Thursday, 30 June 2011


Sergey Prokofiev was one of Russia’s great composers; this blogger is a great admirer of his work. We all associate his composition, Troika, with Christmas time and scenes of sleighs being pulled across the snow. Then there is his wonderful and imposing piece of music, Montagues and Capulets from Romeo and Juliet, which is often used in films and on TV when scenes of Soviet Russia are being shown.

He wrote some wonderful and varied pieces of music, one of which is his music to the tale of Peter and the Wolf. This is an old tale which all have heard about the boy who cried ‘Wolf’ and revelled in the mayhem it caused, something he repeated so often that in the end none would take notice of him. So, when he really did see a wolf and cried out – he was on his own and in danger as everyone just thought he was just being silly again.

This then reminds me of the Conservative Party which has been crying EU wolf for so long that we have all learned to take little notice of their silliness and deceit. They have cried EU wolf over lots of things and strutted around pretending to look and sound like real EU-sceptics. Silly Willy had the meaningless slogan of no euro for the lifetime of his first Parliament, which then left the question: what about all the following Parliaments? They also had the all time classic oxymoron of “In Europe not governed by Europe”. I suppose they felt they could get away with that one as in reality Europe does not govern us, it is the EU, which as long as we stay in the EU then we will be governed by it.

Over my years the one thing I have learned about the Conservative Party and its leadership is never to trust it. There was a time, in my distant past, when I placed all my faith in the Tory Party and felt safe when they were in Government, and vulnerable when they were in opposition. These days I feel vulnerable all of the time, no matter whoever is in Government as none of them will stand up to EU tyranny and seem happy to do as it instructs.

So, with this in mind, the news that certain senior members of David Cameron’s inner circle are convinced Britain should quit the EU, comes with a large dollop of doubt and suspicion. Well, considering they represent the party that took us into the Common Market based on lies, signed the treaties of Rome, The Single European Act and Maastricht, promised, and failed, to give us a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty and whose leader says we should remain in the EU – would you trust them when they say such things – I certainly don’t.

We can watch what happens now with a great deal of suspicion and caution, is this really their Peter and the EU moment when they do actually come face to face with the big, bad, wolf in EU clothing? Who knows and who will listen to them?

It seems that two Cabinet Ministers have been reported to have been persuaded that the UK really would be better off cutting its links to Brussels, which is a fact all real EU-sceptics have always known and in recent times a growing number of British people too – is the Tory Party really catching up with the real world at last?

I fear I must warn any readers who stumble on this blog not to build their hopes up, especially when you take a look at who one of those so-called sceptics is, none other than Oliver Letwin, often known as Oliver Leftwing!

It seems this news is coming out of the Spectator magazine, which reported “An increasing number of people in Government are driven to distraction by these EU obstacles.” However, reality strikes and you know that none of this can be real when the article even reported the “Liberal Democrats in the coalition have taken to moaning about how much extra work Brussels imposes upon them.”

Peter and the Wolf, a tune the Tories have whistled too many times.

Monday, 27 June 2011


Any chance of getting a little closer?!

It just shows the absurdity of Council run parking regimes around the country when people, so desperate to squeeze into the last vestiges of free parking on the edge of town centres, they have to resort to such extremes as parking bumper to bumper, as these photos I have just taken show.

In the Midlands here, around my home town of Walsall, we have an army of ‘enforcement officers’ (glorified traffic wardens) who prowl the town pouncing on all unsuspecting drivers, including those who used to park for free on street to dash into shops to make a quick purchase and then go – now they come out to a ticket for not feeding a roadside machine all because they wanted to spend a few minutes to but a newspaper.

Added to that, it looks as if the section of the M6 from junction five (Castle Bromwich) to junction eight (M5 M6 link) is to undergo major alterations at a cost of £millions and masses of congestion, all to help ease the overcrowding on this section of road. The mad thing is, if you drive from the north to the south, or the other way, you are given a choice – pay £5.30 each way – that’s £10.60 by the time you return, to use the M6 Toll which by-passes Birmingham and most of the congested areas, or drive through the congested area which is not tolled. Those with more money than sense pay the toll, while others who feel their road fund licence and high levels of fuel duty are more than enough, choose the congestion.

If the powers that be in Councils and Government decided to stop the persecution of people that drive to go about their everyday lives, and if they made it easier and cheaper to park, scrapped this road toll, they would find the traffic would move quicker and Birmingham and Walsall could be by-passed by those on long journeys.

I pity the white car driver in these photos, trapped between a lamp post and the bumper of the other car – just like the rest of us – stuck in a tight spot. Let’s hope the other driver is not working late.

Now get out of that!


There is an old saying about democracy in the European Union, that if the EU applied for membership of itself it would be refused as it is not democratic enough to join.

Democracy within the EU is a most peculiar thing, the not so great and not so good of the EU talk about democracy a lot, but as soon as people demand their democratic say on matters that directly affect the EU then democracy is denied or twisted, as we have seen in several referendums where the people got it wrong and had to do it all over again.

Countries that want to join the EU have to jump through all sorts of hurdles to comply with human rights and equality, then when they are in the people are then ignored. So, considering all the noise the EU makes against regimes such as that in Libya, considering its ban on the death penalty and so much else, why does it want to cosy up to one of the world’s most powerful tyrannies which suppresses free speech, refuses democracy and executes a large number of its citizens for crime which in the UK would get a feeble slap on the wrist and sympathy from Ken Clarke?

We are, of course, talking about China which the EU is very friendly with. The EU’s “flying pig” project, Galileo which sucks in vast sums of money, is being done in partnership with the Chinese, it also gives them access to some quite high tech secrets too. The Chinese have also purchased euros instead of dollars in the past to help prop up the euro, and now it is promising to help bail-out the EU during its great Grecian debt disaster to help keep the unloved EU vanity currency alive.

The one thing I have learned about the Chinese is not to trust them, look at the way they stitched up Rover and asset stripped. We now have this thing being bolted together in a tiny corner of the old Longbridge site, which they call call an MG, despite the fact, as the Top Gear programme pointed out, is just a car already in production in China with an MG badge glued on the front.

So why is it of interest to these great Chinese tyrants to help the EU and keep the most unpopular currency in all known history alive? What’s in it for them?

