain extra light to compensate for the loss of light from the lower performing EU approved bulbs.  The effect of this, of course, as anyone with two GCSE's to rub together will tell you, there will be a surge in the use of energy as new fittings are made and the increase in the use of light bulbs will probably outweigh any meagre energy savings which these unpopular bulbs will bring.

To add insult to injury, the EU has been forced to admit that the new light bulbs give off less light than the more popular and cheaper traditional bulbs.  Test have shown that one of the new energy-saving CFL bulbs only produce 58% of the illumination of a normal 60-watt bulb.  Despite this admission those who dare to disobey our master race in  the EU by selling or smuggling traditional bulbs will face prosecution and a whopping great fine.

This ban on our much loved light bulbs will create many problems, traditional fairground rides with all their flashing lights can't use energy-saving bulbs, then there is the disposal of these new bulbs at the end of their dull lives which is going to be a problem as they are full of mercury and other poisons.  This is despite an EU-wide ban on most products which use mercury such as barometers which uses only a tiny fraction of the mercury compared to the EU approved bulbs.  But of course as we would expect nothing more from the EU - the whole thing is a bit dim.


Tom McCartney's latest cartoon.
There has not been much time for blogging, but here is the latest cartoon from the Staffordshire anti-EU campaigner Tom McCartney.  As they say, many a true word spoken in jest.

Saturday, 29 August 2009


Derek Bennett muses at the end of the week.

Despite the fact I do quite a bit of writing and try to get something new on this blog most days, which is often easier said than done, it’s not very often I get the opportunity to indulge in a bit of musing – so this fine Saturday while I have a bit of time to reflect I thought it would be good to have a muse about the week, things in general and the bank holiday weekend to come.

This last week I have been blogging about injustice in our society and police heavy handiness, Anne Palmer who is a tremendous researcher kindly sent me a piece about the EU’s treaties to pop on the blog and not to forget the No2ID press release I have posted too. This last week I have also vented my frustration with David Cameron and his Conservative Party. As someone who used to treat voting Conservative as almost a religious experience I get really angry with the betrayal of that party and how Cameron is leading some pretty good people up a trail that will take them to no other place than EU subservience and utter misery. Sadly, those following him can’t see it coming.

Anthony Coughlan of the Irish National Platform also sent around an e-mail asking for the people of Britain to support the ‘No’ campaign in their second Lisbon Treaty referendum, which I posted too, but what of other things?

These last few days Adair Turner who once Chaired the Confederation of British Industry, and has since become Lord Turner, revealed just how much of a useless prat he is. Over the year as our manufacturing base and heavy industry has declined, the one wealth creating industry we have left, if you can call it an industry, is our financial sector in the City of London where vast fortunes are made. The last thing any sensible government would want to do is introduce laws or taxation which threatens the City – Lord Turner has proposed just that.

Just to show what a twerp he is his Lordship has proposed a Tobin tax, a tax on every speculative transaction, this would have the effect of closing down the City of London and shifting the business – and the profits – to another less regulated part of the world. Nigel Farage the leader of the UK Independence Party was scornful of Turner’s mad idea.

In the business section of Friday’s Daily Telegraph (28-9-2009) it reported problems in the eurozone due to the decrease in credit. Several ECB governors have had to warn people not to build up their hopes of a recovery due to this, although the ecomomies of France and Germany look as if they are recovering, according to Yves Mersch the Luxembourg governor, it is not sustainable. And so the whole euphoria of the EU’s grand project which is floated on hot air, bullshine and rhetoric drifts on towards its inevitable nemesis.

And what will I be doing for the rest of the weekend? Tonight it will be back to the Good Hope hospital where my father in law still languishes with his fractured hip. His six weeks in there have cost us a small fortune in parking fees, this does not include the £10 charge for the hospital TV rental for five days viewing. By the time you add up six weeks worth that also comes to a tidy sum too.

Tomorrow it is his Worshipful the Mayor of Walsall’s BBQ at the Lyndon House Hotel. Sounds fancy doesn’t it hob-nobbing with the Mayor of Walsall – well not really. We are both regulars in the Lyndon and over the years, with him being a Tory and I UKIP there has been a bit of banter going back and forth, and of course, when he came around a couple of weeks ago flogging hi BBQ tickets there was no escape. At least the beer will be good, as it always is in the Lyndon – I just hope the rain keeps off.

On bank holiday Monday I will have the chance to have a lie in bed and a stroll over the pub at lunchtime for a beer or two, I may even get time to take a few more photos of my town to put on the Geograph web-site as long as the weather holds out, then life gets back to normal and the campaign against our imprisonment in the EU will resume.

Friday, 28 August 2009


Walsall Council House, victim of EU scam.

EU-sceptics have been saying it for a long time, and that is membership of the European Union is the biggest con trick ever played on the people of this fair nation. A prime example of the problem of EU membership has come to light in my own Black Country town of Walsall which gives want the perfect reason why Britain should no longer remain in the EU. This was revealed in the Express & Star on Thursday 27th August 2009.

In the article entitled: ‘Authority to return £1m as receipts lost’, it reported that almost £1 million of Walsall Council taxpayer money looks as if it will have to be repaid to the EU as the council cannot find the receipts for the various groups which this money was given to under one of the EU’s so-called funding schemes.

The irony in this is such that if you didn’t laugh you would cry. The EU itself loses £ billions each and every year to fraud, corruption and sheer incompetence, its auditors have never once been able to sign off its books as so much money, mostly that of the German and British taxpayers, goes AWOL. Yet, because Walsall Council can’t find these receipts the chances are the EU money (our money) will have to go back to an organisation that will then probably lose it anyway.

Added to that, in order for Walsall council to get that £1 million from the EU, Walsall Council taxpayers had to give it approximately £1.5 million to it in the first place. All the EU has done is taken a large slice of money from the long suffering taxpayers of the town then given them a little bit of their own money back. In some circles it is known as ‘creaming off’.

As stated, here is a perfect reason why we would be much better off out of the EU. Had we been in that happy situation then Walsall Council would have been able to fund these causes to the tune of £1.5m the additional coming from what the EU creams off for itself. Sadly, Walsall has fallen victim to the EU scam.


Anne Palmer warns of the EU treaties.
I find it ‘strange’ that no one has come up with having the highest Court in this Land of ours looking very closely to see if the EU Treaties are compatible with our Common Law Constitution? I am sure that our Constitution and Her Majesty’s Coronation Oath is no less important to the people of this Country than the present Treaty of Lisbon is to the people and Parliament/Government of Germany and their Constitution. As far as I understand it, they have a written Constitution that can be altered to suit, where as our Constitution is hundreds of years old and certain parts of it cannot legally/lawfully be altered and certainly not by Government alone for part is a Treaty between the Crown and the people, one or the other has to agree. Our Constitution is indeed just as important to the people of this Country as the German Constitution is to the people of Germany.

Perhaps it is time for the new Supreme Court to see if the Treaty of Lisbon is compatible to our Constitution and that our Constitution remains “supreme at all times” and can override the EU Treaties and our “sovereignty” remains in full.

