Britannia Radio

A pygmy on the world stage   Tuesday 17 April 2012 If the level of military spending is an indication of power, then the EU, representing the sum of its members, is a declining power. That is one inference from a report by the Stockholm International Peace Research Institute (SIPRI) on global military spending levels. After 13 years of increase, world spending has levelled out, with 2011 at $1.74 trillion, almost the same the figure in 2010. In real terms, there is in fact a very small increase of 0.3 percent, but that compares with an annual average increase of 4.5 per cent between 2001 and 2009. Six of the world's top military spenders - Brazil, France, Germany, India, the UK and the US - cut their military budgets in 2011, in most cases as part of attempts to reduce budget deficits. Other states, notably China and Russia, increased their spending markedly. The key comparator, though, is the US. On the world stage, it remains by far biggest spender, even if its expenditure fell by 1.2 percent ($8.7 billion in 2010 prices). But of the Europeans, according to theEuropean Defence Agency, the total military spend for the 26 EDA participating member states (pMS) was $257 billion. That compared with US spending of $689 billion – a ratio of 2.7:1. And while the US has seen a modest fall, of the three top spenders in Western Europe - France, Germany and the UK - France's military budget has fallen four percent since 2008. Germany has cut 1.4 percent and only the UK is holding up, with a 0.6 percent cut – although deeper cuts are in the pipeline. In other European countries, far larger cuts have been made. Greece is down 26 percent since 2008, Spain 18 percent, Italy 16 percent and Ireland 11 per cent. Belgium has seen a 12 percent cut and most central European countries have also made severe cuts. Taking the aggregated defence expenditure of the 26 EDA pMS between 2006 and 2008, this has been about half that of the US. But in the years 2009 and 2010 this difference increased. While the EU aggregated defence expenditure decreased from $266 billion in 2008 to €257 billion in 2010, US expenditure increased from $612 to $689 billion in the same period. Comparing defence spending with other macroeconomic data, in 2010 US defence expenditure represented 4.8 percent of GDP and 11.2 percent of overall government expenditure. In the EU these ratios were, respectively, 1.6 and 3.2 percent. As for defence expenditure in relation to the total population, the US $2,222 per capita in 2010, while the EU spent on average $517. The spending alone does not tell the whole story though. Between 2006 and 2010, EU pMS spent half of their aggregated defence budget on personnel (civilian and military staff). In the US, personnel costs represented slightly less than one third of total defence spending during the same period. Operation and Maintenance costs of EDA pMS were between 22 and 23 percent of total defence expenditure for the period 2006 to 2010. In the US this percentage was closer to 30 percent. Another important difference was defence investment (Equipment procurement and R&D/R&T). In the EU, the proportion of the budget dedicated to investment has always been lower than in the US (respectively 20 and 30 percent). However, it increased from 19 percent in 2006 to 22 percent in 2010, at $57 billion. As for R&D expenditure, the US spends more both in absolute terms and as a proportion of defence expenditure. Turning to defence personnel, in 2006 total defence staff was higher in the EU than in the US (2.4 million against 2.1 million). Between 2006 and 2010, the number of staff working in defence decreased by 17 percent in the EU and in the US it increased by six percent. As a result in the past two years (2009 and 2010) the relative position changed and total personnel in the US exceeded the number of personnel in the EU (2.2 million and 2.0 million respectively in 2010). Military personnel represents 80 percent of total personnel in the EU while in the US the proportion is 66 percent (these proportions have remained constant for the period 2006 to 2010). In terms of absolute figures, the US has twice as many civilian defence staff as the EU (778 thousand and 390 thousand), whereas the EU has more military staff than the US (1.6 million in the EU against 1.4 million in the US). In terms of deployed personnel, the US deployed on average almost 200,000 troops. This represents 14 percent of military personnel. The EU deployed 66,000 troops, four percent of the total military personnel. For all the figures, these last ratios have the most force. The four percent deployed by the EU represents probably the maximum capability, less than a third of the US figure. And given that the EU 27 exceeded the US in population and GDP, any ambitions the EU might have of matching the US on the world stage are no closer than they have ever been. Compared with the US, the EU is a pygmy. And nor even does it stop there. The year 2011 saw Russia increase its military spending by 9.3 percent in 2011, reaching a total of $71.9 billion. This makes it the third largest military spender worldwide, overtaking the UK and France. Furthermore, military expenditure in Asia and Oceania rose by 2.4 percent, due mostly to a 6.7 percent ($8.2 billion) increase by China. India's military budget fell by 3.9 percent, or $1.9 billion, in real terms, with high inflation cancelling out a nominal increase. The US, therefore, continues to remain at the top of the league, spending more on its military than EU countries, China and Russia put together. But as the latter two powers increase their spending, the EU is trailing further and further behind. Its ambitions are bigger than its ability to realise them. COMMENT THREAD Richard North 17/04/2012