The answer has to be control, as already pointed out by others, the more shares you buy in a company the more control you have over it, which is exactly what is happening here. In reality the best thing that could happen to all of us at the moment would be to brace ourselves for the ultimate crash and the great depression that will inevitably follow. To stock up on tinned foods, buy gold and prepare for the worst – without help the whole EU edifice is going to come crashing down and a lot of people are going to suffer. Sadly, there are times in history where this is the only course, just as people suffered during two world wars and the great depression.

We have to go through these times to enable us to see better days and better times, the longer the inevitable is delayed to worse the crash will be – so why do the inscrutable Chinese want the great EU crash delayed? Maybe they expect to pick up some very profitable pieces from the wreckage, just as they did from Rover. Added to that, a weak and feeble West will be less able to challenge their global dominance – we should all fear the Chinese and the EU is treading a dangerous path by cosying up to their oriental friends – who are far from democratic.

Friday, 24 June 2011


In the EU we have masses upon masses of health and safety legislation, you can't even chage a light bulb in a public building without spending hundreds errecting scaffolding first. However, in China, 'elf and safety, wotsat! Just take a look at this vegetable market - it gives a whole new meaning to HS stew - vegetable stew of course.


The UK National Defence Association (UKNDA) is sounding a “Red Alert” on the danger of further cuts to Britain’s already chronically-overstretched Armed Forces and says that the Coalition’s Defence policy amounts to “disarmament in all but name”.

The Association, which campaigns for a fairer deal for the UK’s military, is spearheading efforts to persuade the Government to recognise the need for a fundamental rethink of its whole approach to

The UKNDA’s “Red Alert” warning comes in the wake of an article in the authoritative and highly respected Jane’s Defence Weekly which claims that the Government is considering further sweeping cuts to the Armed Forces, in addition to the recent reductions and redundancies.

The options that according to Jane’s are currently being considered by the Government include: Shrinking the Royal Navy’s surface fleet to just 12 frigates and destroyers (six of the new Daring Class and just six of the Type-23 destroyers).

Terminating the Army’s future AFV programmes and replacing these programmes with smaller efforts to buy mine-protected vehicles with limited combat capabilities.

Halving the order for 12 Chinooks to just six. Reducing the number of RAF fast jets to “well under 100” from the force of 210 Eurofighter Typhoons and Panavia Tornado GR4s.

Disbandment of either the Royal Marines 3 Commando Brigade or the Army’s 16 Air Assault Brigade, or possibly disbanding both.

Commenting on these proposals, UKNDA Founder/Director Cdr John Muxworthy said: “The Government has U-turned on its National Health Service policy but by sticking to its ill-conceived SDSR and ongoing Defence cuts, against the advice of the military experts, it looks like the next patient on the NHS critical list will be our nation’s Armed Forces!

“We already have the smallest Army since the nineteenth century and the smallest Navy since thesixteenth! Any further cuts to our Armed Forces, on top of those the Government have alreadyimposed, will put the security of this country at very severe risk.

“The UKNDA, senior officers and many in the media have for months now warned that the reductions in Britain’s defence capabilities have gone dangerously too far. HMS ARK ROYAL and the Harriers have been cast aside. The strength of the Army has dropped below the 100,000 mark for the first time in more than 100 years. The RAF have already lost many of their Tornadoes and Maritime Surveillance aircraft, nine of the latter being crushed for no value at all – and at an utterly wasted cost of more than £4bn, which must be the most staggeringly short-sighted defence decision ever taken!

“And now we read of possible further swingeing cuts. This is more than a step too far – it would be a gigantic and irresponsible leap into insecurity and future insignificance. These latest proposals should be abandoned and earlier SDSR decisions reviewed, rejected and reversed. Once lost it will be well nigh impossible to restore these capabilities.

“Listen to the Service chiefs. Listen to the experienced voices of those, present and past, who have served their country and helped make it what it is today. Please don’t repeat the mantra that ‘we face difficult decisions’ – we all know that, but the choice, to save or to emasculate our Armed Forces, with all the inevitable consequences that will bring, is now yours to make, not dodge.

“You say repeatedly that ‘Defence is the first priority of government’ but when compared to the reality this statement looks increasingly hollow and almost laughable. Please have the courage to admit that the SDSR was rushed and wrong – just as you did with the proposed NHS reforms. Now, please, stop the rot and SAVE our Armed Forces!”

Links below to other UKNDA press coverage:

Wednesday, 22 June 2011


From its very inception the euro was always doomed to fail, many warned that a currency without a country would not last. One person who warned of the many problems the euro would create was one of the EU’s own economists, Bernard Connoly.

Mr Connoly was first told to stay quiet, then intimidated and finally sacked for his consistent warnings of the inevitable future failure of the euro. Sadly, he has been proved right and now the people of Europe are paying for it – and how.

The Greek economy is in tatters and the only way some resemblance of fiscal order in that nation can be resumed is for the Greeks to leave the eurozone and for them, unfortunately, default on their substantial debts.

It is grossly unfair to expect the British people to continue to pump in gigantic amounts of our money to prop up the terminal Greek economy, especially as we are having to make so many substantial cuts to essential services at home, including the closure of care homes and cuts to our police service, among other things.

If this problem, created by the EU’s insistence against all sound advice, is not corrected, then the impact across the financial markets could be devastating. The EU should forget its vanity currency and begin the task of dismantling it allowing the nations of Europe to take charge of their own economies and interest rates once again. Currently, British banks are exposed to the tune of £200billion of eurozone debt and may need further bail-outs if this problem is not tackled.

This has proved that membership of the EU and the implementation of its policies, directives and regulations have been a disaster for Britain and the other member nations. David Cameron needs to begin the process of distancing Britain from the EU rather than issuing platitudes about standing firm on the EU – then caving in. Even one of his own MEP’s Roger Helmer, has commented that the Cameron administration has ceded more powers to the EU in a short period of time than the past pro-EU Labour Government.

Tuesday, 21 June 2011


Anne Palmer, who does the most amazing work digging out all sorts of information about the EU and the devious ways of it and its acolytes, dug out this warning to Ted Heath, the treasonous Prime Minister who ensured Britain and its people would be ensnared in the EU we are stuck with today. Had Parliament taken more note of such warnings below, and those of us when we were given our one and only vote on this issue in 1975, the mess and total chaos that is now the EU would not be our problem as it is now. We would not have to squander gigantic sums of our money bailing out the PIGS of Europe, we could have sat on the side as an observer and possible adviser, but sadly few listened and here we are in the mess we see today.