There are some people that think we have no Constitution, some because there is already a proposal to put forward a new written Constitution which may contain a new Bill of Rights all of which Lisbon, if it becomes ‘active’, will have “Competence” over, but in the voting for the ‘new’ they may be destroying their own unique Bill of Rights 1689 which contains the Oath of Allegiance we all bear to the British Crown and the great Magna Carta so admired throughout the world. It is a matter of the highest constitutional importance whether the Treaty of Lisbon is compatible or not with our Common Law Constitution and Her Majesty’s Coronation Oath to uphold the ‘laws and customs’ of the Realm on behalf of the People.

Our Government has very recently needed to use part of our Common Law Constitution, namely Article IX of the Bill of Rights 1689 in the Parliamentary Standards Act 2009, proving without doubt the whole exists. The first entry in that act reads, Article 1: "Nothing in this Act shall be construed by any court in the United Kingdom as affecting Article IX of the Bill of Rights 1689". The Bill of Rights 1689 Article IX provides "that the freedom of speech and debates in Parliament ought not to be impeached or questioned in any court or place out of Parliament". This section is to remove any doubt about whether any provision in the Act affects Article IX.

I make this approach to you because the people of this Country are so angry-you only have to read the Telegraph Blogs to realise that, and the people are simply not going to allow their way of life and their children’s future to be changed to the Continental system without their whole-hearted agreement. I hope that you will take up this fight to save our Country, because it is YOUR Country too, so I ask, beg you to fight on behalf of most of the people in this Country. So many have fought and died to prevent strangers from imposing their constitution and laws on this Country, yet as soon as the last war was over, another ‘different’ way was found to impose foreign rule on to the people of this Country through EU Treaties eagerly entered into by those that accepted the words of strangers rather than the words written in our Constitution. Yet the truth of the contents of those Treaties has never been told to the people of this Country, or the true affect those Treaties would have on their daily lives-FOREVER.

I had no idea just how much I was banking on a legal challenge. I feel bereft, as if I have lost something or some-one very special, which I suppose I have or at least lost a chance of a fight of saving it for I, along with all those that feel the same as myself, will have lost our very unique English way of life should Lisbon and its opening up of the continental system here in our beloved Country come about.

I have tolerated the loss of our laws, the humility of people being "financially penalised" for such trivial things such as leaving a dustbin lid a couple of inches higher than the brim of its main body, or even leaving it out too long, and for people being criminalized as a terrorist for shouting, "Rubbish" at a Labour Conference. This once free Country is now known as the Surveillance State of the World, spied on where-ever we go.

The indignity of having to have an ID card with intimate details held on a Data Base to be shared by all and sundry, this when I vowed I
would never have another ID Card after having to 'produce' when asked
by the police throughout the last war.

I am in mourning at the loss of my freedom and all because not enough money could be found to have a 'go' at least one Legal Challenge. It should not cost any one of us one "Penny" to try to honour our Oaths of Allegiance to our Queen (Crown) and our Country. So many died
fighting in two world wars to keep this Country free to govern tself,
they gave their lives for their Country and its people, yet for the want of money a whole country and all in it is lost. Maybe the time will come when ALL will have forgotten what it was once like to be FREE.

For want of a nail the shoe was lost.
For want of a shoe the horse was lost.
For want of a horse the rider was lost.
For want of a rider the battle was lost.
For want of a battle the kingdom was lost.
And all for the want of a horseshoe nail.

The Official Journal of the EU, C 321/6 dated 31.12.2003

Thursday, 27 August 2009


In a press release sent out by the anti-ID card campaigning group, No2ID, it stated that millions of people working in education in health or as volunteers could come under pressure to be fingerprinted and obtain a national IDcard, it was revealed today (27th August 2009).

Research by online IT magazine The Register has uncovered proposals to use ID cards and the national database behind them to support Criminal Records Bureau (CRB) checks – which are due to be extended to many more categories of people.

From October this year people working in all sort of roles will be compelled to be registered with a new vetting body the Independent Safeguarding Authority, which may eventually keep tabs on around 11 million workers and volunteers at any one time. ‘Enhanced’ CRB checks mean not just criminal records, but police intelligence files containing suspicions, opinions and unsubstantiated allegations, may be used for the purpose.

To make this massive administrative task a manageable one, officials are aiming to use the Home Office’s ID database, which is going ahead. ID records and police intelligence records would end up connected for millions. One of the most frightening predictions of campaigners against ID cards - that the ID *scheme* will be an easy reference to all official files and a key to the most private information about every one of us - could be coming true before a single ID card has been issued.

Phil Booth, National Coordinator of NO2ID said: 'This is entirely consistent with the various forms of coercion strategy they've been working on to create so-called volunteers for ID cards. 'Biometrics are part of the search for clean, unique identifiers. But it's patently ridiculous given another part of the plan has people registering fingerprints in high street shops.'

Guy Herbert, General Secretary of NO2ID said: 'Ministers are always quick to point out the ID database itself will not contain criminal records. The covert programme unearthed by The Register shows what a fatuous piece of misdirection that is. If the
CRB gets its way, then for millions of people their ID card would be directly LINKED to a detailed police record and a scoring system designed to evaluate their suitability for various jobs.'


Many years ago, in the days when this blogger lived a normal life before joining the campaign against EU tryany, Mrs B and I had several wonderful holidays in Sorrento, Italy. There we met lots of nice people both local Italians and other holiday makers from many parts of Europe, including on one holiday a family from Sweden.

Sitting by the pool one afternoon I got chatting to this Swedish gentleman and asked him if he had been to England, he replied in his Swedish accent: “Oh yes, I have been to London and Didcot”. My instant reaction was complete puzzlement, I could understand him going to London, but what the bloody hell did a Swede see in sodding Didcot?

When I looked at him in a puzzled manner and queried what on earth had taken him to Dicot, he instantly whipped out from under his sunbed the Swedish equivalent of Train Spotters Weekly and replied: “Ya, I like steam trains and I went there to see the trains”. I have come across all sorts in my sixty or so years on this planet, but a Swedish train spotter was definitely a new one.

For most of us mere mortals we have a job to fathom why anyone would want to go into raptures over steaming, rusting lumps of metal just because they run on rails, but some do and for them it is just a bit of harmless enjoyment – so why should we impinge on their freedom to go about their hobby?

Sadly, the police in Pembrokeshire take a different view and any woolly hatted anoraks have to be interrogated, as holidaying train spotter Stephen White discovered when security cameras picked him up photographing ancient diesel trains near an oil refinery.

The bizarre thing about this tale is that it has just been revealed just how useless the mass of security cameras are in this country, despite their being almost one camera to every person in the land and Britain the most spied on nation in the world (even more that Communist China). This vast array of monitoring technical equipment only accounts for a handful arrests annually, the £ billions we have tied up in this equipment is virtually useless.

So how ironic is it that a harmless anorak, taking some piccies of a couple of clapped out engines, gets harassed by the local rozzers because he was spotted on a camera and the registration of the car he was in taken.

From then on this tale becomes even sadder than a train spotters anorak. As Mr White, who hails from Somerset, was on holiday in South Wales the police visited the home of his sister three times when she was out and even called her mobile in the early hours of the morning, plus they stopped her car in the street as Mr White’s car was traced to her home. They demanded she take the photos into the police, which she refused as she did not want to disturb her brother and his families holiday.

Mr White and his family were then pulled over by the police with blue lights blazing who then treaded this ordinary family as if they were a bunch of terrorists, there was even a threat of Special Branch officers investigating. All this despite the fact the oil refinery can be looked up in some detail on Google Earth.

