Thursday, 14 July 2011

Germans not doing enough in Libya, shock - by Richard... Thursday, July 14, 2011


That is the sub-text of 13th-Century Fox's diatribe, whence he declares: "Far too many of our European partners are still trying to get a free ride and they should regard Libya as a wake-up call".

He actually refused to name which European allies were not playing their part but, as The Mailnotes, his remarks will have been noted in Germany which, despite being one of the richest countries and having a large military, has refused to contribute troops.

However, it has to be said that, the last time Germany played an active part in Libya, it was under a general called Rommel (pictured). And despite the US even then supplying some of the equipment (see M-3 half-track in the foreground), we spent not a little time and money kicking them out.

Perhaps that is why Germany is not keen to repeat the experience.

COMMENT THREAD

Print ready

Delicious - by Richard...


Mr Henry Smith will be so happy at the publicity he is getting. Interestingly, the Guardian content partner has still got him down as a "rebel", even though they now know this is wrong. What else isn't CH telling its readers?

Interestingly, one of the things this site is telling its readers, via Anthony Browne, former Brussels correspondent for The Times, is "why we shouldn't leave the EU".

Says the happy little chappie: "I voted for this government because I wanted to reform healthcare, education and welfare, so we get the public services we deserve, to bring down taxes and to stop the inexorable growth of red tape and bureaucracy. I didn't vote for it because I wanted to pull out of the EU".

It seems to have escaped the hollow brain of this creature, however, that no one actually voted for this government. It is a coalition, formed after the election, which means it is a stitch-up that occurred after the event.

More particularly though, no one ever gets to vote for our supreme government in Brussels, and nor would it make any difference if it did, as it lacks the legitimacy of a demos - which is why most people want the UK to leave the EU in the first place.

Strangely though, after all those years in Brussels, Browne doesn't seem to have cottoned on to that, which is perhaps why he is writing for a Guardian content partner – when the said Europhile can tear himself away from working for Boris Johnson as an "economic advisor" and calling formore jobs for the boys in Brussels.

Once upon a time when you lifted a stone, all sorts of multi-legged creatures crawled out. Now, with biodiversity under threat, all you get is Tories ... euroslime working for Boris as his economics advisor ... who'd have thunk it. Must be global warming.

But then, wasn't Boris once a Brussels correspondent for the Failygraph, about the same time his drinking partner Browne was also working over there for his? And now Boris is mayor of London and the otherwise unemployed Browne pops up as his advisor, on a very comfortable salary of £127,784 – plus expenses.

No wonder he's so interested in jobs for the boys. And yes, you are quite right. CH doesn't tell us that either ... the innocent Mr Browne is merely a former correspondent. It just wouldn't do to have him as Boris's highly-paid advisor in this context ... that would spoil the mayor's carefully nurtured but utterly false image as a eurosceptic.

COMMENT: MADAME DEFARGE THREAD

Print ready

The new normality - by Richard...

When the unusual becomes normal and crisis becomes a way of life, you know that we are really in trouble. You certainly get that impression from the Irish Times, but – of course – not from the British media, caught up as it is in its Murdoch obsession. I may be wrong – but my considered judgement is that the Fourth Estate has completely lost it.

In what may be a flash of insight, or merely an intellectual cul-de-sac, it suddenly occurs that we are dealing with the tale of two crises. One is real, the other imagined. Illustrating the latter, we have such as Steve Richards in the not-so-Independent, expending his life energy, speculating on a preposterous theme, quite oblivious to the reality of the tumultuous crisis building up around him, which he thus completely ignores.

One struggles here for analogies, but the vision comes to mind of frightened little men who, caught up in a real war on their doorstep, retreat inside their bunkers and huddle round their TV to watch and discuss re-runs of Downfall. Perhaps that is not an adequate enough description, but the difficulty is in conveying with sufficient force and clarity, the complete retreat from reality of our political and media classes.

