Fantasy politics - by Richard... Monday, January 09, 2012

Fantasy politics - by Richard... Monday, January 09, 2012

It is hard enough following real politics, but we are now residing in a surreal new world where rival politicians are fighting over things that don't even exist.

First there was the non-existent EU veto, but now we have Shadow foreign secretary Douglas Alexander complaining that Cameron's pledges on the EU were "rapidly unravelling" after "a draft EU agreement suggested Britain could be left out of decisions affecting the single market".

This cropped up a few days ago when Cameron pledged to keep single market issues out of the new treaty.

But such pledges are about as relevant as would be a government promise to keep wild elephants out of Lewisham High Street. As there are no wild elephants in the darkest reaches of London, so there is no mention of the single market in the new treaty – as even a basic search will show.

The implications of this new development, though, are profound. There can now be no limits to the issues over which our politicians can fight, and score off each other. We could, for instance, have Mr Cameron refusing to offer equal rights to Martian settlers, or promising to cut subsidies for the Brazabon airliner.

Come to think of it, so much fun could be had from fantasy politics that we could park the real version in Brussels and allow our politicians free rein on any subject that takes their fancy. Considering what use they are, this at least would introduce an element of entertainment into an otherwise moribund subject.

Cooking the books - by Richard... Sunday, January 08, 2012

In the 2010 Queen's speech, 46 separate measures were announced. By contrast, the EU in its2012 equivalent set out 129 initiatives – a measure of how much power has shifted from Westminster to Brussels.

The EU's plans for 2012 were duly noted by Booker in the second part of his column, the contrast triggering a search of the government archives. The intention was to show how the focus of legislation has changed, from Acts of Parliament to statutory instruments (SIs), implementing Brussels legislation.

Booker used regularly to report on the rising numbers of SIs. Just over 20 years ago they began to grow inexorably, from an average of 2,600 a year in the 1980s to well over 3,000 a year in the 1990s and more than 4,000 a year in the Blair era. This coincided with a dramatic drop in the number of Acts of Parliament, reflecting just how much of our law was coming from the EU.

To our surprise, however, these developments are no longer reflected in government statistics. In the year 1992, for instance, when we recorded 3,355-plus SIs being adopted, the government site only lists 1,923. This drastic downwards revision also applies to Act of Parliament.

Puzzled, Booker asked for an explanation of a change which has made it impossible to make historical comparisons. He ended up talking to National Archives who say that the figures now show only "those SIs which are published on our website" – so that many of those formerly included in the totals for earlier years have vanished.

They concede that this change in methodology should perhaps have been explained, and that a statement to this effect may be added to their website. But Booker also pointed out, as an unfortunate consequence of the change, that the new figures seem to show the numbers of SIs issued in 2010 and 2011 as very much higher than those for any years previously.

This gives the "red-tape czar", Oliver Letwin, something of a problem. Despite his efforts to reduce regulation, the way the statistics are now presented, it looks as if the coalition is producing a record amount of legislation. What was that about "when you first practice to deceive"?

The theatre continues - by Richard...

The inability of the MSM correctly to report on European Union affairs is manifest in an article today in the Sunday Express (pictured above) which has europhile analyst Peter Ludlow warning that:

If Cameron is stupid enough to try and block the use of the institutions it would be a very, very dramatic development which could only have grave consequences in terms of Britain's own interests.

Even though Ludlow then goes on to record that "all the messages" he is getting are that Cameron will not do this, this does not stop the newspaper delivering its thoroughly misleading headline. This refers not just to blocking the use of EU institutions, but to the treaty as a whole. We know he cannot do that.

Of greater interest though is Ludlow questioning the description of Cameron's "veto". He says: "He didn't veto, the negotiations were terminated by his partners who could see he had no negotiating position".

This is about right, but it glides past the Express reporter, with the observation tacked on to the end of the piece – even though it makes a nonsense of the whole article.

It also makes a complete nonsense of Farage's most recent comments. Rather bizarrely, he tells us:

Cameron may have used the veto once, but he is going to have to use it again and again and again … 2012 is going to be the year when so see that the veto, fun though it it was, isn't really worth a row of beans.

This is playing into the hands of the Cameron. It promotes the idea that he is committed to fighting a long-running battle against the "colleagues", reinforcing the "battling for Britain" meme, as he seeks platforms for talking tough.

In the meantime, we are getting the same vibes as Ludlow. The Cameron spat is carefully crafted theatre. There is going to be no serious opposition to the Merkozy initiative. But then, theatre rather than reality is the fare of the media and politicians. There is a lot more to come.

Read the blog - by Richard...

"Military cadet forces in every school, says schools commissioner" in the Sunday Failygraph. "All secondary schools should have a military cadet force in the drive to raise standards, according to a senior Government education official". Now read the blog - Sunday, 26 August 2007, to be precise. You can also read the piece on 2 September 2006.

Of course, we are not the "great and the good" which has every word faithfully transcribed by the MSM, to fill the gaps between the adverts. But, as we wrote back in 2007, it ain't going to happen anyway. The "great and the good" would prefer to wail and wring their hands, speaking from that profound state of ignorance that only the highly educated seem to be able to manage.