Socialists: why don't they have a sense of humour?

Given their policies and their absolute determination to ignore the lessons of history and plough every country they have power of into the dark ages you'd have thought they'd have a blinding sense of humour.

But no. Proof was given once again in Strasbourg when the woman who makes Harriet Harperson look like a decent member of society; our beloved new Minister for Europe, was giving a press conference.

I'll let another fruitloop, Mary Honeyball, set the scene:

Yesterday UKRep, the UK Permanent Representation to the European Union, held their traditional reception to welcome British MEPs to the European Parliament. It was, for me, a deeply depressing experience.

Shall we find out why it was a 'deeply depressing experience'? It's not, as you might imagine, because it was full of idiots who think Keynesian economics and ignoring the choice of the voters is a good idea.

It's much more serious than that...

Not only were most of the UKIP MEPs present; they were also accompanied by young women in fairly flimsy purple dresses...

Did you read that? Can you see how appalling that must be? Women went to an event looking good! They weren't sporting paunches and crew cuts or unattractive suits which made them look of questionable gender.

Glenys! bring the tar and I'll fetch the feathers!

It does, however, get worse. Lady G was talking about how wonderful it was that 35% of British MEPs were women and quite rightly pointed out that they needed to ensure they had something to do.

However, there were some bright spots. It was good to see British Commissioner Cathy Ashton there. The keynote address from Baroness Glenys Kinnock, Minister for Europe, was absolutely delightful. At last we have a Europe Minister who knows not only knows the subject but has years of experience as an MEP. Glenys, of course, talked about her passion, international development, and how she wished to continue contributing to Europe on the world stage.

Cue a voice from the back from that sexist beast Godfrey Bloom who said that, and I can hardly bring myself to type it, 'They can make the tea'. To add insult to injury those floozies in their dresses had the audacity to laugh. They actually laughed at a joke. Whilst wearing a dress and being a woman.

Of course, the socialists standing next to them quite rightly told them all that they should not be laughing at jokes because they weren't funny.

Godders himself thought that Mary Honeyball was playing an absolute blinder as far as humour was concerned. "Mary Honeyball's going to scratch your eyes out ladies for looking significantly more attractive than she..." he warned.

quid pro quo?

If we can just sidestep the main focus of the Blair story that he is the UK's choice to be EU President* and go to the issue that this POSITION DOES NOT EXIST AND SHOULD NOT EXIST BECAUSE THE LISBON TREATY HAS NOT BEEN RATIFIED AND MILLIONS OF PEOPLE WERE DENIED THE RIGHT TO HAVE THEIR SAY.

That's how much they hate you. They couldn't care less if a rabid sheep walked up to you with a SA 80 Mk II, fixed Bayonets and turned you into his Christmas tree angel with some extra intestinal tinsel. They want a federal Europe and so you'll fucking get one.

*in 2005 when Blair handed over the rebate word on the ground was he'd done it so that he'd get the presidency of the EU. And here we are.

Health and Safety in a warzone and throwing washing machines

Lots of people in the military smoke. I was chatting to a couple of Riflemen the other day, as we were all chain smoking, about it and we came to the conclusion that soldiers smoke a lot because there's an awful lot of hanging around to do.

Yes, it's bad for us. Smokers know that. We've chosen to take the risks associated and by god do we pay the price every time we hand over the money for a pack of 20. But then I personally don't take other risks. I don't eat meat, I exercise an awful lot and I don't stick my head in a gas oven for kicks.

It's part of being human and part of being an adult. We have the responsibilities that that comes with such as not plunging knives into people and going to work to pay for the cost of living (some of us) and in return we are supposed to be allowed to make decisions on what we do with our lives: be that have a couple too many on a Friday night or a weekend screeching down a mountain on a bike. It's our lives, it should be our choice.

It's unfortunate that successive governments have decided that we aren't nearly as intelligent as they are and that our lives need to be monitored and analysed in order for us to live as they wish us to. Smoking is bad ergo we shouldn't do it. Not even if we want to.

We should be told what to eat, what to drink and how often to go for a walk and I can only imagine that in a few years time some white aproned middle aged nurse will do house to house calls where they shove a hose up your bum and flush it all out of you.

Pity then, the current serving personnel in the American military. Their tours, unlike British personnel, are about 13-16 months which is a fucking long time away from family.

American troops are not to be banned from smoking in war zones, the US Defence Department says...Mr Morrell said the Pentagon would examine the recent study to see what else could be done to move towards banning tobacco in the military.