What a mad country we have become when those convicted of real terrorists offences get treated leniently and freed because they have a limited time to live, when thousands of crimes go undetected because the cameras that are supposed to prevent crime and protect us are useless, and an innocent train spotter gets such treatment. Let the cameras create the strain.


A little time ago my good friend from Wonko’s World, who is far more adept with interthingy than I, helped this lowly blogger to set up a site monitoring system which helps me see how many hits this site gets each day and where the hits are coming from.

It’s quite fascinating to see all the part of the world and some of the organisations who come visiting. Someone from Nevada is a regular visitor, there are often visits from Brussels, but today (27th August 2009) at 10.11 am this blog had a visitation from the European Court of Justice in Luxembourg.

So, welcome to the ECJ, I hope you found something of interest and learned a little from your visit. We all hope too that you now know why the EU is such a bad thing and if there was any real justice there would be no European Union, no Lisbon Treaty and no EU laws and directives.

Wednesday, 26 August 2009


Watching the antics of the Conservative Party and its leader, David Cameron, must be akin to watching the sinking of the Titanic. There was no way that gigantic ship was ever going to sink – but somehow it did – and all from a tiny scrape on an iceberg.

The Tories iceberg, of course, is the European Union which floats on a sea of mad bureaucracy in Brussels and Strasbourg. It is an obstacle that has been known to sink the Conservative Party and several of its leaders in the past – and David Cameron and his motley crew are heading full steam ahead towards it without any protection. There can be little doubt an almighty crunch is on its way and a lot of Tory souls will soon find themselves floundering.

The iceberg this time is in the shape of the British rebate which Margaret Thatcher so valiantly defended with her iron clad handbag. It would seem, that just like Tony Blair and Gorblimey Brown before him, Cameron couldn’t give a toss about how much money the British taxpayers lavish and squander on the EU, just as long as there is a vague promise that the Common Agricultural Policy will be reformed. Donkey’s and carrots on a stick come to mind.

Just like the previous posting on this blog, the question has to be asked: what’s the point of voting Conservative these days if they are not going to defend our interests, stop wasting our money (what little we have left) and stop deluding themselves that EU membership has any benefit at all? There are no benefits to EU membership – just bureaucracy and ever increasing costs.

It seems that captain Cameron and his Tory henchmen are quite relaxed about our rebate, which as already reported, is about to leap from £4.1 billion per annum to a whopping £6.4 billion, which represents a staggeringly painful rise verging on 60%. But as far as the Tory toff is concerned, it’s ok as long as he can get some “really fundamental reforms.” Oh really? The press is not going to let this one go and has already slated the Labour plans to dump our rebate, he will also find an ever increasing EU-sceptical public are not going to be too happy having to stump up an extra £270 p.a. for the privilege of being told what light bulbs they can use by the EU.

Abandon all hope of Conservatism all who look to that party to protect us against the EU onslaught coming our way. To repeat again, what is the point of voting Conservative?

Tuesday, 25 August 2009


Anthony Coughlan of the National Platform appeals to British EU-sceptics.
Dear Friends Outside Ireland,

The E-mail below is being sent today on behalf of this organisation to activists in the various No-side groups in Ireland's Lisbon Treaty referendum re-run. It will give you some idea of the current situation regarding this referendum here.

The Lisbon re-run takes place on 2 October, five weeks from Friday next.

This is not just an Irish battle for democracy in face of the EU-State-in-the-making whose Constitution would be the Treaty of Lisbon. We would like to turn it into a European battle for democracy on Irish soil - not just for this country's sake but for the sake of all our countries. 

So anything that you can do in or from your own country to show soldiarity with the Irish No-side over the five weeks to our referendum and to bring home to voters here that Ireland would not be isolated or "punished" if they dare to vote No to Lisbon again, could be very helpful to us in our democratic struggle. 

Such actions could take the form, for example, of delegations to Irish Embassies abroad to hand in letters congratulating Ireland for being the only EU country whose people are being allowed to vote on the "Lisbon Constitution". . . Or demonstrations outside the EU Commission offices in your country, protesting at the Commission's outrageous and unlawful interference in the Irish referendum campaign, something that has been sanctioned by Commission President J.M.Barrose and his Secretary-General, the Irishwoman Catherine Day.

Any such actions would of course need to be brought to the attention of the Irish media, so far as possible, if voters in Ireland are to be made aware of them. Details of the Irish media can be got on Media Live

Or people outside Ireland could send letters in English to the Irish national and provincial newspapers making various points about the Lisbon Treaty, showing thereby that people in other EU countries are against the Treaty too. Or they could write privately to friends and acquaintances they may have in Ireland, or to Irish people at addresses taken from our phone book. Or use the internet, blogs and e-mail, especially social networking sites, to send messages to people here. 

Or if people had the resources, they might consider putting advertisements in the Irish newspapers. These should not of course entail "telling" Irish people how to vote, or be hectoring or patronising in any way. They should rather make factual points about the Treaty, point out that people elsewhere in Europe are being denied a chance to vote on it, that Ireland would not be isolated if it votes No again, and appealing to Irish voters to "bear us in mind" when they vote on 2 October.

And friends outside Ireland will be able to think of other ways to show their concern and solidarity.

This organisation has not the resources of personnel or time to advise our friends abroad on the details of any such support. We merely point out its desirability as part of the international effort to defend national democracy in face of the constitutional revolution which the Lisbon Treaty would entail for all 27 EU States.

We appeal to you however to do whatever you can and to use your imagination and creativity in this matter to the best of your ability.

Yours faithfully

Anthony Coughlan
(President, Foundation for EU Democracy, Brussels; Senior Lecturer Emeritus in Social Policy, Trinity College Dublin) 

Copy of letter to Irish No-side activists for your information:

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

Tel.: 01-8305792

Tuesday 25 August 2009

Dear Friends,
There is now growing evidence that the Lisbon Treaty Re-run is winnable if the various elements on the No-side can get certain crucial items of information across to the Irish media and voters in the five weeks left from next Friday to 2 October. . . Even though it is stiil a David and Goliath struggle.

1. Lisbon would put EU law-making on a pure population size basis, just as in any unitary or federal State. At present the Big States have 29 votes each in making EU laws and Ireland has 7 - a ratio of 4 to 1. Under Lisbon EU laws would be made by a majority of the EU Member States as long as they have 65% of the total EU population between them. Instead of the Big States having 4 times Ireland's voting weight, as now, this change to a pure population basis would give Germany 20 times Ireland's weight and France, Britain and Italy 15 times each. Ireland's present voting weight of 2% would be cut to 0.8% post-Lisbon (See Point 1 in the document below for more details).

Under what conceivable circumstances can such a shift of power to the Big States be in this country's interests? How can Taoiseach Bertie Ahern and Foreign Minister Brian Cowen have agreed to such a bad deal when they signed up to the EU Constitution in 2004 - now repackaged as the Lisbon Treaty?

2. That instead of the Irish Government deciding who Ireland's Commissioner is, as at present, under Lisbon it will be Merkel, Sarkozy and Gordon Brown who will decide. Most people do not know that Lisbon entails this shift from a bottom-up process for appointing EU Commissioners to a top-down one that benefits the Big States. The Government's White Paper ignores it, but it is true. The reason is that it completely subverts the value of the promise of the EU Prime Ministers and Presidents that every EU State will continue to have its own national Commissioner post-Lisbon.

