Not normal - by Richard... Tuesday, October 13, 2009

Not normal - by Richard... Tuesday, October 13, 2009

Seeing snow this early is not normal. This is only the third time in the last 60 years that there's been measurable snow twice in the Twin Cities in the first half of October.

COMMENT THREAD

Print ready

Get back to work - by Richard...

Not everybody's cup of tea and largely to be ignored but, as I have observed before, just occasionally she comes up with something of interest. In her "take" on MPs' expenses, for instance, she tells us:

Beyond the soon-to-be-depleted piggybanks of Westminster, the Copenhagen climate change talks are in crisis and Afghanistan in such a grave state that Barack Obama's allies fear that the war, rather than the Republicans or the economy, may mean that he is fated to be a one-term president. British soldiers are dying, our alliances in Europe are under threat, and – with the ascendancy of China – our place in the world is shifting towards the shadows.

Questions of size do not only concern the state. The contest is on between big and small-world politics. Rarely has there been a greater need for Britain to look outwards, and rarely have politics seemed so insular. Against a backdrop of global turmoil, the only sounds from Westminster are the rustle of Flymo receipts as MPs prepare to justify their gardening bills and the mutter of backbenchers who think they might like to unseat the Prime Minister after all.

There is sense in that. MPs do not have time to indulge in "small-world politics" and, much though elements of the blogosphere and the chatterati may love it, many of us have little patience for such self-indulgence. The MPs need to sort this, quickly, get it out of the way and get back down to work – the little that is left from them to do.

A protracted orgy of recrimination over this issue will merely reinforce the impression that MPs have very little else to do – which is perilously close to the truth. It is not a good idea to confirm what at the moment is in many minds only a strong suspicion.

COMMENT THREAD

Print ready

The perennial temptations of populism - by Richard...

Adrian Pabst, in The Guardian, is branding Mr Cameron "The prime minister of little England", complaining of the "Tories' threat to renegotiate the Lisbon treaty once it is in force."

Who Adrian Pabst? Well, he describes himself as a lecturer in politics in the University of Kent at Canterbury. Since 1998, he also been a research fellow at the Luxembourg Institute for European and International Studies. In other words, he is one of those raving leftie europhiles that infest the political studies departments of redbrick universities, and make a few pennies on the side writing for left-wing newspapers.

One wonders, though, who his audience might be and, perhaps as importantly, which planet they inhabit. As interesting is whether he actually believes what he is writing or whether he is saying it for effect and, if so, what effect he is aiming for.

The thing is, of course, unless we have missed it, nowhere do we ever recall Mr Cameron or his brand of Tories actually threatening to renegotiate Lisbon once it is in force. That is one thing they have been very careful not to do, leaving "hardline Eurosceptics" (as Pabst describes us) with the distinct impression that Dave intends to do precisely nothing.

From opposite ends of the spectrum, therefore, it is fascinating how opinions as to the intentions of one man and his cabal can differ so widely, supposedly based on the same pronouncements and information. Thus, Mr Pabst also thinks that a Tory referendum on re-nationalising powers is also on the cards – another area where he seems to be better informed than us. 

But even – or so it seems – Mr Pabst can see through the fluff. "Of course Cameron won't repudiate Euroscepticism until the next general election for fear of losing crucial votes to the UK Independence party," he writes. So, that is the view of a raving leftie europhile ... very interesting.

Pabst's fear though is whether, once in office, Cameron's duplicity "realism" can prevail "over the perennial temptations of populism and ideological posturing". If he can resist the temptations. Pabst opines, Mr Cameron should offer, by way of an alternative "vision" - a positive and genuinely transformational, Conservative vision - for the EU.

Notwithstanding that Cameron has already got plenty of unreformed leftie europhiles on his staff and hardly needs advice from another one, after yards of extruded verbal material, Pabst tells us there are "many other economic and political reasons for a new Tory approach to Europe". 

Sticking with "vulgar euroscepticism", he cautions, will boost the SNP's case for Scottish independence, and might spell the end of the United Kingdom. There you are, by a wonderful perversion of logic, being against the EU will actually lead to the break-up of the UK.

Moreover, the Tories' current EU stance will in time provoke a major rift with continental European partners, depriving Mr Cameron of a "unique opportunity to influence Europe" in cooperation with his natural, centre-right allies who have a majority across EU institutions and the 27 member states.

Thus, we are warned, instead of shaping the EU's future under British leadership, Cameron might be remembered as the first British PM to preside over "little England" – not exactly a glorious legacy for a one-nation Tory unionist. For this reason alone, he needs to start developing an alternative Tory vision for Europe.

If he did though, he probably would not get elected. But then Mr Pabst has an answer to that as well – pander to the "hardline Eurosceptics" before the election and then prevail "over the perennial temptations of populism and ideological posturing" after getting into office. 

What it is to understand politics so well. No wonder he is a research fellow at the Luxembourg Institute for European and International Studies. The "colleagues" must be so proud of him.

COMMENT THREAD

Print ready

Downgrading "Europe"? - by Richard... Monday, October 12, 2009

According to The Times, Gordon Brown appears to have downgraded the post of Europe Minister after shifting Baroness Kinnock from the job to become Foreign Office minister responsible for Africa.