He said: "Obviously it is not our preference to have a force that is using tobacco products."

Luckily they appear to have a sensible Defence Secretary

Pentagon spokesman, Geoff Morrell, said US troops were already making enough sacrifices in Iraq and Afghanistan.

He said Robert Gates, the US defence secretary, did not want to add to the stress of the troops by taking away their right to smoke.

I'd like to think the MoD would also come up with the same line but to be honest, I think the money on that survey would be better spent on equipment, training and welfare. Call me old fashioned.

It's the bare faced cheek of telling people who face the daily risk of having their arse blown through their ears that smoking 'is bad for them' which makes me want to reach for something large and heavy. No shit, Sherlock, but then so is going out on patrol.

It's about choice.

Sticking with throwing large, heavy objects, I was pointed in the direction of the BBC news Northern Ireland website this morning.
Not to be outdone by their military friends, locals have taken to throwing washing machines at the police.


Who needs clean pants when there's a fight to be had?

Don't talk to the Eurosceptics

Former President of the European Parliament Hans Gert Pottering has been in fine form this week, clearly demonstrating why people around the continent point and call him a fascist.

Ja, Ja. Seig Heil!

Hans-Gert Pöttering, the outgoing President of the Parliament, urged MEPs to unite to freeze "anti-Europeans" out of the decision-making process for the next five years..."I think it is very important that the pro-European MEPs co-operate well so the anti-Europeans cannot make their voices heard so strongly," Mr Pöttering said.

This is the man who decided to stop eurosceptics from participating fully in their role as MEPs and, most importantly, stop them from representing the people who elected them, by snatching arbitrary powers straight from a 1930s history text book.

Hans-Gert openly admitted that the behaviour of his Euro-sceptic opponents was within the rules. And he wasn’t asking to change those rules a procedure that would take time. No, he simply wanted permission to disregard them. Permission was duly granted, by 20 committee votes to 3.

Hans-Gert’s letter is worth quoting in full:

Dear Mr Leinen, [Jo Leinen, a German Socialist, is Chairman of the Constitutional Affairs Committee]

In the course of the current part session, Parliament was confronted on several occasions with procedural requests which were formally based on and fulfilled the requirements of a provision of the Rules of Procedure, but which according to the full conviction of myself and of other Members of the House were moved with the intention of obstructing the procedures of the House...

For those of you not aware of how the European Parliament decided to celebrate the 2009 - 2014 session, here's a quick reminder:

Leading the ceremony in Strasbourg, a detachment of combat troops marched to the overture of The Force of Destiny by Verdi, before raising an EU flag twice the size of the national flags around it to a military bugle call.

The troops - drawn from the Eurocorps member states of Germany, France, Spain, Belgium and Luxembourg - then stood to attention to a full orchestral and choral rendition of Ode to Joy.

So that's nice. But it's probably best for our MPs and press corps over here to concentrate on nice, important things like, er, duck houses. Let's let the euroweenies fight and bicker about their important issues well away from the glare of the media and the public eye and then have a tantrum every few months when some summit or new treaty gets put forward and we don't get a referendum on it.

Important, dignified parliamentary behaviour such as this beauty from Tory MEP Nirj Deva who spluttered

What has distressed me is that the EPP is doing deals with the Socialists and the Alliance of Liberals and Democrats, rather than doing deals with us. On policy areas we should work together.

Do deals.

DO DEALS.

Thanks, Nirj. Nice to know where we all stand on that transparency and being truly part of a eurosceptic group. Good to know Tory MEPs are not pining for the power, the fois gras, the plush offices and champagne receptions that being part of the biggest group allows.

Because although the European Election campaign was most notable for the complete lack of debate about the EU I'm sure David Cameron was whining on at some point about wanting to bring back powers.

Yes, so we know he can't really without renegotiating treaties, but it's good to at least vote against those directives you're supposed to want to 'bring back to Westminster'?

Isn't it?

Joined up government part deux

Honestly. With this lot it never rains but it pours.

Yesterday the Today programme put on for my catharsis* the chairman of the Charity Commission to talk about why they think that private schools don't provide a public good. Apparently providing thousands of children with a decent education and relieving the state sector from having to find places for even more children isn't actually a benefit to our society.

The Independent Schools Council says that the Charity Commission's decision has been based too much on the level of bursaries available - without taking into account contributions such as sharing facilities with other local schools.