3. That Lisbon would give the legally new European Union which it would establish the Constitution of a supranational European Federal State which would be superior to the Irish Constitution and laws in all the areas covered by the Treaties. We would then be made real, and not just symbolical, citizens of this constitutionally new post-Lisbon EU. One can only be a citizen of a State and all States must have citizens. We would still retain our Irish citizenship, but our rights and duties as EU citizens would have primacy over our rights and duties as Irish citizens in any cases of conflict between the two, with all the implications of that. 

4. That a Yes vote would copperfasten the Laval and related judgements of the EU Court of Justice, which put the competition rules of the EU market above the right of trade unions to enforce pay standards higher than the minimum for migrant workers. This puts pressure on Irish workers to move towards minimum wage levels or risk losing their jobs. A No vote to Lisbon can be used to obtain a social Protocol which would outlaw these unjust verdicts of the EU Court. 

It is hugely important to get Points 1 and 2 in particular across to the media and journalists as well as voters. For they show that the Irish Government and Yes-side are lying on the most crucial issues of the Treaty, as the untruths and omissions in the Government's White Paper make clear.

May we suggest that No-side activists should seek meetings with, and maybe arrange delegations to, provincial newspaper editors, local radio stations and key journalists nationally and locally to give them these basic facts about Lisbon and ask them, if they lean towards Yes, how they can possibly imagine that they can benefit Ireland?

Please consider phoning your local newspaper and radio station and asking to meet their current affairs staff to talk to them and give them these basic facts on the Treaty, while pointing out the untruths in the White Paper. This is probably the most important single thing that concerned No-side activists can do over the next 3 weeks. 

For if the media can be induced to ask how Taoiseach Brian Cowen and former Taoiseach Bertie Ahern signed up to such a bad deal for Ireland by agreeing to this huge increase in the power of the Big States and the halving of Ireland's vote under Lisbon, the way will be open to a No victory in the referendum.

If one gets the chance, it might be worth pointing out to them also that Lisbon would give the EU the sole power to lay down rules regarding foreign direct investment (Arts.206-7 TFEU) and would strengthen the hand of the EU Court of Justice as regards harmonising indirect taxes and undermining Ireland's low company profits tax(Art. 113 TFEU; Protocol 27). 

The issue will then become what will happen if we vote No. Will Ireland be in the EU dog-house and find itself isolated in Europe? Will our economic crisis, in face of which people are understandably so fearful, be made worse by a No vote?

The reality is that if we vote No, the Czech Republic and Poland will in turn not ratify the Treaty, for they are waiting to see what Ireland does. Germany may not have ratified it either, if there is a further legal challenge there. And the next UK Government, which must be elected by next May, will introduce a Bill on its first day in office to hold a referendum on Lisbon in the UK and recommend a No vote to it. That will give our fellow countrymen and women in Northern Ireland the chance to vote on Lisbon too.

Politicians in the Big States and the Brussels Commission will be infuriated at a second Irish No, for it would baulk them in their takeover bid for the post-Lisbon EU. But people all over Europe will be cheering.

The way would then be open to a new and genuinely more democratic EU, to be embodied in a new Treaty which would repatriate powers back to the Member States, as the original 2003 Laeken Declaration envisaged, before the Euro-Federalists hijacked the subsequent EU Convention. 

Ireland's reaffirmation of last year's No in the Lisbon Re-run in five weeks time would stop this gallop to an EU Federal Superstate that would be run on most undemocratic lines, under the total dominance of the elites of the Big EU States, hand in hand with the Brussels Commission.

It is surely worth doing everything one can over the coming five weeks to save Irish and European democracy from this fate. 

Yours faithfully

Anthony Coughlan


The Lisbon Treaty Re-run Š 13 Facts

On Friday 2 October we will be voting on exactly the same Lisbon Treaty as Irish voters rejected last year. Not a dot or comma of it will be changed. Lisbon Š
1. Would radically shift control of the EU towards the Big States by basing EU law-making post-Lisbon primarily on population size, just as in any State. At present EU laws are made on the basis of a 'double majority' system - a simple majority of the 27 EU States (14 or more), as long as between them they have a qualified or weighted majority of 255 out of a total of 345 votes (Art.205 TEC*; Declaration on Enlargement). Under this system the Big States have 29 votes each and Ireland has 7. Under Lisbon EU laws would be made by a majority of States (at least 55%, 15 or more), as long as they have 65% of the total EU population between them (Art.16 TEU). This change would double Germany's voting power in making EU laws from its present 8% to 17%, increase Britain's, France's and Italy's from 8% each to 12% each, while halving Ireland's vote to 0.8%. Instead of the Big States having 4 times Ireland's voting weight, as now, under Lisbon Germany would have 20 times Ireland's weight and France, Britain and Italy would each have 15 times. The Government White Paper tells an untruth when it speaks of the 'change to a double majority voting system in the Council' (p.44). A double majority of States and weighted votes already exists for EU laws. What Lisbon does is to replace the weighted votes by population size as the key criterion for future EU law-making - thereby hugely advantaging the Big EU States at the expense of the Small.

2. Would abolish our present right to 'propose' and decide who Ireland's Commissioner is (Art 214 TEC), by replacing it with a right to make 'suggestions' only for the incoming Commission President and the Big States to decide (Art.17.7 TEU). The EU Prime Ministers have promised each State a permanent Commissioner, but what is the point of us continuing to have an Irish Commissioner post-Lisbon when the Irish Government can no longer decide who that Commissioner would be? The Government White Paper makes no mention of this shift from a bottom-up to a top-down appointment process. 

3. Would abolish the European Community which Ireland joined in 1973 and replace it with a legally new European Union in the constitutional form of an EU Federation. This post-Lisbon EU would for the first time be legally separate from and superior to its 27 Member States and would sign international treaties with other States in all areas of its powers (Arts.1 and 47 TEU; Declaration 17 concerning Primacy). In constitutional terms Lisbon would thereby turn Ireland into a regional or provincial state within this new Federal-style European Union, with the EU's Constitution and laws having legal primacy over the Irish Constitution and laws in any cases of conflict between the two. Ireland would thus formally cease to be a sovereign independent State in its own right in the international community of States, and become like a provincial state inside an EU Federation.

4. Would turn us into real citizens of the constitutionally Federal post-Lisbon European Union, owing obedience to its laws and loyalty to its authority over and above our obedience and loyalty to Ireland and the Irish Constitution and laws in the event of any conflict between the two. One can only be a citizen of a State and all States must have citizens. The Irish people were not that happy when they were citizens of the UK State. Although as citizens of the post-Lisbon Federal EU we would still keep our Irish citizenship, this would be subordinate to our EU citizenship and to the rights and duties attaching to that in any cases of conflict between the two (Art.9 TEU, Declaration 17 concerning Primacy).