Subject: Last couple of pages in one of the research Papers on the European Union Bill

Appendix 2 Letter to Edward Heath from Lord Kilmuir, December 1960 I have no doubt that if we do sign the Treaty, we shall suffer some loss of sovereignty [...] Adherence to the Treaty of Rome would, in my opinion, affect our sovereignty in three ways:- Parliament would be required to surrender some of its functions to the organs of the Community;

The Crown would be called on to transfer part of its treaty-making power to those organs; Our courts of law would sacrifice some degree of independence by becoming subordinate in certain respects to the European Court of Justice.

(a) The position of Parliament
It is clear from the memorandum prepared by your Legal Advisers that the Council of Ministers could eventually (after the system of qualified majority voting had come into force) make regulations which would be binding on use even against our wishes, and which would in fact become for us part of the law of the land. There are two ways in which this requirement of the Treaty could in practice be implemented:- Parliament could legislate ad hoc on each occasion that the Council made regulations requiring action by us. The difficulty would be that, since Parliament can bind neither itself nor its successors, we could only comply with our obligations under the Treaty if Parliament abandoned its right of passing independent judgment on the legislative proposals put before it. A parallel is the constitutional convention whereby Parliament passes British North America Bills without question at the request of the Parliament of Canada; in this respect Parliament here has in substance, if not in form, abdicated its sovereign position, and it would have, pro tanto, to do the same for the Community.

It would in theory be possible for Parliament to enact at the outset legislation which would give automatic force of law to any existing or future regulations made by the appropriate organs of the Community. For Parliament to do this would go far beyond the most extensive delegation of powers, even in wartime, that we have experienced and I do not think there is any likelihood of this being acceptable to the House of Commons.

Whichever course were adopted, Parliament would retain in theory the liberty to repeal the relevant Act or Acts, but I would agree with you that we must act on the assumption that entry into the Community would be irrevocable; we should have therefore to accept a position where Parliament had no more power to repeal its own enactments than it has in practice to abrogate the Statute of Westminster. In short, Parliament would have to transfer to the Council, or other appropriate organ of the Community, its substantive powers of legislating over the whole of a very important field.

(b) Treaty-making Powers
The proposition that every treaty entered into by the United Kingdom does to some extent fetter our freedom of action is plainly true. Some treaties, such as GATT and O.E.E.C., restrict severely our liberty to make agreements with third parties and I should not regard it as detrimental to our sovereignty that, by signing the Treaty of Rome, we undertook not to make tariff or trade agreements without the Council’s approval. But to transfer to the Council or the Commission the power to make such treaties on our behalf, and even against our will, is an entirely different proposition. There seems to me to be a clear distinction between the exercise of sovereignty involved in the conscious acceptance by use of obligations under our treaty-making powers and the total or partial surrender of sovereignty involved in our cession of these powers to some other body. To confer a sovereign state’s treaty-making powers on an international organisation is the first step on the road which leads by way of confederation to the fully federal state. I do not suggest that what is involved would necessarily carry us very far in this direction, but it would be a most significant step and one for which there is no precedent in our case. Moreover, a further surrender of Parliamentary supremacy would necessarily be involved: as you know, although the treaty-making power is vested in the Crown, Parliamentary sanction is required for any treaty which involves a change in the law or the imposition of taxation (to 75RESEARCH PAPER 10/7976

take only two examples), and we cannot ratify such a treaty unless Parliament consents. But if binding treaties are to be entered into on our behalf, Parliament must surrender this function and either resign itself to becoming a rubber stamp or give the Community, in effect, the power to amend our domestic laws.

(c) Independence of the Courts
There is no precedent for our final appellate tribunal being required to refer questions of law (even in a limited field) to another court and – as I assume to be the implication of ‘refer’ to accept that court’s decision. You will remember that when a similar proposal was considered in connection with the Council of Europe we felt strong objection to it. I have no doubt that the whole of the legal profession in this country would share my dislike for such a proposal which must inevitably detract from the independence and authority of our courts.Of these three objections, the first two are by far the more important. I must emphasise that in my view the surrenders of sovereignty involved are serious ones and I think that, as a matter of practical politics, it will not be easy to persuade Parliament or the public to accept them. I am sure that it would be a great mistake to under-estimate the force of the objections to them. But those objections ought to be brought out into the open now because, if we attempt to gloss over them at this stage, those who are opposed to the whole idea of our joining the Community will certainly seize on them with more damaging effect later on. Having said this, I would emphasise once again that, although these constitutional consideration must be given their full weight when we come to balance the arguments on either side, I do not for one moment wish to convey the impression that they must necessarily tip the scale. In the long run we shall have to decide whether economic factors require us to make some sacrifice of sovereignty: my concern is to ensure that we should see exactly what it is that we are being called on to sacrifice, and how serious our loss would be.

Monday, 20 June 2011


Mouse catcher, Tom the cat.

Anyone who owns a cat will no doubt have had a similar experience, possibly also in the early hours of the morning.

We own two cats, Danny and Tom. Danny is a timid little soul who spends all night tucked up on the bed next to us, while Tom, the intrepid tabby, is out and about doing his nocturnal stuff in our part of Walsall. Part of that nocturnal stuff is catching mice then bringing them in to the house, live, so we can all join in the fun of chasing mice at all hours God sends. Our fun started at 3 am this morning.

His usual habit is to bring the mice into the house and drop them in the hall, usually to much noise and a fair bit of mewing. Up we get to rescue yet another small rodent, victim of Tom the terible. It’s amazing just how fast a small field mouse can run and how evasive they can be, it took nearly ten minutes to catch the little blighter and set him free in the back garden. This leaves us now with the problem of another of Tom’s house guests, Supermouse who after Tom brought in and released, as he usually does, has now taken up residence in our living room.

I refer to this rodent as ‘Supermouse’ as he is proving to be impossible to catch. Neither Tom can catch him, or Mrs B and myself. Normally when Tom deposits a live and active mouse in the living room we get the humane mouse trap out, put a bit of Cadburies chocolate in it, which mice seem to find irresistible, then the following morning there is a mouse waiting, unharmed in the trap awaiting freedom – but not this little bugger.

He has had the freedom of the living room for about three days now and is having a high old time living off chocolate, which he manages to get out of the trap without setting it off. He is also managing to evade Tom too who keeps a constant eye on the underside of the bookcase. Mrs B has also put out a saucer of water for our little visitor to ensure he does not become dehydrated. How we are going to evict this little fella is anyone’s guess.