"We are deeply disappointed with the approach taken by the Charity Commission, which focuses on the amount of means tested bursaries provided by each school," said David Lyscom, chief executive of the Independent Schools Council.

"The implication of the commission's findings appears to be that many schools must now aim to provide a significant, but still unspecified, proportion of their turnover in full bursaries. This will inevitably lead to fee increases."

Mr Lyscom also challenged the Charity Commission to recognise the collective benefit of the independent school sector, which he says saves the taxpayer £3bn per year.

It started off with a cracker when Dame Suzi Leather** was asked if she was a member of any political party, to see if the decision that focusing entirely on social manipulation or if it had anything to do with merit goods, she replied that she was a member of the Labour Party. Well fancy that.

Someone who is a paid up member of the Labour Party wants to assist in closing down schools which are fee paying and have entrance requirements based on ability.
I'm sure it's absolutely nothing to do with jealousy and social engineering. I mean, the fact that parents who send their children to private school also pay for the state education of other children is just something that they've had to put up with, as a choice they themselves have made.

And then today, we have this little gem:

A fifth of English local authorities are reporting increased pressure on school places due to the recession, the Local Government Association says.

One reason may be parents abandoning private education to save money.

Education is not recession proof, it would seem. Well, no surprise there: private school fees have been rocketing for years and in no small part due to the fact that many state schools out there have more in common with a zoo than they do a place of learning.

It's no real surprise with this government: I marked some SATS papers a few weeks ago and the view from the teachers marking was that the papers were so much easier than last year; a fact which was put down to the knowledge of a forthcoming General Election where the government will want to boast about more children achieving the required level in English and Maths.

So, pressure on state schools is rising and an apparent Labour apparatchik at the Charity Commission is trying to ensure that fewer and fewer parents can afford to send all their children to private school.

Wow.

Soon we'll all be as uneducated as the policy makers.

*Tis required at the moment. Managed to get involved with another complete arsehole

**Go read the wiki entry. Someone's done a fucking great job.

joined up government

News this week was that our beloved government wants to take us all back to the dark ages by cutting carbon via the medium of having these:

as our energy solutions.

Climate Tsar Ed Miliband (the unhot one) admitted that this will mean fuel prices will rise as relying on wind for our energy supply is as sensible as allowing Gary Glitter to look after your young daughters.

Instead of something sensible for a policy such as clean coal and nuclear technology (a friend of mine has just pointed out that more people die down coal mines every year than have ever died in nuclear accidents but it's supposed to be 'unsafe')we have nonsense.

According to the government's Fuel Poverty Advisory Group, more households will enter fuel poverty unless measures are introduced to eradicate the problem by 2016.

The study found that fuel poverty levels are currently three times the rate seen five years ago.

Additionally, Derek Lickorish, the group's chairman, said that the impact of carbon emission reduction, rising unemployment and a volatile energy market meant that current measures "are simply inadequate".

And

The Fuel Poverty Advisory Group (FPAG) says about 4m households in England are already in fuel poverty, spending more than 10% of their income on energy.

And it has urged ministers to set out a detailed plan for meeting their own target of ending the problem by 2016.

Are you seeing any links here?

The government are warned about an increasing number of people spending more and more of their incomes on energy bills and their response is to sign up to a stupid energy policy which will be unreliable, hugely inefficient and expensive. What happens if there's no wind? We know from the very cold weather earlier this year that an anti cyclone brings freezing temperatures with no wind. High demand, no spinning bloody windmills.

Not only are the lights going to go off around the country, I think they've definitely gone off in the wee minds of politicians all over the world.

It's completely untrue...but we wrote it

Over at England Expects, the European Parliament are speaking out of their arse again.

Do they do anything else?

Hedging your bets II

Allow me to once again indulge by bringing up some of my pearls of wisdom written a few years ago about the EU's attitude to hedge funds:

Drifting my mind back across The Channel, I am reminded of yet another economic retard. Step forward Mr Jo Leinen MEP: socialist and German so we can probably guess he’s not well up there with the liberal market economy. Mr Leinen, who studied half an economics degree during the 1970s, when people were convinced that Keynesian demand management actually works, happens to think that people in Europe shouldn’t have anything to do with hedge funds, because they are an ‘alien concept in Europe.’ That’s not strictly true, actually, Mr Leinen, any more than the IS-LM curve is.