5. Would give the EU Court of Justice the power to decide our human rights by making the EU Charter of Fundamental Rights legally binding for the first time (Art.6 TEU).
This would give power to the EU judges to lay down a uniform standard of rights for the 500 million citizens of the post-Lisbon Union in the name of their common EU citizenship in the
years and decades to come. It would open the possibility of clashes with national human rights standards in sensitive areas where Member States differ from one another at present, e.g. inheritance and property rights, trial by jury, the presumption of innocence, habeas corpus, legalising hard drugs, euthanasia, abortion, labour law, marriage law, children's rights etc. Ireland's Supreme Court and the Strasbourg Court of Human Rights would no longer have the final say on what our fundamental rights are.
6. Would abolish the national veto which Ireland has at present in over 30 new policy areas by handing over to the EU the power to make laws binding on us as regards public services, crime, justice, policing, immigration, energy, transport, tourism, sport, culture, public health, the EU budget, international moves on climate change etc.

7. Would reduce the power of National Parliaments to decide 49 policy areas or matters by shifting their powers to the EU, and increase the influence of the European Parliament in making EU laws in 19 new areas (See for the two lists). 
8. Would be a self-amending Treaty in that it would permit the EU Prime Ministers and Presidents to shift most remaining EU policy areas where unanimity is required and a national veto still exists - for example on tax harmonisation - to qualified majority voting on the EU Council of Ministers, without the need of further EU Treaties or referendums (Art.48 TEU). Lisbon would also extend the so-called 'Flexibility Clause', which allows the EU to take action and adopt measures to attain one of the EU's objectives even if 'the Treaties have not provided the necessary powers', to all areas of the Treaty and not just the internal market rules as at present (Art.352 TFEU). This would open the floodgates to more political integration, i.e. centralisation, by means of this article, which is already widely used.

9. Would permit the post-Lisbon EU to impose its own EU-wide taxes directly on us for the first time in order to raise its own resources for the EU itself, without the need of further EU Treaties or referendums (Art.311 TFEU).

10. Would copperfasten the Laval and related judgements of the EU Court of Justice, which put the competition rules of the EU market above the right of trade unions to enforce pay standards higher than the minimum for migrant workers. At the same time Lisbon would give the EU full control of immigration policy (Art.79 TFEU). 

11. Would amend the existing treaties to give the EU exclusive power as regards rules on foreign direct investment(Arts.206-7 TFEU) and give the EU Court of Justice the power to order the harmonisation of national indirect taxes if it judges that these cause a 'distortion of competition' (Art.113 TFEU, Protocol 27 on the Internal Market and Competition). These steps could threaten Ireland's 12.5% company profits tax. 

12. Would enable the 27 EU Prime Ministers to appoint an EU President for up to five years without allowing voters any say as to who he or she would be, thereby abolishing the present six-month rotating EU presidencies (Art.15 TEU). 

13. Would militarize the EU further, requiring Member States 'progressively to improve their military capabilities' (Art.42.3 TEU) and to aid and assist other Member States experiencing armed attack 'by all the means in their power' (Art.42.7 TEU).


Reported in the Daily Telegraph on page 2 (25th August 2009), was a snippet entitled: “Video piracy law unenforceable”.

This tiny easily missed and very short article just about sums up every reason why we should be so opposed to membership of the European Union. Although it seems ridiculous, an Act of Parliament has been proven to be unlawful simply for nothing more than the EU was not informed about it. How much more evidence do we need to prove that our elected politicians and our own Government are no longer in control?

Back in 1984 an Act of Parliament, as mentioned above, which was intended to prevent people from selling illegal videos and DVDs and to prevent pornographic material to children, went through all the usual Parliamentary procedures to be passed into British law – but one thing was forgotten – no one told the EU.

For nothing other than that technicality it has just come to light that this statute, which had supposed to be British law to protect British people and British children, has not actually been law – technically it is unenforceable for nothing other than the fact our real masters in the EU, those we do not elect or have any control over, were simply not informed.

Those who have broken this law and been punished over the last 25 years will now be able to seek damages from the Government. This one small item reveals all that is wrong with EU membership – we are not allowed to govern ourselves without first asking the EU for permission. It’s like that old joke: ‘I’m the boss in my house, I have my wife’s permission to say so’! We govern ourselves as long as we ask the EU permission to say so.


Concorde, photo by Rich Daley reproduced under the Creative Commons Licence.

Back in the days of my boyhood in the 1950’s we lived in Castle Bromwich, which was just a short hop from Elmdon Airport, now known as a Birmingham International.

One of the fascinating things for a lad growing up in the 1950’s living not too far from an airport, was to stand in our back garden looking skyward as an assortment of old propeller driven planes flew over – then of course, there was those incredibly stylish dark blue and white B.O.A.C coaches I often admired driving along the Chester Road. My reaction was always ‘Wow, look at that’, they were much more impressive than the knackered old Midland Red busses I used to have to catch to go to school.

In those distant days flying was not for the masses, to go anywhere in an aeroplane was really quite something. The ladies wore their best frocks and the gents, with pipes firmly clenched in their mouths, would make sure they were suited and hatted, usually a trilby – and they always had an overcoat draped over their arm – what a spiffing way to travel in those days.

Now we turn up at our cattle sheds we call airports, get processed, shoved and shunted around in queues to go through security where we have to almost disrobe, be frisked and sometimes interrogated. We are told that certain items are to be confiscated as we are not allowed to take them through, only to be able to then purchase them in the departure lounge shops – and finally, often hours late after delays, we get to squashed into the plane with our tee-shirted and often less than savoury travelling companions.

Flying ain’t what it used to be, especially for those who remember the days of B.O.A.C., now British Airways which, according to the business section of the Daily Telegraph (25th August 2009) celebrates its 90th birthday today. We have all flown in geriatric jets at some time, now we can fly with a geriatric airline!

What changes we have seen over the last few years at B.A., which was the airline we were once told was the worlds favourite when we wanted to “fly the flag”. Maggie Thatcher used to praise it in the days when it was under the Chairmanship of Lord King, then raving Europhile Lord Colin Marshall got his mits on it and it was never the same since.

Gone went the flag, in came ethnic mumbo-jumbo giving Richard Branson the chance to promote the flag on his Virgin Airlines, Mrs T stuck a hankie over the BA model and the airline had to back down and bring back a stylised flag PDQ.

Lord Marshall who supports the anti-British European Movement has long gone but BA is definitely having to fight hard in a tough competitive climate to stay airborne. Food has gone from its short haul flights, BA’s pilots have taken a cut in pay, its staff have been asked to give a certain amount of work time without pay or take pay cuts – how things have changed.

Happy 90th British Airways, our geriatric airline, will you still be here to see in your 100th?


The village of Dolwyddelan, North Wales
What is it with North Wales and I, why does it always rain whenever I go there, which I have to do on a regular basis to visit my dear old mom who lives in the village of Dolwyddelan.  This last weekend it threw it down ceaselessly on Sunday, but at lease the sun shone a little on Monday 24th August, 2009 before starting for home.

While I have been away from civilisation and the delights of blogging there have been a few interesting Euro stories popping up in the press such as the nonsense of the EU directive banning normal light bulbs which most people prefer.  The press made a big thing that we only have until the last day of the month to get our mits on them to stockpile for the years to come thus avoiding the dull, mercury and expensive things the EU is fousting upon us.

Christopher Booker, as usual in his excellent Sunday Telegraph column, reported yet another expose of the dangers of EU membership, this time he wrote about the EU arrest warrant which this blog has covered many times.  It seems that the number of people expected to be arrested and face injustice under this nasty bit of EU inspired legality is to treble from around 500 to as amny as 1,700.  Those British victims arrested will have no protection from our Government which has sold us down the river, they may even find they face trial for crimes in other countries which are not offences here in the UK.  Added to this, they may find themselves in a court where English is not spoken and no translators are provided.