This then may give you some inkling of how soppy we are in the Bennett family about our four legged friends of all shapes and sizes, so discovering the EU is considering allowing the use of household pets in laboratories for tests does not do much to convince this already convinced Eurosceptic that there is nothing good about the EU – at all.

It has been reported that the EU is planning a directive that would enforce the UK to weaken its current legislation on animal welfare laws, if this goes through then dogs, cats and other domestic animals currently protected under British law could be used for such barbaric practices. Once again this proves the power of the EU over our sovereign Parliament and that EU membership brings no benefits at all, not even to our pets.

Any pets deemed as strays could be rounded up and used, unlike the current situation where only animals specially bred for testing are allowed – which is still far from good as no animal should suffer to test products that we use mostly for vanity.

It seems our so-called EU partners have no concerns about using dogs, cats, horses and donkeys in tests and now want us to join in further to this animal cruelty. This blogger is against vivisection and would like to see its end, but is also not supportive of those who threaten or use violence against others who have not yet learned the error of their ways. We are all God’s creatures and inflicting suffering against humans is just as bad as inflicting suffering against animals. All we need to do to stop the cruelty is leave the EU – and for Supermouse to leave my home – hopefully in one piece.


The EU, which has over the years perfected the art of spending other people’s money – mostly your money, has now come up with a magical method of disposing your hard earned income, a large chunk of which is taken in tax.

Reported in the Daily Express on the 19th June 2011, it seems the EU has spent £37,000 on a film about fairies as part of a strange project to promote, as the Express calls it, “its own fantasy land, the Arc Manche region,” which unfortunately lumps part of the South of England in with Northern France as an EU administrative area.

It seems the film is about “fairytale landscapes” and “magical tales of enchantment, fairies, river spirits and giants” within this not very magical EU region. As well as this, an additional £40,000 of taxpayers’ money has been earmarked to fund circus performers to travel the region with the sole aim of braking down national borders and increase cooperation.

The only fairytale this resembles is that of the brothers Grimm –the EU is away with the fairies – and your money!

Friday, 17 June 2011


Ponder these words: ‘We have to remain in the European Union to have influence’, or: ‘We need the EU for the benefits’, and not to forget: ‘The EU has prevented wars since 1945’. When you read the above then take a look at the mayhem and enormous cost of EU membership you have to ask yourself if those who spout such ludicrous platitudes are actually talking about the same EU that is falling to bits around us.

The situation in Greece, which is now bust and heading towards at least ten years of fiscal misery, gets worse by the day, all credit to the EU’s euro which was going to be the all singing, all dancing wonder currency back in the days when it was launched. Like all the other eurozone countries that sacrificed their fiscal freedoms to be part of this great EU federalising project, the Greeks government was incredibly foolish and sadly it is the people who are suffering, and now rioting – and to be quite honest – who can blame them.

Those in this country who act smug and say: ‘Aren’t we lucky not to be part of it and kept our pound’ can’t be so smug, sadly we’re in as much doo-dah as the other struggling EU countries because, as members of the disastrous European Union, it is British taxpayers who are currently being forced to make drastic cut backs and do without who will have no choice, or say in the matter, who will have to bail out Greece and the other PIGS (Portugal, Ireland, Greece and Spain).

Why will we have to bail them out when we can’t afford it? Because the Germans and the rest of the EU will decide this for us, a vote in the EU will be taken by qualified majority vote and, unless we come to our senses and say: ‘Stuff you, we’re quitting this madness and leaving the EU’, our weak and feeble coalition two-tone Government will do as the EU tells it and the rest of us will foot the enormous bill.

In the not too distant future the people of this country will be calling on the services of Kanellos, or Loukanikos (depending on where you source your information) which is the name of the fearless Greek dog that turns up at all the riots in Athens and seems to take little notice of flying missiles, tear gas or water cannon – it is not far off before we take to the streets too – the euro and the failed project that is the EU will have to go, something we will do with the help of Kanellos, or Loukanikos – there’ s a good dog – go kill the euro.


Kanellos/Loukanikos, the famous Greek roit dog has a dedicated video.

Wednesday, 15 June 2011


Back in 1997, when first beginning to write about the great EU problem, and why Britain should get out, a lot of what I was writing about regarding the EU was boring, which is how the Eurocrats have managed to conquer us – what they were doings and the way they were implementing was tedious so few bothered with it.

So, to liven things up I began writing a silly little story called 'A Euro Soap Story' of how life could be in the future when the UK is fully owned by the EU and the British people subservient to it. I invented all sorts of scenarios, some based on things we knew were coming such as the European Arrest Warrant and a European police force, others on sheer guesswork. What has surprised me just how many things guessed have come to pass and my predictions become a reality. The latest piece of this fiction to become real is the news in the Daily Mail that Burger King are to produce and sell ‘Spam Burgers’.

Anyone with a bit of time to spend reading my daft Euro Soap will find, a good way down In chapter five, reference to one of the characters having a packet of crisps and “a spamburger at the Happy Eurosnax Eatery”.

This is getting seriously scary, too much of my Euro Soap is becoming reality – and none of us will want to live in the sort of future predicted in that story – we had better get out of the EU pretty soon before the ‘Eurobill’ come to arrest us.


Promises, promises, oh dear, what happened to David Cameron’s promises. This is the man who, to take the leadership of the Tory Party, promised he would get his MEP’s out of the rabidly pro-EU and federalist European Peoples Party Group (EPP) in the European Parliament within weeks, if elected as the Con Party leader. Oh yes, he did do it – but it took a couple of years rather than his promised weeks.

This too was the man who made a ‘cast iron guarantee’ that if elected as the Prime Minister he would call a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty. We got a referendum alright, sadly it was on AV voting which, to put it bluntly, no one could give a rats fart about and effectively told him so, and his Limp Dem cohort, on the 5th May. As to the referendum we were promised and really wanted on the Lisbon Treaty – all we got was sorry – no can do.

Another promise made by the Cons in the run up to the general election was they would bring back weekly bin collections. By now we have got to know that any promise David Cameron makes is about as long lasting as an ice cube in the Sahara. So it comes as no surprise to be told this week that another of Cameron’s promises, that like ice cube, has evaporated into thin air leaving nothing other than a trail of rotting, smelling, debris behind.

As people begin to get used to the fact they are going to have to continue putting up with mounds of festering rubbish lurking outside their homes for fourteen days at a time, with all the other vermin problems that come with it, they may be interested to learn the real reason why yet another British Government can’t tackle a problem that seriously needs sorting and why another promise broken.