Assets under management of the hedge fund industry totalled $1.13 trillion at the end of 2005. This was up 13% on 2004 and almost 50% on three years ago. Between 2006 and 2008 assets are expected to grow by 15%. So for a new idea, it’s doing pretty well. About 2/3 of hedge funds are managed offshore in the Caymen Islands, British Virgin Islands or Bermuda. The biggest onshore collection is in the USA, with 34% of funds and 24% of assets. London is Europe’s leading centre for hedge fund management, with three quarters of European hedge fund investment, ₤300bn, managed within the UK.

It's great news that Borisis now trying to defend the City of London from the EU who don't want London to be a successful financial centre. It's nothing to do with their desire to protect consumers from something they don't understand and everything to do with bitterness and jealousy.

If the EU manage to fuck up financial markets just as they have done democracy and transparent accounting then businesses won't move to Germany they'll leave the EU altogether.

However, wouldn't it be nice if the rest of the Tory party agreed with what Boris said?

UKIP pointed out Tory MEPs voted for the new EU directive last year, while they were the only party that voted against it. UKIP MEP and former mayoral candidate Gerard Batten said: “It's great that Boris is supporting the City in this way but a shame the Tories didn't when they had the chance.

From the UKIP website:

In September the Conservative MEPs were whipped to support legislation written by the socialist former Prime Minister of Denmark, Poul Nyup Rasmussen which provided the base for these draconian laws. The Hedge Funds and Private Equity Report passed by a massive majority in Strasbourg was designed to punish the City rather than to improve its actions.

Talking to Mr Farage about it, its author Rasmussen infamously said, "We don't like your Anglo-Saxon capitalism".

So we're going to have to say something about it before the EU bankrupt this country more quickly than they originally planned.

She wrote a cheque out – and three grand more and that's my yearly income

I don't usually read the Guardian but the hacking story today was rather close to home and very interesting and so I have purchased a copy. Delving into the inner pages I stumbled across a story yet to come to my attention about a lady called Lisa Greenwood who was essentially sacked for having a less than worshipping view of Hazel Blears.

Mrs Greenwood, who worked at the Department for Children, Schools and Families, was rather miffed to see the Chipmunk on TV waving around a cheque which, in the eyes of many, was proof she had broken the rules for MPs expenses. After sending an e-mail via the excellent They Work For You website, she received information saying that she had been suspended. After a subsequent meeting, she was then told she was sacked.

She sent an e-mail from her personal e-mail compaining about an MP whose wages she contributes towards and who had by her own admission broken the rules and she gets sacked?

So often do we have to use them about this government that '1984 is a warning, not an instruction manual' and 'Big Brother state' just become meaningless.

"I just had to get it off my chest. I have not said anything awful – it is not that extreme and I wasn't saying she should be killed, I was just having a moan. Hazel Blears is the one I want to tell, she is the one working for us. They are not in this ivory tower somewhere."

She said her case had stirred up a debate about data protection. "A lot of people are now worried. We are human and now people are worried if they send something anonymously it will be flagged up. So we have to remain impartial as a civil servant, but why allow us to vote? It is ludicrous that we are not able to have an opinion. Hazel Blears has made a mistake and she has got her job still."

And she's exactly right. Blears is in a position of responsibility in this country and along with many MPs has proven that she could not be trusted.

The sort of people who make rules regarding taxation and who pass laws saying that people who commit crimes should go to prison then stick two fingers up to us the tax payer, us the voter and do as they wish.

But again, over the past few months the angry, frustrated articles on these issues do tend to blend together as we sit there in amazement at the state of our institutions and how on earth they got this bad.

But then what really are we going to do about it? People have forgotten that we were all clamouring for a General Election because in the mind of the public that was a million years ago.

So I guess it will all just go on and people like Lisa Greenwood and bloggers who risk our jobs to say what we think will just have to go on hoping that we're not the next ones to get fired for daring to have an opinion.

A wet dream of a front page?

I had to buy the Daily Mail today after spying their headline today:
'MURDERERS AND RAPISTS AT LARGE'

At first glance I wondered if yesterday had been a particularly slow news day and as such the editors at the Daily Mail had just decided to write their dream headline. After all, it's bascially what they've been telling us in a variety of forms for years but haven't been able to be so, well, damned obvious about it.

Then I noticed that the Daily Express also had a very unbiased and well balanced story running, and so my dream of the Mail's subheading being

'AND THEY'RE ALL ASYLUM SEEKERS'
floated away like a retarded child's helium balloon at a summer fete.

Another time, perhaps.