The economic crisis is real - it is big, complex and scary. Unable to deal with it, even to understand it, much less control events, our chatterati indulge themselves in displacement activity - their faux indignation and their orgy of blather - all to drown out the encroaching reality of an economic collapse, and all that goes with it.

But today is a special day. It is Bastille Day. The guillotine beckons and we'll return to our list of MPs later. That is our reality - having to confront these foul, posturing creatures. Whatever Murdoch might have done, he did it with his own money. They have done worse. They stole ours.

COMMENT THREAD

Print ready

Up a Gumtree? - by Richard... Wednesday, July 13, 2011



It looks as if our 'enry is having something of a clear-out sale - picked up off the online, Gumtreeclassified ads site. In addition to voting both ways, Henry's been a busy boy. Or perhaps the lovely couple (below right) are having a clear out? Odd how they are using the constituency office as the contact point, though. Perhaps it's just as well Jennifer is part-time.

This, incidentally, is the same Henrywho told us last year:
In Westminster I have been appointed to the Foreign & Commonwealth team advising the Minister of State. In addition I have been selected to the European Scrutiny Committee, a role I am greatly looking forward to as well over half our legislation comes from the EU, yet up until now meetings have been held in secret. I see my first job as being the reversal of this appalling situation and have Committee meetings in public so that all can see the kind of legislation Europe seeks to impose on us.
No wonder, he wanted to keep quiet about the voting games he is playing. The funny thing is, though, how the Guardian content partner and Myrtle don't seem to have noticed. Amazing how tolerant they are, when it comes to their own.

COMMENT: MADAME DEFARGE THREAD

Print ready

Noted By Madame Defarge - 2 - by Richard...


In the tradition of Madame Defarge, we continue to record the 274 MPs who gave away £9.8 billion of our money with their votes. This one, though, is special. He is Henry Smith, a Conservative (In Name Only). His facebook profile is here.

What makes Mr Smith different is that, this morning, he e-mailed to tell us he had noted that he was listed on EU Ref as supporting the increase in IMF lending capacity. But, he wrote: "This is not the case and I would be grateful if you would amend your website accordingly". He then referred us to the Guardian content partner, which lists Mr Smith as a "rebel", having voted against the increase.

Reluctant to take ConHome as the source of record, however, we checked back with Hansard, from where we had acquired the list in the first place. And there, he was and is still listed in the "ayes". But, to our surprise, we found that he was also listed in the "noes".

We wrote back to Mr Smith, telling him that he was listed as having gone through both lobbies. Was there a Henry Smith doppelganger ... or was this a case of identity theft, we asked. The reply, interestingly, came swiftly. "You are quite right, yes. To abstain on a vote one can go through both lobbies", Mr Smith wrote.

Thus, our egregious Mr Smith had not supported the increase, but neither had he opposed it. He was not a "rebel". He had abstained.

That then led me to write back asking him if it was not a "tad disingenuous" to point me in the direction of Conservative Home "which indicates that you opposed the measure". That, by your own account, I observed, "would seem to be less than the whole picture".

Believing that the ConHome site would be anxious to amend their misleading record, I then left a comment on their site, pointing out Mr Smith's duplicitous voting behaviour. But, despite gentle probing from my colleague, the comment has not survived moderation and Mr Smith is still listed as a rebel. One can only admire the dedication to truth and accuracy.

On the basis of Mr Smith's behaviour, however, I am not inclined to remove him from Madame Defrage's list. Technically, he may not owe us his portion of the giveaway, which we assess at £36 million, but he has shown himself not a man to be trusted. He can, therefore, now consider himself Noted By Madame Defrage (NBMD). The knitting grows longer.

COMMENT: MADAME DEFARGE THREAD

Print ready

Self delusion - by Richard...


A poll released by the Daily Mail shows the public would vote by 50 to 33 percent to leave the EU if a referendum were held tomorrow, "a huge lead of 17 points" says the paper.

And so what? In August 1974, a private poll conducted for the Labour Party showed that, should there be a referendum on membership of the Common Market, 50 percent would vote to leave, against 32 percent who would vote to stay in, a "huge" lead of 18 points.