Like everything that is bad, frustrating and problematic in our beleaguered country today, lurking behind it is the dark form of the EU. In this case it is all down to the EU’s landfill directives. The EU has decided that everything should be recycled, which in some ways is no bad thing but not really practical for all things. To encourage recycling whopping great taxes have been put on filling holes in the ground. This may sound all very good, but filling holes in the ground with unwanted rubbish for us her in the UK has not been bad and has worked quite well.

There are all sorts of reasons we have holes in the ground, mostly through quarrying. We did out stone, sand and gravel and clay, amongst other things. When all is extracted then the hole could be filled, in many cases the methane produced from the rotting waste was tapped off and used – which is very practical, then when the land had finally settled after a number of years it could be landscaped into parkland, or even built on. But the EU don’t like it and our holes in the ground have to be left as a scar on the landscape unsused.

The interesting thing however, is if Councils have the weekly bin collections, now a failed Tory promise, this puts added pressure on Councils to use landfill sites to get rid of the waste thus incurring not only EU landfill taxes, but fines too if they exceed their strictly controlled EU landfill limits. To add to the Tory dilemma and serious embarrassment on this issue, as far as the EU landfill directive goes it was a Tory wot dunnit!

As the press and media tear into the Government over its U-turn on weekly bin collections, it has been revealed that the instigator for the landfill directive was none other than Conservative MEP Caroline Jackson. She is the culprit who wrote and proposed by her as the then Tory MEP for the South West of England back in 2008.

Those who delude themselves into thinking the Tories are going to stand up to the EU and protect us from it are living in a dream – the Conservative Party is the problem and UKIP is the solution.

Thanks to Tory EU compliance they are blighting the land with useless wind turbines which create noise problems for those living nearby, they are taking power stations offline without having any viable alternative, all because the EU has swallowed the bullshine that we are heading towards global warming. In a few years when we head into a possible mini ice age they are going to be in for a shock and the rest of us bloody cold without reliable electric supplies.

If you want more EU then the Conservative Party is the party to vote for, if you care for your country then UKIP is the party for you.

Tuesday, 14 June 2011


So far the EU has a President of the European Parliament, a position currently held by Jerzy Buzek, who hails from the Czech Republic. Then there is the ex Maoist from Portugal, Jose Manuel Barroso, the President of the EU Commission. Along with these two dubious souls the EU also has a rotating presidency which changes from the head of each nation on a six monthly basis, soon to be held by Poland (June 2011). Last, but not least, there is none other than the damp rag himself, the EU President unelect, Herman Van Rumpoy.

Considering the EU already has this motley collection of presidents, and none of them mean much to the people of Europe, there can hardly be a need for yet another President in the European Union– even the USA, one of the most powerful countries in the world only has one President. However, not content with a plethora of four useless presidents, Tony Blair has decreed that there should be another President in the EU, but this time the EU should do something which it normally does not like doing, i.e. having a bit of democracy to elected a president.

No doubt old Tone, other than screwing up the Middle East and making a bob or two from various properties, is looking for a nice little earner and a job that helps keep his over inflated ego in the news– and being an elected EU President would do nicely, thank you.

Such is his arrogance that, no doubt, he thinks the people will be so delighted with this news he will be elected unopposed. This then is where the EU has a problem with democracy, the people don’t always do and vote as the EU wants them to. What if one or more of the presidential candidates is an opponent of the EU and wants to see it dismantled – and then gets elected on the promise that he/she will spend their EU Presidency closing the whole disastrous affair down – it could be interesting to say the least. No doubt if such a scenario took place the EU would find a way of making the people do it all over again and to ensure they get it right next time and elect the president it wants.

We will see how far Tony Blair gets with this project for a plethora of presidents, anyone for a UKIP President of the EU? What a great campaigning slogan that would be: ‘Make me redundant – vote UKIP’.

Monday, 13 June 2011


Every morning, Monday to Friday, I clamber into my car and head off into the congestion on the M6 between junctions 7 and 6,from Walsall to Birmingham, then come the evening the same journey in reverse. This stretch of motorway is one of the busiest in Europe, and don’t those of us that use it daily know it.

Back in 2003, when the M6 Toll finally opened, it was sold to us as the ‘Northern Relief Road’, it was going to drastically cut the congestion on the M6 and for those travelling North to South, or vice versa, it was going to cut their journey times and make life easier for one and all – or that was the plan. Sadly, there was one little snag, on top of paying a Road Fund Licence, a high proportion of tax on fuel which also has VAT added, making it a tax on a tax, as this road was a toll road people and businesses were being asked to pay to use a road that they had already paid for – which is not on.

In the early days of the M6 Toll people did put their hands in their pockets and used it, although a number of motorists, this one included, refused to use it on principle. When it opened the toll fees were not too high, but have been steadily rising ever since. The current cost of driving the full length of the M6 Toll from Cannock to Coleshill is £5.30 for cars and £10.60 for vans, HGV’s and coaches at peak times. For those that need to use this road twice a day, as I do with the M6, by the end of a week that is a fair bit of cash and a real fiscal burden for already hard pressed hauliers.

News that the numbers using this road, which has never been great, is steadily falling, comes as no surprise at all. As the numbers vehicles on this high priced road fall and the revenues drop for Midland Expressway, the toll operators, their only option to keep their income stable is to increase prices, which in turn drives away potential users. The end result is the M6 itself, rather than being relieved by this so-called relief road, takes all the traffic resulting in a section of the M6 having to be widened at a massive cost in order to cope with the traffic the now almost deserted M6 Toll was going to take.

The whole thing has been a pigs ear, proving the warnings of many, that this project was doomed to failure from the offset. One of the main reasons the road was tolled, which was not really mentioned at its inception and launch, was to comply with the EU’s plans for a system of road pricing across the whole of Europe. Naturally, the Labour Government of the time felt this was not worth mentioning as no one would be interested in the real reason they were to be charged again to use a road they had already paid for.

Now a group of campaigners opposed to road tolls has called for the Government to buy the M6 Toll and make it free to use, which would then mean it would serve its original purpose of by-passing Birmingham thus easing the congestion on the M6 and speed up journey times for those travelling North to South.

This group, the National Association Against Tolls, is urging the Government to buy the M6 Toll for £1 billion, which would still see a nice tidy profit for Midlands Expressway who spent £900 million building this white elephant, otherwise known as the road to a hole in the pocket.