However, the best of all the press revelations was the news that our EU payments are to rise by almost 60% - its nice to see the press catching up with us EU-sceptics who have been warning of this ever since Tony Blair sacrificed our rebate.  It seems our payments to the EU are to increase from £4.1 billion to £6.4 billion in 2010-11.  It seems the Treasury slipped the figures out just before Parliament broke for its recess in the hope no one would notice.

The thing which frustrates entirely is the Conservative mock anger over the selling off of our annual rebate, but had a past Conservative Government took us into this nightmare under a cloak of lies and spin in 1973, or even had the decency to tell us the real truth during our only referendum on membership in 1975 giving us reason to vote for withdrawal, then we wouldn't be in this mess in the first place.

While I was away in the warm Welsh rain the grinding machinery of the EU continued on its relentless course with the press just about keeping up.

Saturday, 22 August 2009


The BBC’s Radio Four Today programme (Saturday 22nd August 2009), reporting on the elections in Afghanistan, said the EU monitors who had been observing the elections had reported that they had been “fair”.

To many people across Europe the EU, voting and fairness are words that are incompatible. If the EU had any concept of the theory of fairness in elections and voting then it would have not ignored the will of the French and the Dutch when they said ‘No’ to the EU constitution. Nor would the Irish be facing a second referendum on the 2nd October when, according the EU, they got it wrong the first time they had a say on the reconstituted EU constitution in the shape of the Lisbon Treaty. Is it fair they are having to do it all over again with dire warnings that if they don'’ vote the way the EU wants the people of Ireland will be punished – that ain’t very fair is it?

The voters in Afghanistan have been shot at, bombed and been threatened of reprisals by the Taliban for daring to go out and vote and the EU decides it was fair - rank hypocrisy or what?

Friday, 21 August 2009


The aftermath of the Lockerbie outrage.

The release yesterday (20th August 2009) of the convicted Lockerbie plane bomber, Ali Mohmed al Megrahi, has resulted in all sorts of turmoil, not least in the mind of this blogger.

Megrahi was released from his 27 year prison sentence on grounds of compassion, he is, we are told, a man dying of cancer with only weeks to live. Yet there are many anomalies with this case. Why should a man who was proven guilty in a court of law for the murder of 270 innocent people be released so easily, when train Robber Ronnie Biggs who is old and decrepit, had to go through a far lengthier process to be released also on compassionate grounds of ill health? After all, the crime Biggs took part in was responsible for only one death and Biggs was not the person who struck the blow which resulted in the death of the train driver. When comparing those two crimes there seems to be little fairness in the times taken to reach these decisions

Then there is the other question, why on earth did the Scottish administration go ahead with this release when so many were against it, especially the American’s? Why too were our own Government and our Scottish Prime Minister so quiet about this whole affair? From all accounts the US President, Barrack Obama, is not at all happy about this, nor are the families of those Americans that died on that fateful flight in 1988.

One American lady who lost a loved one has accused the British authorities of doing a deal to ensure Shell and BP receive Libyan oil supplies – you have to admit she has a very valid point which ties in with the silence of Mr Brown and his Cabinet cohorts. But what of the Scottish people themselves – especially those in Lockerbie whose town was torn apart by the falling wreckage? There seems to be little comment about their feelings.

Then we have the issue of Megrahi’s guilt, was he a victim himself? He has claimed innocence all through, after leaving Scottish soil he made a statement yesterday expressing his innocence and gave his sympathy to the families of the dead. Dr Jim Swire whose daughter was one of the Lockerbie victims is convinced that Megrahi was innocent. There is much to confuse about all this for those of simple minds like this blogger.

If Megrahi was innocent and new evidence had come to light, why not an appeal? As someone who hates injustice and cares for liberty the thought of an innocent man being imprisoned for a crime he did not commit is as upsetting as the outrage itself. Some are convinced of his guilt on the basis that Megrahi was known to transport detonators – but being convicted for one crime does not automatically mean that person is guilty of another offence. This is where the principle of not giving details of past offences to a jury is so important – it prevents them from pre-judging that person and means they only try the defendant on the case in hand – not on all the naughty things they may have got up to in the past. Sadly, like so many other principles of British justice this rule is under threat as our EU supine Government is gradually changing our system of law to that of the European corpus juris system.

How also, has the Scottish executive, run by the SNP, been given the power to make a decision that undermines our long standing alliance with the USA? Tiny little Scotland which generally has no power or influence in the world has, in effect, stuck two fingers up to the most powerful nation on the planet in a case of the Mc mouse that roared. Is the very reason for Megrahi’s release down to devolution? The majority of British people at the time of devolution were opposed but denied a say in the break up of the nation, all once again to comply with the EU’s dictate to create a ‘Europe of the Regions’. The English, who were also part of the union, were not given a say, or a referendum on this break up, only the Scots and Welsh had a vote. Despite this we could all suffer the fallout from what could be a flawed decision by a handful of minor politicians – we could all be the victims of EU inspired devolution.

Thursday, 20 August 2009


The police in the UK now hold DNA profiles on something like ten per cent of the population – around 6 million people. A very large number of those people who now have their DNA stored on the police data-base are innocent of any crimes – they just had the misfortune to be questioned by the police who now routinely take the DNA of all they question and then hold it for all time.

In a land that once valued its liberty and freedom it doesn’t take much logic to realise that this intrusion by a organ of the state is a direct attack against that once cherished liberty and freedom. Sadly, most ordinary people once caught up in the state’s Orwellian mincing machine find their rights and liberties are soon trampled on and they themselves become a piece of data in the system which they are powerless to remove or change.

One person who was caught up in this state mincer was the Conservative Member of Parliament, Damian Green. He, if you remember, was arrested on suspicion of Whitehall leaks and as part of the process the police took samples of his DNA. When the case was dropped and no charges made, as an innocent man he asked for his DNA to be removed from the police data-base and, as is usual, the police refused. Senior police officers want and encourage the growth of this DNA data-base irrespective of who the samples belong to or whether they are held on the guilty or innocent. Such a data-base increases their power.

Mr Green argued against this and said that he was an “exceptional case” and after some wrangling Scotland Yard agreed to remove his DNA from their records, he is now campaigning for the same right for the hundreds of thousands of other innocents whose DNA is also stored by the police.

Some people who either have little care for their own liberties, or for other more devious reasons, want the authorities to create a national data-base on all. With the DNA of all new born being taken and stored this is on its way. There are many problems with this policy of keeping such intimate records on such a vast swathe of the population, not least is the question; how safe is it? Considering the appalling lack of security it is not impossible to find our data on a lost disc or memory stick on a train or other public place, or for us to find it has been hacked into for use in criminal purposes – also how trustworthy are those left in charge of this data?

Added to this only recently it has been proven that DNA can be falsified (scroll down after opening the link) and planted at a crime scene. DNA, like so much evidence which the courts and state place so much faith in, is far from immune.

Those who are asked to provide DNA find, if they refuse are manhandled and forced to provide it against their free will – this again is an outrageous affront to our liberty, in effect it is the rape of the innocents. What would happen if a victim was to accuse the police of the rape of their DNA?

