Friday, 15 March 2013

Gauleiters who will gag our anti-EU voices


The British press poses the only serious threat to the Berlaymont's propaganda war against the people of Britain. The EU Federasts have billions of plundered tax money at their disposal, whole floors of skilled propagandists and the friendly ear of the BBC. Their job is to persuade us that the loss of our freedom and democracy is a cheap price to pay for being one of the bigger Gau in a new European Superstate. Against this behemoth stands a small army of bloggers and commentators - and a free British press. 

That's all likely to change on Monday when the Federast Gauleiters-in-waiting of the British Gau, Miliband and Clegg, sell their birthright for a mess of EU pottage by loading the press with the chains of State censorship. In a devastating act of political treachery, they will hand control of the free British press to the EU bureaucrats in Brussels.    

In a classic 'Think of the children!' ploy, the press-enslavers are claiming to act on behalf of 'victims' of the Press; for the most part these are sexually incontinent actors, talentless 'B' listers, coke-snorting game show hosts, perverted soccer players, adulterous politicians, toilet-trading Mandarins, DJs with rotten septums and publicity-seeking nonentities. The true 'victims' of the rare cases of culpable misreporting, such as Christopher Jefferies, have adequate existing recourse and have been well compensated.

No, the real agenda is the gagging of the only powerful voice speaking against the machinations of Brussels. You can be sure the Berlaymont is happy to pay their Gauleiters more than thirty pieces of silver to secure this end. And once they have defeated the British press, our blogs will be next.

Wednesday, 13 March 2013

Powerless against Maladministration

Simon Jenkins puts his finger on it in the Guardian. Our inability to prosecute politicians for Maladministration leads us instead to hound them on whatever grounds we have - like jailing Capone for not filing a tax return. It's Gordon Brown and Ed Balls who should be in Barlinnie prison, it's Bloody Blair who should be slopping-out in Wandsworth and it's Blunkett and Smith who should be doing several hundred hours of community fence-painting. Huhne, for the lunacy of planting 32,000 bloody windmills across Britain as our energy supplies collapse into Brownout, deserves every second of his sentence - but not for the trivial matter of penalty points. Pryce is just collateral damage. As Jenkins writes;
In Britain there is no committee or tribunal to charge Huhne with his time at the energy department. He left power stations unbuilt and energy supply at risk, while pursuing an obsession with giving rich landowners millions of pounds of other people's money to erect senseless wind turbines. Let him answer for that.
We are powerless against Maladministration. The political class, who have more in common with each-other than with us, protect themselves, confer a mutual immunity from prosecution. This is not good enough - we need a new law or a new tribunal to deal wit it - and to see politicians in jail for the right reasons, not the wrong ones.

The bar must be high for prosecution. Collecting unassailable evidence may take years; only after Chilcot, for example, will we have enough to prosecute Blair. The truth of the depths of Brown's Maladministration has not all yet emerged. The sanction must not be used for spite or revenge or abused by a change of administration. And it should cover the actions of the Speaker.  

Tuesday, 12 March 2013

Localism, not anarchy

I'm happy to take up the challenge set by Nick Drew over at C@W - the thorny issue of planning permission and localism. Nick cites the case of a London faith community seeking to take advantage of the government's initiative to localise planning decisions, as they feel the existing planning authority are acting unreasonably in refusing their applications to build faith schools and house extensions to house their large families. No, it's not Muslims in Newham or Tower Hamlets - it's ultra-Orthodox Jews in Stamford Hill. If local councils lose control of planning, the theme goes, what will we end up with?

OK. Firstly Localism is about devolving collective administrative functions down to their most appropriate level; it doesn't mean everything has to be at the neighbourhood level. Defence and air traffic control can only be done nationally. Minerals planning may best be done on a regional, geological, scale. State education planning may work best at the County level. However, asking the Secretary of State to rule on replacement glazing or front-door colours in conservation areas is clearly inappropriate. So we need to agree criteria about how far to devolve.

The regulation of built development is only legitimate so long as its necessary for the common good. We have Building Regs to ensure structures don't collapse or go up in flames like BBQ fuel, and planning rules originating on Public Health grounds to ensure people don't build unduly crowded, insanitary, disease-liable rookeries; there are standards for maximum bed spaces per acre to stop the Rahmans of this world erecting instant slum tenements, and a whole range of rules to constrain the negative externalities of inappropriate development. There are some alternatives. If we stop people building on their gardens because it reduces permeable ground and places additional costs on the rest of us to deal with their rainwater, we can always pass on the entire marginal cost instead. Yes, you can build on your garden, but it will cost you an additional £500 a square metre in Council Tax each year. And Yes, you can build a house without any parking space - but you must pay an additional fee of £20,000 for the road congestion that you will cause. 

The problem with communities such as the Stamford Hill Jews is that they are seeking to impose all the negative externalities of creating a dense, crowded religious shtetl on the rest of us without meeting the cost. That's not localism - it's anarchy; 'gaming' the planning reforms isn't localism - it's asocialism. Either there's a robust framework of rules that allocates the full cost of development back to the developer, or decisions need to be taken at the lowest level at which decisions can properly be made on behalf of all those affected - and that's not the Rabbi and his mates.    