Friday, 10 June 2011


Lord Dartmouth, one of UKIP's MEPs for the South West, challenged the Liberal Democrats in the Eurpean Parliament for their attack against the liberties and freedoms of the British people due to their full support for the European Arrest Warrant and EU Investigation Orders. Watch the video below.

Wednesday, 8 June 2011


Anne Palmer writes below and warns of EU fines.

Government wants local Authorities to pay for EU Fines? It is the EU that wants its UK-EU Regions to pay their fines directly. But let us just go into detail a tad more on this very issue, for without any doubt, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland is indeed very different in many ways to those Nation States on the Continent. Their Constitutions are quite recently written (After the last war) and can be altered quite easily, where-as our Common Law Constitution is rather old and has actually stood the test of time very well indeed, parts of which cannot be changed unless we lost a war of course.

To get to the ‘nitty-gritty’. If the people (could) accept the proposals in the Localism Bill regarding the EU Fines, this would be the very first time in the history of this Country and contrary to its Constitution that the people would be expected to pay directly towards an EU Fine imposed by a foreign Organisation.

Not one EU Treaty has been put to the people to either accept or reject, and without doubt the contents are absolutely contrary to our Constitution. Particularly of grave concern regarding the Treaty of Lisbon, was the giving of “Legal Personality” for the EU to make Treaties on our behalf, and is ‘questionable to say the least’ because any Treaty or Agreement can only be ratified by using the Royal Prerogative by an elected British Government using the Royal Prerogative on behalf of the British Crown. No foreigner, nor citizen may use it on the Crown’s behalf and neither can any such Agreement or Treaty be accepted in this Country unless by the Crown or a British Government Minister using the Royal Prerogative on the Crown’s behalf. Was this an Act of Treason? Most certainly it was an act of sheer treachery to pass on to foreigners something that had been entrusted into the temporary care of our Ministers. Whether any Act or Agreement or Treaty passed by these foreigners can be held as legal in this Country is another question that should be put before the Courts or debated fully in Parliament.

I am aware certain Treaties have been passed by the EU since “Lisbon” using the Royal Prerogative, the SWIFT Treaty is one such and as Government Members are fully aware of the implications and honour of the privilege of using the said Royal Prerogative, the years of history behind it, along with their total Allegiance to the British Crown, the casual giving therefore of Legal Personality to the EU in a Treaty is questionable to say the least for it was not the Government’s of the day to give. No Treaty/ Agreement passed by the EU should have any jurisdiction here in the UK. There is much more to it than that but in the giving of the Royal Prerogative to a foreign Organisation to use on behalf of the British Crown should be sited as treason without doubt. (See also House of Lords Official Report of the Grand Committee on the Extradition Bill pages GC 287 294 quoting EU Commissioner Antonio Vitorino, re EU-US Extradition Treaty, “This is the very first Union Agreement in the field of Justice and Home affairs and it will be a historic precedent,” also recoded in the Debates of the European Parliament 3.6.2003).

With this new proposal regarding EU fines, the suggestion that Councils/Regions will contribute to EU fines imposed upon the UK Government, I guess as long as we remain in the EU, those EU fines will come our way thick and fast, probably until this and perhaps every other Country in the EU are completely bankrupt, because there is nothing and no one it seems, that is prepared to stop the EU, except perhaps the people themselves. But I ask you this. If I, as a top Judge or Magistrate, (Which I am not) 'fine' a person, say a £5000 fine, can he/she then go to a neighbour or another member of the family or perhaps a complete stranger in the street and say. "Hey! I have been found Guilty of breaking UK/EU law but YOU are going to have to pay the fine (or part of the fine) to the EU". Can that be right? This is what the UK Government will be expecting the Local Councils to do? Or perhaps the local people to do. Pay the fine or part of it for the UK as a whole. Yet not one UK Citizen has been asked if they wanted to be party to such an agreement, or to take on the responsibility and pay fines if things go wrong, most certainly they did not have any chance to accept or reject any such Treaty that allowed such intrusion, or break-up of their Country of ENGLAND through a Treaty, a Treaty that should never have been ratified. (See the Localism Bill-it started its Journey in the EU of course-See also Council of Europe)

When, and where was there a Court Case that suggested such fines? Who attended on our behalf? Was a plea of ‘Innocent Me Lud” taken down? Was there a trial? A full hearing? When did the people agree to such legislation that brought this about that a foreign Organisation is making laws for the people in this Sovereign Country, that they can be FINED if found wanting? Since when did the people agree to all this? Was there a debate in Parliament that “innocent until proven Guilty was now illegal/unlawful here in this Country? Do the people not pay through their TAXES for their own Government to govern them according to their own Common Law Constitution? Is the Government going to actually PAY the people for taking on this heavy responsibility, which is part of MP’s job? What is the point of the people voting for British Politicians to govern them if they can no longer govern this Country according to their own Country’s Common Law Constitution? Even though people actually vote and pay for that person, none may take their seat in the House of Commons until they have sworn a faithful and true solemn Oath of Allegiance to the British Crown, the Crown that represents all the people in this Land. All in this Country are innocent until proven Guilty. Have the people been led into accepting ”instant fines” over the years, quite deliberately to get them used to then accepting paying foreigners when required to do so. There is no one in this Country that has agreed to any of this EU Legislation. All three Major Political Parties want to be in and remain in the EU and be Governed by foreigners apparently forever, whilst it seems they want to continue being paid as if they are still governing this Country according to its long Standing Constitution. Yet, that is the only way this Country can be lawfully governed.

Much of this is contrary to our Constitution and yes, charges of treason have been made by the people in the past and some even “today” are being put forward, the people are trying to do their duty. I pray in the end they will succeed, rather through the Courts than by any other means.

As for EU Border guards being allowed in this Country? Perhaps even made up by British people? EU Border Guards hold no allegiance to this Country. The Bill of Rights makes clear subjects of the British Crown can hold guns for their own Protection. However, we all know after Dunblane the peoples RIGHT to hold guns (Bill of Rights), was removed and though that decision was challenged very hard by one Michael James Burke, the case was lost. That decision left the position that only the bad guys, and those that are easily led carry, and sadly use guns. We read of these sad events where guns are used, even on small children-more than ever before. I remember the headlines, “Carjacker put a gun to the head of cancer victim, age eight” (Daily Mail Nov 22 2006). I remember reading the debates in Parliament when there was a possibility of foreign police-border controls and the possibility that they may enter this Country carrying such weapons, which of course they could chase from one Country into another on the Continent, but here, it was decided they would have to leave their guns behind. Will that be the case still now?