Wednesday, 19 August 2009


For seven years George Alagiah, who presents the BBC’s Six o’Clock News, has held an unpaid position in the Fairtrade Foundation as its patron. This organisation aims to help farmers in developing nations to sell their products on the world markets. The BBC who employs Mr Alagiah has forced him to step down due to its rules on impartiality.

He has run into conflict due to a programme he has made on the supply of food which could be seen as bias due to Fairtrade’s support for farmers in these poorer countries. A BBC spokeswoman told the Times online: 'The BBC has guidlines in place to ensure our reputation for impartiality is protected. That is paramount.'

Strange that, the BBC does not seem to see any link with a soft loan from the EU which contracts it to promote the it, nor does the BBC flinch at its shameless bias against UKIP in the Norwich North by-election.

Tuesday, 18 August 2009


The British people left high and dry and abandoned.

This blog has been covering the tragedy of the European Arrest Warrant for quite some time and has not been short of POSTINGS on this EU inspired abomination, as you will notice if you click on the link and scroll down. (Be prepared for long read).

There are sorry tales of people such as Andrew Symeou and Dr Gerald Fredrick Toben, both of whom have fallen victim to the EAW. All anti-EU campaigners will know of the sad fate of Andrew Symeou who was arrested and shipped off to a Greek prison on little more than circumstantial and very suspect evidence obtained under duress, but some may have forgotten the strange case of Dr Toben.

This chap is obviously a rather odious character, not someone I would ever want to defend, he is a holocaust denier which in my eyes makes him a fully certified nutter. However, as unpleasant and ignorant as holocaust denial can be, being such a barmpot is not a criminal offence here in the UK, nor is it in Dr Toben’s adopted country of Australia. Yet when Dr Toben, who is German by birth, flew into this country he was promptly arrested by British police acting on behalf of the German courts with a European Arrest Warrant. He was arrested for a crime that does not exist in this country, nor the country he had flown from, then sent off to face trial in Germany.

This and a whole load of other cases show just how dangerous, unscrupulous and unfair the EAW is. Yet despite this our EU subservient Government have, as reported in the press over the last couple of days, have opened up the possibility of hundreds, if not thousands, of British subjects being arrested here in the UK for crimes that don’t exist in Britain, with evidence based on some tenuous and suspect basis, and then to be shipped off to face a long spell in a foreign prison before they even go to court where they will be tried by a system of law of which they will have little or no knowledge.

What was originally introduced to stop terror and organised crime can now be used for such minor offences as being drunk and disorderly, minor drug related offences, driving infringements and petty theft. Those on the orders of a foreign court may find they are not only unlucky enough to be shipped off to some squalid foreign prison, if they end up in court in certain countries they will not even be provided with a translator to help them understand what is happening. If you were one of the thousands of British drivers who refused to pay a parking fine or committed some other minor infringement while on your holiday on the continent going back many years – start worrying now, you have no protection. The Government you elected to look after your interests, protect your rights and defend you against foreign interference has abandoned you – you are on your own in a very dark place called the European Union.

Monday, 17 August 2009


The front of the Daily Telegraph today (Monday 17 August 2009) had over 200 photographs of young men, all of which had been killed in Afghanistan. Each and everyone of those men, some young boys of just 18 years of age, will have a bereaved family in mourning for their loss.

Wars like this soon begin to touch each and everyone of us as to the closeness to home many of these deaths are. My own town of Walsall saw a large funeral take place just a few weeks ago, people from all over the town turned up to stand at the roadside to pay their last respects to a son of the town. Another person I have known for yours went to the funeral of Birmingham lad, Joseph Murphy who was just 18 years of age and was killed while trying to pull the body of his comrade out of the line of fire.

It is sad to say that all wars bring death and tragedy, that is why they should always be avoided. Some wars are unavoidable and have to be fought, the Falklands was one such war, but others are needless posturing by governments that have lost their way and believe a war will make them look good. Sadly, I can feel there is no other excuse than that for this war in Afghanistan.

Anyone who takes a look through the pages of history would have known you can’t win in such a place, no army lasts there including our ill equipped army of today or that in the past when we were last there.

Sadly, Afghanistan is one of histories lessons being ignored. To find out more go to the Defence of the Realm blog-site.

Sunday, 16 August 2009


Christopher Booker, campaigning journalist.
It was good to see Christopher Booker back in full EU bashing mode in this Sunday's Telegraph, for quite some time, although he still covered the madness of EU membership to a degree, he has concentrated more on the global warming scam so beloved of the BBC and our politicians who use this as a way of controlling and taxing us much more than is necessary, but today he was back in full anti-EU form.

For many the only point in paying extra for the Telegraph on a Sunday and be inflicted with unwanted glossy mag's, holiday, property and lifestyle pages which only serve to fill our rubbish bins, is to read what Christopher Booker has to reveal about the EU and confirm why we are so right to want out. This Sunday he did not let us down.

His lead article on food security highlighted the uselessness of Hilary Benn, who can't be considered as a chip off his old man's block as he lacks the passion and conviction of his dad, the old leftie Tony Benn who now speaks out against the EU and much of what this Government is doing despite the fact his son, Hilary, is a Cabinet Minister.

Booker pointed out how the vegetarian Benn can't do anything to help our struggling agricultural industry as all he can do is implement the EU's orders, which are in turn destroying our agriculture and putting farmers out of business resulting in the loss of food production in the UK.

Booker then turns his attention to the recent comments made by the front bench Tory, David Willets about the number of announcements made on our trains which now blight any thoughts of a quiet train journey. Christopher Booker points out that the train operators, like so many industries and businesses these days, is doing nothing other than obeying EC regulations. The sheer number of announcements, Mr Booker reveals, is due to EC Regulation 1371/2007 on 'rail passengers rights and obligation's', 'third package' on 'further integration of the European rail system'. This is seems, under Annex II, information is to be supplied during the journey. Considering Mr Willetts is a member of Parliament and a member of the pro-EU Conservative Party and most probably voted for this tosh, as Booker points out, maybe he should keep his mouth shut for fear of putting his foot in it.

Booker's final article is yet another of the far too many sad tales of job losses due to the folly of our EU membership. He reports how 540 jobs on Anglesey are to be lost in an area where such losses represent a major tragedy as there are few large employers to help mob up those thrown into what will now be a long period of unemployment.

The reason these jobs have been lost will be down to the closure of the island's aluminium plant at the end of September 2009 due to convoluted and ludicrous EU rules. The plant, which consumes large amounts of electricity in its smelting operation, has had a deal with the nearby Wylfa nuclear power station whereby the power station provides the aluminium plant with electricity at a discounted price as it is assured of a continual income from the plant. Everyone was happy until the EU and its mad interfering rules came along to wreck things.

When the nuclear power station went into state ownership after being acquired by the Government's Nuclear Decommissioning Authority the deal had to stop as the deal contravened EU rules on state subsidies as discounted electricity is classed as a subsidy.

He also pointed out that Britain's only other aluminium smelting plant which employs 600 people also faces closure as part of our benefits of EU membership. This plant sutuated in Northumberland produces its own power from its own coal fired power station which has failed to comply with the EU's Large Combustion Plants directive meaning more job losses and trade moving to other parts of the world where rules have little influence.