United in their greed   Tuesday 17 April 2012 It's taken it long enough, but even The Failygraph is putting two and two together, top discover that local authority parking fees are largely motivated by greed – a direct tax on the motorist, for which there is no democratic (or any) mandate. This discovery is driven by the news that, in Aylesbury, Buckinghamshire, the council has made £30,000 from parking machines that won't give change, one council of many. Most Welsh Councils have long since joined in the gold rush, thus demonstrating yet again that parking rules are a one-way street. The Councils are quite happy to take the excess, but if hapless motorists overstay their time, the fines are instant and savage, backed by a ruthless disregard for the law. However, unlike the newspaper, its own commenters have a better understanding of the bigger picture. With the political pressure to keep limit rises in the headline rates of Council Tax, Councils are avoiding the discipline of applying spending cuts – imposed on most normal people as the economy shrinks. Instead, they are supplementing their Council Tax income by ramping up a wide range of fees and charges, of which parking fees are but one part. Nor is it the case that Councils have any other concerns other than lining their pockets, as The Failygraph rightly puts it. The economic drag of unreasonable an excessive fees is of no concern to them, as the latest report of economic damage comes in. Even though we have Council elections on 3 May, however, no relief will be afforded. There is rarely any difference in attitudes between Councils of different political hues. Their avarice overcomes any difference in political dogma, presenting voters with no real choice. The political classes, as they have become, are united in their greed. COMMENT THREAD  Richard North 17/04/2012

The Guardian is upset   Tuesday 17 April 2012 Even though "it has caused two earthquakes", huffs The Guardian - i.e., barely discernible tremors – experts have given the go ahead for shale gas exploitation. But it gets better … not only is the newspaper in a mick, "green groups" have denounced the report, with campaigners saying that the recommendation by government advisers casts "grave doubt" on commitment to cut emissions. However, the government expert findings are very welcome, and much needed. With E.ON and RWEscrapping their plans to build new nuclear plants in the UK, there is very little option but to push for as much gas production as possible. Wind isn't going to cut it and coal is lumbered with CCS. Without a massive new supply of gas, and a rapid gas-fired power station building programme, the lights are going to go out. Getting the gas is one thing though. Hacking off The Guardian is something of a bonus. COMMENT THREAD  Richard North 17/04/2012

He can't even do that   Tuesday 17 April 2012 What a pathetic creature The Boy is. First having put the repeal of the Human Rights Act on the agenda, he waters that down to a reform of the Court of Human Rights. But when the going gets tough, The Boy rolls over, set to achieve nine-tenths of absolutely nothing. Unsurprisingly, the Conservatives are only scoring 33 percent in the polls, their lowest rating in this parliament, and 61 percent of those questioned think that the Carmeron-led coalition is performing badly. With the local elections only a few weeks away, Labour is leading with 42 percent. Insofar as these figures mean anything, that gives an equally lacklustre party a head start, lining up to thrash the Tories with a nine-point lead. UKIP, on the other hand, seem to have overtaken the Lib-Dims, which rather puts the idiot Greg Barker in his place. But the central point is that, when Cameron sets his own agenda and can't even get that through, he can hardly be surprised that even more people are seeing him for what he truly is – a loser. Far from being seen as "swivel-eyed", UKIP positively shines by comparison. COMMENT THREAD  Richard North 17/04/2012