However, times change, and now we are at the time when foreigners-the Eurogendarmerie-(even though this Country is not in that organisation-see Article 5 of the Velsen Treaty) the Eurogendarmerie may carry guns? Just how long do you think the people will think that ‘RIGHT’ and do nothing? If foreigners are allowed fully armed here in the UK and the indigenous people may not carry guns-even though, according to their Constitution, they may, will the people STILL do nothing? Do not the indigenous people of the United Kingdom now have the right to challenge the verdict given by those Judges in the Michael James Burke case? What a farce if or when foreigners can carry guns here in our country yet the people are denied their RIGHTS as stated in their long standing Constitution.

Parliament was reminded of the Bill of Rights after the Case of Pepper v Hart when the Speaker at that time said, “This case has exposed our proceedings to possible questioning in a way that was previously thought to be impossible. There has of course been no amendment to the Bill of Rights. I am sure that the House is entitled to expect that the Bill of Rights will be required to be fully respected by all those appearing before the Courts.”

It has been said that there are only four clauses left in Magna Carta. Proof that Magna Carta remains complete is recorded in Hansard, for many are the times clauses have been quoted to prove an argument. I have over a hundred pages printed where Magna Carta has been mentioned-I stopped looking after one hundred. The last time Clause 61 was used regarding a Treaty, was by the Lords at the time of NICE-a clause that was allegedly repealed. Magna Carta is a Treaty and it needs the people’s consent to alter. It was also invoked last December, not yet put to use.

I quote (the late) Lord Renton when he said (Lords Hansard 20th July6 2000) “My Lords, before the noble Lord sits down, perhaps I might mention one point in relation to his fascinating speech. He suggests that we should amend Magna Carta. We cannot do that. Magna Carta was formulated before we ever had a Parliament. All that we can do is to amend that legislation which, in later years when we did have a Parliament, implemented Magna Carta”.

There has been, fairly recently, talk that a new proposed Bill of Rights and new UK Constitution that could be written and be ENTRENCHED, yet in the Government’s own Research Paper 96/82 18 July 1996 page 36 makes clear, “Again, the theory of sovereignty means that no Parliament can bind its successors, and that this inability of Parliament to prevent any law from being later altered or repealed by a Parliament means that, in principle, no scheme of constitutional change-Bill of Rights, devolution, even, perhaps, a written Constitution itself-can be entrenched-made secure against any or easy amendment or repeal-in the legal order”. Our own Common Laws cannot lawfully be destroyed for, according to R v Thistlewood 1820, to destroy the constitution ‘is an act of treason’. The only way our Common Law Constitution could be destroyed is if we had lost a war. Parliament may only alter that which Parliament has done. Parliament had no hand in certain parts of our Common Law Constitution.

As was made clear on Question Time 24.2.2010, when debating the Bankers and the taxpayer’s money they have used for their Bonuses, it was brought home very strongly that it is indeed the taxpayer’s money that is being used. It is our money that is used for MP’s and Government’s wages and the vast expenses they have so recently “taken advantage” of. Plus, while so many people are losing their jobs, there has been no reduction what so ever in either the House of Commons or the House of Lords. A suggested reduction of MP’s by 50 or 60 has recently been made yet not only has the House of Lords been crammed full to the limits, we are also looking at yet another layer of Governance through the Localism Bill, which also proposes Elected Mayors, full CABINETS with all the regalia and entourage that goes with it. WE SIMPLY CANNOT AFFORD ALL THIS AND NETHER DO WE WANT ENGLAND DIVIDED UP INTO EU REGIONS.

Why are we paying for a full to the brim House of Lords, plus the silly suggestion it is replaced with elected Lords (Before that is taken on, see Clause XII Act of Union, plus Clause II re Act of Settlement) but beware the people cannot afford any of this. Ask also the question just how much longer are the people supposed to pay for a full House of Commons when all in that House of Commons have to obey all the same EU laws as the rest of us AS LONG AS WE REMAIN IN THE EU. It is indeed OUR Money that has and IS being used. Without our money nothing gets done. Nothing gets done in our Country and none of it goes to the EU. Hold on to that thought. Anne Palmer.

Council of Europe. Signing up to the Localism Bill-=European Charter of Local Self-Government.

This is the one with the signatures on UK right at the end.

Full List of Treaties

Remaining orders and notices in Parliament

In looking into this, I believe this came from the EU upward, and not instigated by the UN at all. Habitat-Towards a World Charter of Local Self-Government

Tuesday, 7 June 2011


Every now and then there is a story in the local press that you know the EU has to have its sticky little fingers all over, but it is never too obvious and there is always a feeling of uncertainty about it.

One of those local press stories came up in my Walsall edition of the Wolverhampton Express & Star on Monday 6th June 2011. With the heading: ‘Lecturer is Euro group president’ meant someone like me, who is on constant lookout for any mischief the EU may be up to, was bound to home in on this news item.

Added to that, this story was on the same page as news of the sad death of one of my political opponents in Walsall, Martin Barker, who was a long standing Liberal Democrat activist and a nice chap who I always got on with, despite our political differences, and there was also news on the same page of Walsall Council creating problems for people in the town who have to have to pay to park outside their own homes by having parking permits, and as parking issues in the town are a bug bear that drew my attention too.

There was a lot on this page, and after writing letters to the local press regarding the unnecessary parking problems created by Walsall Council, I decided to have a poke around to see what could be found out about Mr John Delacruz, who as the heading stated, is now the new president of this Euro group.

The group in question is the European foundation for communications education (Edcom) – it doesn’t take much working out, especially after taking a look at the links, that this has EU brainwashing all over it. The EU, just like many doctrinaire regimes, always aim to educate children and students in the way of thinking it wants. To do this it has got up to all sorts of shenanigans. In recent years it has had a Euro bus visiting schools and colleges to let the kids know how wonderful the EU is, EU inspired projects for the kids and there has been comic books with hero’s from the EU Parliament. One of the best lines ever is in one of these comic books where the heroine says to her arch rival: “Wait until you see my amendments”. I don’t know about her arch rival but I’m still quivering with excitement at the thought!

Added to the brainwashing list of techniques used by the EU to nobble the young into being good little obedient Europhiles, was the setting up of Monet professors. These are all enthusiastic pro-EU lecturers who are quietly not only encouraged to brainwash their students into thinking we can’t survive without the EU and its thousands of mind numbing directives, but the EU funds them too – they just don’t let on about it. It’s nice when they get caught out though, as this rabid Euro fanatic did by Nigel Farage in this LINK.