As Booker points out: "Don't expect any expressions of regret, however, from our industry minister and former EU Commissioner Peter Mandelson, or for that matter from his Conservative shadow Kenneth Clarke. Both are equally happy to see Britain ruled by our unelected government in Brussels."

This was classic Booker, I just wish we didn't need him.

Friday, 14 August 2009


It would seem that Lord Tebbit is once again slightly more than subtly supporting the UK Independence Party and its reasoned stance on withdrawal from the EU, a fact that UKIP reported on its web-site and was also reported in the Daily Telegraph.

Lord Tebbit, for quite some time, has been warning that David Cameron’s stance of trying to be all things to all men is actually creating the possible threat of an exodus of traditional Tory voters to UKIP, which will accept them gladly. Many long standing traditional Conservative’s are feeling frustrated over their party leader’s somewhat vague stance on the EU and are now looking at UKIP, especially after its outstanding success in the European elections, as a possible new home for their political views.

Ever since William Hague’s botched anti-EU election campaign in 2001, which he sort of opposed the EU but not fully with his vague Hague message: “In the EU but not governed by it”, and “We will keep the pound for the lifetime of the next Parliament”, which left voters wondering what about after that. Naturally, this failed to convince or inspire anyone. The Tories have lived in mortal dread of the EU ever since, so much so you can almost imagine Tory leadership meetings with Cameron doing a Basil Faulty saying ‘Don’t mention the EU!’

The problem this has left them is that as the country has slowly but surely is becoming aware of the seriousness of the EU problem, they are for the first time looking seriously where they can place their votes so that their concerns about the EU can be represented. Because the Tories mucked things up previously and are now too afraid to dip their toes into the anti-EU water, also the fact there is an old (now insignificant but vocal) rump of old Tory Europhiles such as Clarke, Heseltine and others still lurking within the Tory hierarchy, the EU is a place Cameron won’t go despite the problem not going away.

For him this is a problem that is going to get worse as the EU increases its already enormous amount of control over us, especially if the Lisbon Treaty is ratified and the EU, in effect, becomes a nation in its own right. Where does that leave Cameron then? He won’t hold a retrospective referendum on the treaty but as a newly installed Prime Minister he will be stuffed and have about as much power and influence as Town Hall Mayor in a rate capped council.

The effect of this, especially as the majority of the rank and file of the Tory membership, which are those who do the donkey work, have a very similar stance on the EU as the UKIP, then Lord Tebbit is correct to point out the problem which Cameron faces. The question now has to be asked, how long will it be before Lord Tebbit becomes so frustrated with the Conservative party and joins UKIP too?

Thursday, 13 August 2009


The EAW stands for European Arrest Warrant which was going to stop terrorism, drug running and money laundering, crimes which generally have a cross border nature about them. No, we were told when many in the EU-sceptic campaigns began to warn that this would have wider implications, it was not intended to pick up on other crimes - just these major cross border crimes.

Now as poor Andrew Symeou rots in a Greek jail, arrested and extradited on extremely unsound and suspect evidence which was obtained under duress, we know that once again those of us who are opposed to the EU led destruction of the nations of Europe were correct and that those Quislings who support the project of ‘ever closer union’ had once again lied and cheated, as they usually do.

Today (Thursday 13th August) the Times online reports yet another case of the EAW being used to arrest someone now living in the UK on a very dodgy basis. It’s worth clicking on the link and reading yet another sad chapter in the demise of British justice and freedom at the cruel hands of the EU. The EAW spells nothing but angst for all those who encounter it.

Tuesday, 11 August 2009


Sadly, I have been pretty busy with other things which has not given me much time for blogging, but I couldn't resist showing off a little with this short item I managed to get printed in the Daily Mail, Tuesday 10th August.

Anyone who reads the Daily Mail will have come across the answers to correspondents page where someone asks a question and other readers give their answers.  I couldn't resist answering this question: "When Halley's comet re-appeared in 1969, a flue epidemic killed more than 60,000 in Britain.  In Britain in 2008, comet Nostradamus (and others) passed by, and now we face a flue pandemic.  Were the ancients right to fear comets as bad omens?  What other natural disasters have been attributed to comets"

For a bit of fun I couldn't resist giving this answer, which the Daily Mail published: "Further to the earlier answer, during the election period in 1997, the comet Hale-Bopp passed over followed by a Labour landslide.  I firmly believe we are still suffering the consequences of this 'disaster' today."

You only have to take a look at the state of the nation, the climate of fear that the state is monitoring and controlling us which is now instilled in us, to realise the election of Tony Blair and New Labour in 1997 was the biggest political disaster this nation has ever known.

Monday, 10 August 2009


Wow, big news story on the BBC, Hazel Blears the grinning MP has been the victim of vandalism after leaving her car while out canvasing.

It seems some so-and-so’s have slashed her car tyres and smashed a window – this is a major news story for the BBC which never quite managed to cover UKIP in the Norwich North by-election despite the EU-sceptic party being the second lead party in the European elections just a month or so earlier.

So, if the BBC is to make car vandalism a top story how about the damage done to Mr Smith’s Mondeo on Sunday as well – or what about Mr & Mrs Jones having their fifteen year old car stolen or what about......


Dan Hannan MEP, agrees with holding candidate primaries.

Since giving up on the Conservative Party as a lost cause in the mid nineties due to their pro-EU stance, there have been few Conservatives I could admire. I have always admired Richard Shepherd, the Member of Parliament for Aldridge Brownhills who is the only one of the Tory Euro rebels left in Parliament. Owen Patterson MP seemed to have a bit of a vague fling towards EU-scepticism – but remains remarkably quiet these days, and the only other two are the Tory MEP’s Roger Helmer and Dan Hannan.

Dan is someone I have heard speak at meetings several times, I seldom disagree with him, that was until I read the Sunday Telegraph (9th August 2009) on the issue of open primaries to select party MPs.

When the story of the Totnes Conservative Association sending out invites to one and all to ask them to vote for the Conservative candidate they wanted hit the news, I listened to the report on the wireless and considered it a bit odd, but left it at that. Now Dan Hannan, writing in the Sunday Telegraph, has come out in support of the idea.

If this idea takes off the political parties could find they are lumbered with some really peculiar candidates. What fun it would be to go along to my local Labour Party candidate hustings, sack my long standing member of Parliament as my next Labour candidate, then replace him with some screaming left wing nutter who is going to alienate the voters thus giving me, as the UKIP candidate in Walsall South, a greater chance of being elected.

As nice as this idea is, it certainly isn’t going to do the political parties any good, in fact what will be the point of joining a party and paying your dues if your influence over who your candidate is going to be has been removed from you? Although, thinking about it, the Conservative hierarchy have become so Stalinist in recent years over candidate selection Tory activists like Dan Hannan may have more influence over the choice of their candidate than before.

Then there is cost, it seems to elect Sarah Woolaston as the Conservative candidate in Totnes cost £40,000, imagine repeating that all over the country? Dan thinks this could be much reduced if the political parties got together and held their primaries together on the same day as a local or European election. He wrote: “the additional cost of printing an extra ballot paper would be negligible.” How negligible is negligible and who pays? Currently the selection of party candidates costs the taxpayer nothing, it is the parties that pay but is he proposing the taxpayer has to stump up?

Sorry Dan, I remain a great admirer for your stance against the imposition of the EU, but on this one I think it’s a none starter.