At around the same time, Gallup confirmed these proportions, with a poll coming out at 47-30 percent in favour of leaving, exactly the "huge lead" about which the Mail is crowing. Then, as history will recall, when there was a referendum nearly a year later, 67.2 percent voted to stay in, while those voting to leave had fallen to 32.8 percent – a "huge lead" of over 34 percent.

And therein lies the most important issue in relation to those who call for, or argue for an in/out referendum on the EU. Those who advocate such a course of action must be able to show that a slender majority in favour of withdrawal prior to the event would be able to survive a prolonged sustained attack from the Europhiles, once a campaign had started.

To believe that a referendum is winnable on the basis of a helpful poll showing is self-delusion of the worst kind. And without the evidence and arguments to demonstrate how the UK could benefit from withdrawal from the EU, we would stand to lose any referendum.

Assuming the EU lasts as long, that could set the cause of euroscepticism back a generation. And, with that much at risk, with very little assurance that we could win, one really does wonder about the motivations of some of those who support the idea of a referendum.

COMMENT THREAD

Print ready

On a path to destruction - by Richard...


It is an alarming reflection on the madness of this coalition administration that unto the fool Huhne is given the power to destroy lives and our prosperity. Yet, this is the very same fool from whomThe Failygraph took dictation and yesterday published uncritically the most amazing tosh, and has now given the story to that stupid woman Louise Gray.

The "reward" of yesterday's dereliction was to have the fool stand up in parliament at 4.20 pm and dribble. To achieve "our goals", Huhne declared, "we need to take decisive action now to increase low-carbon electricity generation, including nuclear and renewable energy as well as carbon capture and storage".

These "goals", according to this fool, will require £110 billion of investment, and will cost us an additional £160 a year by 2030, relying on the assumption that families will cut their annual energy use in the home by 30 percent over the same period.

Industry regulator Ofgem, however, calculates that the policy will cost more than £200 billion by 2020. It has also predicted a rise of 52 percent in retail electricity costs, equating to around £600 a year. Other analysts suggest that the true cost will be much higher, with average domestic energy bills set to double to around £2,000 a year.

Every indication is that we are looking at the higher end, with the costs of Huhne's renewables fantasy – on which he bases his policy – consistently understated and under-performing. Add his proposal to set a minimum price for electricity plus a "carbon" floor and "carbon capture", and this sets the scene for a doubling of costs.

At the heart of his policy, though, is knocking coal out of the equation, the most cost-effective form of generation we have. He is thereby massively handicapping the industry, and then has the unmitigated gall to tell us that what is left is "simply is not up to the job". In his terms, it thus needs "reform" – i.e., the building of new, more expensive "reserve capacity" to replace the capacity he has removed, thereby massively increasing costs.

Perpetuating what amounts to staggering dishonesty in a thoroughly dishonest speech, he then defines this "reserve capacity" as power plants "we can call on when demand surges". Without these, he tells us, we "would face a much higher risk of black-outs by the end of this decade". We would also be locked into a "worrying reliance" on fossil fuel imports, "putting us at risk of rising and volatile prices".

And thus, this wealth-destroying fool says, "consumers could end up paying more" – i.e., even more than the increase they will already have to pay.

Translating this tosh, Huhne's policy relies on four things: first, an effective ban on coal as a fuel; two, the provision of base load from nuclear; three, the use of renewables (mainly wind) for variable load; four, the provision of gas plants to provide back-up for when his renewables fail to deliver (most of the time).

As to the driver of this policy, it is not – as he claims – "the need to supply secure reliable, clean electricity for the future". First and foremost, it is to meet EU renewables and emissions targets. These are the "goals" he talks about – and only within this hugely limiting framework does he then allow the electricity industry to make plans to deliver.