The Kermit kontest   Monday 16 April 2012 What is entertaining about this contest is that the presidential candidates do a nice line of insult, despite socialist François Hollande telling journalists, "If I sometimes hold back my humour, it's out of pity for the incumbent candidate". He can afford this luxury because, for the first time in living memory it seems, the Left are set to take the crown – not that they have the crown any more as the last hereditary head that wore it was parted from its body in a somewhat violent manner. The later emperors, of course, had to bring their own gear, most of which was subsequently flogged off. But, with the first round of the contest now five days away, things are getting interesting – at least according to Kim Willsher, former Sunday Telegraph journalist (one of the better ones), now working for The Guardian. Ten candidates are in the contest, which has Euronews going further than Willsher, describing it as a frenzy. It has Hollande saying of Sarkozy, "So many unkept promises, so much recklessness, unadmitted failures. This justifies no second mandate!" Sarkozy, he of the UMP, retorts: "M. Hollande proposes more civil servants, less working time and more support payments. How do we pay for that? I understand why he has proposed a one-year programme". But Marine Le Pen, of the Front National party, is the one that is going to make this into a two-round contest, stopping any candidate getting an absolute majority. And it is she who wants to pull France out of the "mad and murderous spiral" of monetary union, at the weekend describing Hollande and Sarkozy as "Siamese twins". She calls their rallies as "a school for fans" and "puerile". Nevertheless, it is a man, the far-left revolutionary Jean-Luc Mélenchon of the Front Gauche, who is setting the contest alight. He has vowed to tax earnings over €360,000 (£300,000) at 100 percent and rails at "Anglo-Saxons" and their "stinking money". A former socialist, he brands Hollande as being as useful as "the captain of a pedalo in a storm". Marine Le Pen, whom he is fighting for third place, gets to be a "filthy beast spitting hatred", a "bat", a "dark presence" and "half-demented". When she challenged him to his face, he repeated the insult. "Half-demented … that at least leaves the other half", he said. To Marine, however, Mélenchon is "a fat bourgeois who plays being a man of the people", whom she damns with faint praise. "In front of the cameras Mélenchon will hurl threats and insults, but in reality he's charming, affable, almost a little boy", she says. All of this and much more, makes a refreshing change from the anodyne, limp-wristed campaigning that we get on this side of la Manche. This has The Boy launching the Tory council "fight" yesterday, with a speech so boring that it is a minor miracle that even he kept awake for it. "You want a better future for your children - that is what the Conservatives are creating; You understand what's right for this country - and so do we. That's what we need to tell people," he says.  "If you're sick of the status quo, if you're tired of being told that this is the best you can hope for, if you want leadership that admires and encourages those who want the best for themselves and their families, if you want real change, if you want a radical alternative, you know who to vote for", he adds. Sheesh! At least the Kermits have a bit of fire in their bellies. Most entertaining is the poison dwarf, who is giving his political advisers nightmares. In meet-the-voters visits, he snapped at a disgruntled farmer and poked her husband in the chest and called a journalist a "tosser", which is a change from calling them paedophiles. For all that, though, the contest is almost a done deal. The opinion polls show Hollande and Sarkozy level for the first-round vote on Sunday, but Hollande well ahead for the second and final round a fortnight later. Nevertheless, Willsher offers us some light relief, with a tale of rank outsider Nicolas Dupont-Aignan discovered his campaign headquarters was not as soundproof as he might have wished. Noisy neighbours engaging in what the French press described as "bedroom sport" interrupted a press conference, leaving the unfortunate Nicolas to pretend nothing was happening. As journalists sniggered, he told them: "Enough talk, we want actions". At least then, the tossers were in a different room. COMMENT THREAD Richard North 16/04/2012

They don't even read each other   Monday 16 April 2012 Penetrating the paywall behind which The Times hides its nuggets, the Press Association is telling us that this paper is reporting that the MoD is reconsidering changes to Britain's aircraft carrier programme. The defence ministry is, we are told, planning to drop plans to buy the F35C, the conventional carrier version of the American Joint Strike Fighter, and reverting to the previous Labour government's plans to buy the short take-off, vertical landing (STOVL) F35B version of the aircraft. However, that story sounds rather familiar and a quick check of our own archives brings up this storyfrom Thomas Harding of the Failygraph on 19 March. And what a surprise! It tells us that defence ministers "are recommending that the Government scrap its previous decision to back a conventional aircraft carrier and jets - in favour of a Labour plan for jump-jet fighters and ships". So much for the Times's scoop – nearly a month late. We can understand their gifted hacks not reading things like lowly blogs, but one might expect them to keep an eye on the competition. Just very occasionally, they have some news. COMMENT THREAD  Richard North 16/04/2012

Not a game for amateurs   Monday 16 April 2012 As someone who regards Twitter users in general as deserving of capital punishment, and harbouring a strong dislike for the use of hard-core swearwords on blogs and other public media, I am slightly ambivalent on this. On the one hand, it seems to me that John Kerlen (aka Olly Cromwell), who has posted some distinctly unpleasant "tweets" on his Twitter account, was asking for trouble. On the other, it is manifestly clear that Bexley councillors (with whom Kerlan has been locked in battle) and the police have grossly over-reacted. Kerlan's supporters make a very good case for him, pointing to how ghastly Bexley council really is – although it is probably no more loathsome than others. But Kerlan himself does not come over as a character who is likely to gain widespread public support. And if that sounds less than sympathetic, it is perhaps a reflection of Kerlan's lack of tactical acumen. We are up against a ruthless, spiteful and unprincipled enemy, one who was bound to take advantage of any weakness. Publishing the "c-word" on Twitter, as did Kerlan, has given them the opening they needed. If we are going to take these people on – as indeed we must – we are going to have to be a lot more canny. Not least, we need to identify their weaknesses, work out effective strategies to exploit them and then, where possible, to work in concert with others. Turning the electronic ether blue is not going to earn any brownie points. One notes of Kerlen that he does tend to be a one-man band, yet he is now appealing for support when he has got himself into trouble of his own making. And, if for no other reason than the authorities are grossly over-reacting, he should be supported – at least insofar as a jail sentence, currently threatened, would be unconscionable, while the ban on his blogging cannot be acceptable. But one might also observe that we might all get a lot further against a common enemy if more of us took the time and effort to plan and implement a winning strategy. We are not going to win by sounding off – with or without obscenities - and hoping for results. Our enemies are not amateurs. Why should we expect that amateur attempts to take them on should have any success? If we are going to be successful, we need to raise our game. COMMENT THREAD  Richard North 16/04/2012