Meanwhile back at the Express & Star article, a gushing John Delacruz said: “Edcom benefits Staffordshire University greatly.” Does it now? He continued: “I am instigating student chapters which will give our students on ABM a European voice, more networking and franchise opportunities and a European standing for the University.”

So there we have it, it is all about promoting Europe, which in reality is the EU, and our students will grow up and go into life thinking we can’t live without it. Yet a quick look at history shows we did and were better and richer, for it.

Friday, 3 June 2011


Friday, otherwise known by those at work as ‘POETS day (piss off early tomorrows Saturday). It’s the end of another week and the start of another weekend and the chance for a much welcome pint in the Lyndon House Hotel, my favourite watering hole and definitely the best pub in Walsall.

Fridays are generally the day to reflect on your week and all that you have done, or not as the case may be, also a time to look back on the events of the week. For me, apart from relaxing on Whitsun bank holiday Monday, it has been much as normal, work in the day, UKIP meetings on the evenings. Sadly for the rest of us it has been much as normal in the EU too.

The Greek economy continues to plunge into the economic abyss where it was always doomed to fall from the moment the Greek’s scrapped their own sovereign currency for the EU’s vanity euro. As it falls to its inevitable destruction the rest of us, who can ill afford it, are told, not requested, that we are going to have to bail out the Greek economy, again, while at the same time we are told by our two-tone coalition Government that we can’t afford to defend ourselves and that many services are having to be cut. Due to these dire times, the NHS, which most of us rely on in times of medical need, is looking like a real target for cut-backs despite Clegg huffing and puffing about making a stance.

The EU Commission is still spending our money as if it is going out of fashion. During this last week the press has been jumping up and down about the Commissions extravagance, which has been reported as £8 million on private jets, five star hotels and expensive jewellery as gifts over a four year period from 2006 to 2010. Added to this, the EU still wants more and is looking for an increase to its budget. CND supporting Cathy Ashton, our EU High Representative, who few have ever heard of, is also demanding an increase to her budget and wants more of our money to waste on her offices and staff, who do exactly the same as our Foreign Office which is now being sidelined by the EU.

Yes, another cheery week in the fun filled all expenses paid for EU. Oh well, at least there are a few ha’penny’s left in my pocket and a beer or two to look forward to, plus a street party this Sunday in the Crescent, of all things. On Monday morning the whole lot will start again and by next weekend I will be reflecting on many of the same things such as the EU squandering our money, riding roughshod over our Parliament and laws, our useless politicians aiding and abetting in the EU’s national mugging of our country, idiotic bureaucracy, lunatic councils, human rights, political correctness, immigration and all the rest. By golly I need that beer on a Friday night.

Thursday, 2 June 2011


Mike Nattrass, UKIP MEP for the West Midlands.

Our hard working UKIP MEP for the West Midlands, Mike Nattrass, is warning of plans by the EU to restrict the height of lorry trailers which will be bad news for the region’s haulage industry and economy.

Mike, who is a member of the EU’s Transport & Tourism Committee, says he will do all he can to fight meddling plans to bring in a four metre height limit to standardise the size of lorry trailers throughout the EU.

Under the proposals, the EU would impose a four metre height limit on lorries. The proposed move has already come under fire from the Federation of Small Businesses (FSB) who insist the EU should exempt the UK from the plans.

Mike Nattrass MEP, who is a member of the FSB, commented: “The West Midlands is a major transport hub and these EU plans to restrict trailers to about 13 feet (in English) would damage the region’s economy and confirm that there is no logic in EU logistics.

“Haulage firms would see their costs rise as a result of the restriction in the height of trailers. Companies would be forced to scrap newly bought and efficient existing double deck trailers and use two single deck trailers which in turn would increase congestion and pollution on Britain’s roads.

“This would be laughable really if it was not such a waste of money, as a sensible objective would be to reduce costs and environmental impact.

“In my view, they waste their expenses attending these brainless EU committees and now I will need to attend the EU parliament in an attempt to vote it down.

“It is time that our Westminster Parliament regained their ability to govern,” he added.

The FSB say the EU plans would lead to around 7,000 double decker trucks, currently in use in the UK, being gradually phased out.

Richard Hyslop, EU International Affairs and Defence Policy Adviser, said: “This Commission proposal will have a wholly disproportionate impact on the UK as tall lorries up to 4.9 metres in height are almost unique to this country.

“The vast majority of double deck trailers on UK roads are substantially taller than four metres and would thus be affected by the new European ruling if it were to come into force.”

Wednesday, 1 June 2011


Walsall's main library.

This bloggers town of Walsall comes in for some scrutiny from the eagle eyes of blogger, Richard North, of the EU Referendum blog. Richard is not one for mincing his words and he certainly doesn’t hold back when it comes to the matter of one third of all Walsall’s libraries being closed.

Even though it only seems five minutes ago the Council leader, Mike Bird who is now leading the minority Conservative Council in Walsall, was promising that no libraries would be closed at this stage and a review taken in twelve months – yet in the blink of an eye the situation has changed.

This means a service that is wanted and of use to the Council Taxpayers of Walsall will be severely cut, yet at the same time Walsall Council is advertising a non-job for a “part time Regional Co-ordinator-Low Emissions Strategy”. Our beloved leader, ‘Birdie’, as he is affectionately known – amongst other things in the town, has also announced that a third of all council jobs could be axed. However, don’t worry, we will have someone on a whacking great salary, working just three days a week fiddling about with emissions.

When I moved to Walsall as a 13 year old lad in 1961, there were factories manufacturing and metal bashing all around the town churning out masses of all sorts of emissions, as well as the traditional leather industries which Walsall has always been famous for. Now, all these years later as the EU moved in with its thousands of regulations and nit-picking tiresome rules, industry has moved to less regulated parts of the world, Walsall’s saddle maker, what few we have left, import lower quality saddles which just need a bit of finishing from India and such places, which then allows them to slap a ‘made in Walsall’ sticker on it. No doubt we will have this highly paid hardly stressed Emissions Officer even though all the businesses that once produced masses of emissions are no longer there and twee little houses now inhabit the sites that once brought wealth and jobs to the town.

On the three days this person will be working, it will be a case of hunt the emissions, if you can, all to keep the EU happy – and now there won’t be any from one third of Walsall’s libraries.