Blair's crooked cons undone

That bloodsodden shyster Blair has been popping his spray-tanned head above the parapet in recent days in an effort to get a final word in before Chilcot delivers his verdict; Iraq wasn't about WMDs at all, oh no, says Bloody Blair, it was about regime change. As an attempt at falsifying history it's not the smartest of distortions. Most people not suffering from Alzheimer's can actually remember the events of ten years ago, and can remember it was very much about WMDs - not one of which, not the trace of one of which, has ever been found in the length and breadth of Iraq. 

Hugh Sykes has made a useful two-part programme for radio on Iraq ten years on. Even bloody Blair is allowed to deliver his fatuous little platitudes with patent insincerity. Cleverly intercut with the views of a range of actual Iraqis, who make it clear they would love to see Mr Blair again - swinging on the end of a rope in Baghdad. 

There's also a long whine emerging from the Guardian this morning at the rebalancing of official British history from the Blair version, in which everything was bad before the founding of the Labour Party, and in which the UK reached its zenith in 1997 with New Labour to a backing of the Spice Girls. As fatuous as Blair's pronouncements on Iraq, the Labour history must have puzzled foreigners, wondering why the Sheffield Knife Grinders Strike was more important than Agincourt. The Guardian whines that the chapter on the Holocaust has been removed - well of course it has, you ninnies; in what way was the Holocaust an event in British history? 

New Labour's breathtaking arrogance in assuming that by re-writing history they could embed political allegiance has been as misplaced as a Spice Girls single at a funeral. And it's about time we saw the machinations of these shoddy little crooks undone.

Monday, 11 March 2013

EU's Hungarian lies

The EU has been flexing its bully-boy muscles again to Hungary. The Magyar refusal to toe the Berlaymont line has in the past led to outright threats of fund-cutting, and little Herr Von Rumpy is now set to wag his finger again at Budapest. The issue is Orban's action later today in ignoring Hungary's constitutional court to get new laws through. The new laws he's trying to pass are being presented in the Euphile press as 'radical' and 'right wing' but are really nothing of the sort. 

Firstly, he wants to fine or jail homeless people who live in public spaces. Um, exactly like our own Vagrancy Act of 1824, in fact. But without the 'vigelante' element of s.6 of the Act, which allows any person without warrant to arrest any person "wandering abroad, or placing himself or herself in any public place, street, highway, court, or passage, to beg or gather alms, or causing or procuring or encouraging any child or children so to do... every person wandering abroad and lodging in any barn or outhouse, or in any deserted or unoccupied building, or in the open air, or under a tent, or in any cart or waggon; every person wilfully openly, lewdly, and obscenely exposing his person with intent to insult any female; every person wandering abroad, and endeavouring by the exposure of wounds or deformities to obtain or gather alms; every person going about as a gatherer or collector of alms, or endeavouring to procure charitable contributions of any nature or kind, under any false or fraudulent pretence every person being found in or upon any dwelling house, warehouse, coach-house, stable, or outhouse, or in any inclosed yard, garden, or area, for any unlawful purpose"

Secondly, he wants to ban paid political advertising on private radio and TV stations. Exactly like the UK, where the ban extends to matters of political controversy and to printing and publishing by third parties. Or like, er, France, Ireland and Belgium, all of which have absolute bans on paid political advertising on TV and radio. 

Thirdly, he wants to compel graduates who have received State scholarships to work in Hungary for a number of years after graduating. Now we don't have a law against this but perhaps we should have. Just as our newly-qualified nurses and doctors depart for the US and better pay as soon as they can, after getting long years of state-subsidised education, so those from eastern Europe do likewise. 

There's much to be critical of in Hungary, but I don't think these three laws are amongst them. The real issue is a constitutional court loyal to Brussels blocking an elected government ready to defy Von Rumpy. And as Peter Frankopan in the Guardian reminds us this morning, the Byzantine Empire had its own Von Rumpy - and knew how to deal with him;
Those responsible for the crisis were shown no mercy. The Herman Van Rompuy of the time, a eunuch named Nikephoritzes, was lambasted by an angry population faced with price rises and a fall in the standard of living and was eventually tortured to death.
We wish.

Sunday, 10 March 2013

May for PM, Farage for Deputy PM?

We all have our dream tickets, and this combination has to be one of mine. 

Theresa May is of the background that yeoman-sorts such as myself know well - she's one of us, vicar's daughter, local grammar, state primary and a million miles away from the Etonian County class. She's only been an MP since 1997, having had a proper job previously, combined with local council experience. Above all as Home Secretary, she's dealt with all the crises that hit the Home Office - so often the graveyard for incompetents, as Blunkett found - with unflappable aplomb. Strongly Eurosceptic and in support of Britain's withdrawal from the ECHR, and having rolled-back many of Labour's more lunatic initiatives she nonetheless also earns the grudging respect of the left, who lack anyone remotely of May's capacity themselves. 

Farage of course is the bloke next door; you'd not feel awkward borrowing a hose from him. His many positive qualities and ability to engage effortlessly with ordinary people outweigh his failings as a party leader - he needs an environment in which he has license to speak the thoughts of the ordinary man. As May's Prescott (and one really hopes he's capable of keeping his trousers on) he can be a hard-hitter and destroy the amateur Marxian dilettantism of the sixth-form Labour front bench. However, unless there's another by-election he won't be in Parliament by 2015 - unless a new Conservative leader persuades one of the party's giant tortoises in the Commons that it's time to move down the corridor.

Cameron is finished unless he pulls some extraordinary rabbit out of the hat. And Boris needs a place in government - though given his sexual incontinence not in a post from which he can't be sacked without collateral damage when the next story breaks. Exciting times.