Her replacement is Chris Bryant, but he remains a parliamentary under-secretary, "the lowest rank on the paid ministerial ladder", observes Philip Webster, the paper's political editor. The job, he says, has always been done in the past by a Minister of State and they have usually attended the Cabinet when European affairs have been discussed.

Actually, Webster has got it totally wrong. With the constitutional Lisbon treaty about to come into force, a separate post of "Europe minister" is no longer necessary (not that it ever was). 

The duties have been merged with the post of prime minister who, as member of the European Council, is the man responsible for European (i.e., EU) affairs. Bryant's appointment is merely cosmetic, hence the downgrading of his rank.

COMMENT THREAD

Print ready

Totally unprepared - by Richard...

Armed police with 10 snow-clearing machines and vehicles have rescuedmore than 260 Tibetan villagers and 1,000 head of livestock stranded for at least three days by heavy snow. 

The week-long snowfall accumulated to about 30 centimeters in Pulan County of Ali, with some areas suffering meter-thick snow drifts.

Heavy snow cut off the roads connecting some townships in the county and local authorities requested help from the armed police on Sunday. 

Nothing special there, you might say – it does tend to snow in Tibet. But, says this report, "local herdsmen in summer pastures were totally unprepared for the disaster with no winter clothes, for it was not yet time to move to winter pastures." 

So we have early snow in the United States, in Finland and now in Tibet. Meanwhile, a winter weather advisory is in effect today for most of southern Minnesota and western Wisconsin where 2-3 inches of snow is expected in some areas - in what is being described as "another round of early season snow". 

Kent Barnard, leader of the snow clearance team for the "twin cities", says: "This is kind of an anomaly for us; we don't generally get snow obviously this early in the year. Our maintenance crews are ready to go, ready to fight the snow." 

Then, the other side of the world, in New Zealand, a "freak snow storm" has left hundreds of people stranded and unable to return to their homes in New Zealand's central North Island. A state of emergency was declared after heavy snow trapped around 700 people in their vehicles on two of the country's major roads. 

The bad weather, which the BBC says "is highly irregular at this time of year", has forced many to take refuge in nearby community centres. This doesn't sound much like global warming to me, yet still the idiots blather and blather and blather. We really are going to have to shoot them.

COMMENT THREAD

Print ready

Not thinking straight - by Richard...

The twitterings of delight from the Tory Boys & Girls at Dave's great coup in bringing the "Army legend" on side, just in time to make a big deal of it a conference, are now looking more than a bit sad as the grown-ups chew over what in fact has been a huge blunder by the Great Leader.

That the issue refuses to melt away into the background is testament enough to the scale of that blunder. Not only yesterday did we have The Sunday Times leading the fray but today The Times returns to the subject, with a leader headed: "Generals and Politics".

Focusing first on president Obama, the paper sternly declares that, "Policy in Afghanistan must be set by elected governments, not the military," reminding us that the presidency also encompasses the role of Commander-in-Chief of the US Armed Forces. 

It notes that, in that latter capacity, Obama has to make the most difficult decision of his presidency, making the obvious but necessary statement that "decisions are needed now." 

Then we get to the nub, with the paper restating some home truths. "War should not be run by generals," it says. "The Commander-in-Chief is elected to decide how best to safeguard security. He should tell his commanders what the strategy in Afghanistan is; their task is to lay out the military options, warn the President of dangers and implement the decisions then taken."

There are two issues here, we are reminded: how best to prosecute the war against the Taleban, and who takes that decision. The first question is secondary to the essential constitutional principles of democratic government. President Truman was vilified when he dismissed General Douglas MacArthur for insubordination in the Korean War. Yet the decision was right. Truman confirmed that policy decisions are taken by civilian governments.

And now we get to Cameron's blunder. That principle, we are told, is no less pressing today, and it extends to the UK too. As defence adviser to the Conservative party, Dannatt will have unnecessarily stoked concerns about the politicisation of the Armed Forces and, in particular, the men who lead them. It is an essential principle of public service, the paper declares, "that elected governments set policies, and generals implement them."

So basic and straightforward is this principle that one really does wonder why it needs re-stating. In the current Conservative party line-up, we have a former Times journalist in charge of education policy, and none of the Tory Boys seem to think there is anything wrong with that. Why do we not hear cries for a professional educator – a headmaster, or some-such, to be put in charge. 

Why is there not a cry for a qualified medical doctor to be put in charge of health policy – such as Dr Liam Fox? For trade policy, surely we need a former captain of industry, and for transport policy we should have ... a road builder, a railway expert, a former airline executive, or a one-time shipping magnate?

Therein lies the absurdity. Just at a very basic level, what makes a retired army general so well qualified that he should have an executive role in determining the policy for the RAF, the Royal Navy, the Marines, or for grand global defence strategies, or for the very special circumstances of the campaign in Afghanistan, of which he has neither operational experience nor any track-record of success?

The baying of the crowd that in the one particular sphere of activity, defence policy, ministers should have specialist knowledge to the extent of being former professionals in the field, is absurd. People are not thinking straight. In this country and most Western democracies, policy decisions are taken by civilian governments. That is how it should be, and to blur the line is dangerous.

Cameron is going to have to row back from his decision to take Dannatt on board, and then get down to some serious policy-making, the like of which we have not yet seen. And the sooner he admits his mistake the better. The longer he leaves it, the more difficult it will get.

COMMENT THREAD