And here, the arithmetic starts to unravel. Just his proposed offshore wind programme is set to cost about £50 billion, to deliver a theoretical 18GW but in fact only about four – less than five percent of the total estate. By the time he has finished, a £200 billion requirement looks modest – twice Huhne's estimate of the capital required to achieve his goals, itself inflated by the premature retirement of existing coal plants.

The point that must be made, though, is that his "goals" are not our goals. They have not been presented fairly or honestly. They have not been put to an electorate in the form of any explicit manifesto, and they have no mandate. They are a highly contentious imposition from an unpopular coalition government, which has no majority support.

This, in fact, is as close to dictatorship as we have yet come. Doubtless we will move closer through the term of this vile parliament – one which yesterday "congratulated" this fool, and from which any voice of real dissent was missing.

It is thus all very well to point the finger at Huhne. But, as with the wholesale larceny of our money the day previously, this mad policy requires collective approval. And Huhne's very tenure relies on the approval and support of Cameron, who enthusiastically endorses his work.

Rarely has the electorate been so completely disfranchised. Rarely have government and parliament gone about their tasks in total defiance of the mood of the nation, stacking up unwanted costs for a minority obsession that lacks any scientific credibility or electoral legitimacy.

Yet, nothing which is said or done over the next few months or years will have the slightest impact on our dictators. They have spoken. They have given their assent, and that is how it is going to be. And, in the fullness of time, we are going to have to destroy them because, if we do not, they are set on a path to destroy us. And not one whiff of this will you get from Louise Gray and theFailygraph.

COMMENT THREAD

Print ready

Support your politicians - by Richard...

If the "colleagues" don't think that this is bad enough (left), they now have the indignity of being lectured by that insufferable prat Osborne.

"The time has come", the golden boy says, "for decisive action to address the crisis in the euro zone and prevent market uncertainty doing real damage to the world economy". This he said a statement after a meeting of Europe's finance ministers in Brussels.

It is just as well that it was a statement. If he'd said it to their face, they'd probably have killed him. Did he really think that they had to be told that "decisive action" was needed?

Anyhow, according to this idiot savant, the eurozone countries should now:
... set out in detail how they plan to expand the scale of the financial tools at their disposal, carry out credible stress tests backed up with recapitalisation for the most vulnerable banks, involve the private sector to make Greece's debt burden more sustainable, earn fiscal credibility through concrete action to reduce excessive deficits, and push forward structural reforms to boost growth.
This man should try listening to himself. One of these days he is going to utter this bilge to the wrong audience, whence he will be lucky if he gets to live to the end of the sentence.

Perhaps he should take a leaf out of Nick Clegg's book, and save us the trouble of doing it for him. Put Huhne on the list and this is one endeavour where we can fully support our politicians.

COMMENT: FINANCIAL CRISIS THREAD

Print ready

Noted By Madame Defarge - by Richard... Tuesday, July 12, 2011


In the tradition of Madame Defarge, we record the first of the 274 MPs who gave away £9.8 billion of our money, with their votes. This is Nigel Adams, a Conservative (In Name Only). His facebook profile is here. His portion of the giveaway is £36 million, which he now owes us. He can consider himself Noted By Madame Defrage (NBMD).

On each of the next 273 days, as far as we are able, we will record the names and profiles of the rest. Madame Defarge is going to be busy.

COMMENT: MADAME DEFARGE THREAD

Print ready

A short interlude - by Richard...

For those who want them, I have put up the full, readable versions of The Daily Express for 11-12 July 1940 – respectively here and here.

I have also discovered the superb archive from the National Library of Australia, which has some of the main newspapers of the period online, including the Melbourne Argus, example here. Each day's edition is downloadable in .pdf format, as a single file, rather than page-by-page.

Helpfully, also, each page is searchable, so the text can be explored for specifics, if that is needed.

In 1940, while paper for UK newspapers was rationed, the Australian papers were not restricted, which means that events in England actually got more coverage than in the home country. For anyone who has an interest in the period, therefore, these are a valuable source of material.

Unlike UK archives, this material is free and easily accessible, as a national and international resource.

Posted by Britannia Radio at 11:45