wheres the money?

Edward (as he is now to be called) Miliband, at the anti-cuts protest on Saturday decided to imply that the plight of those on the march are as the civil rights protesters in America and himself as the great Martin Luther King I cannot disguise my disdain for him and his party but this is on another level, most will know the struggle that those followers of Martin Luther King and he himself had to deal, so I will not go into that, but it is astonishing that Miliband could even try and make that analogy.

The budget on Wednesday proved to be nothing but a charade, possibly to keep the markets at bay, but having looked at the numbers, one has to wonder what on earth the three main parties in Westminster are playing at, the cameroons are suggesting that these are the biggest cuts in a generation when actual spending is rising (average) 50 billion over the Parliament, the liberal (social) democrats are still with begging bowl receiving  yet more concessions by the day and then labour and the unions, public sector etc.. are in hock with the Cameroons branding these cuts ‘the biggest since WW2. The numbers speak for themselves, so it is those in the public who tend not to follow politics or current affairs who will be mislead and it is those that are the votes these parties are out to get, those that continue to follow the ‘reality’ television and read such nonsense of the celebrities rather than look outside and see what the UK is becoming.


The cuts are therefore non-existent, the money is as always being redistributed and taken away  from some and given to others, this can be laid at Osbornes doorstep when things go wrong.

But the fact that the cuts are to be front-loaded is part of the euro-pact (Plus), so the coalition is just following our masters orders.

Europe is now getting the money it demands without a battle from the UK, Cmeron has signed the country up to further cooperation measures, in that of the EFSF, more competences passed to Europe and more sovereignty lost. Measures include these Conclusions of  24/25 March 2011 EU summit setting out (JR)


2. Within the new framework of the European semester, the European Council endorsed the

priorities for fiscal consolidation and structural reform.

priority to restoring sound budgets and fiscal sustainability, reducing unemployment through

labour market reforms and making new efforts to enhance growth. All Member States will

translate these priorities into concrete measures to be included in their Stability or

Convergence Programmes and National Reform Programmes. On this basis, the Commission

will present its proposals for country-specific opinions and recommendations in good time for

their adoption before the June European Council.

3. In particular, Member States will present a multi-annual consolidation plan including specific

deficit, revenue and expenditure targets, the strategy envisaged to reach these targets and a

timeline for its implementation. Fiscal policies for 2012 should aim to restore confidence by

bringing debt trends back on a sustainable path and ensuring that deficits are brought back

below 3 % of GDP in the timeframe agreed upon by the Council. This requires in most cases

an annual structural adjustment well above 0.5% of GDP. Consolidation should be

frontloaded in Member States facing very large structural deficits or vey high or rapidly

increasing levels of public debt.

15. Member States will set out the main measures required to move towards the Europe 2020

headline targets as agreed in June 2010. They will also present policy measures to correct

harmful and persistent macroeconomic imbalances and improve competitiveness.

Strengthening governance

9. The package of six legislative proposals on economic governance is key to ensuring enhanced

fiscal discipline and avoiding excessive macroeconomic imbalances. It includes a reform of

the Stability and Growth Pact aimed at enhancing the surveillance of fiscal policies and

applying enforcement measures more consistently and at an earlier stage, new provisions on

national fiscal frameworks and a new surveillance of macroeconomic imbalances.


Further more the operation in Libya will cost us and arm and a leg (most likely literally, too) Booker spells out in a great column today the cost of the operation and some details on europes funding.

It is another attempt of the political class in fooling the public (and yes some will be fooled), the fact is there is no money left and this coalition is spending more than the last, taking into account inflation, and the cost of debt the cuts are servicing both those, and the EU, it is as though Osborne still following the Irish (times£)

is on another planet, in that sense. The public are paying for governments mistakes, yet again. But the fact remains that governments find money for what they want to spend it on, the intervention in Libya was not necessary and Britain in Europe is not necessary, (the US trades perfectly well with the EU countries is just one example) if the UK needed europe than the claim of trade as a first priority does not stack up and the countries out of europe are coping far better than those in Europe.

The LibLabCon are indeed playing games, their arguments are false, getting rid of this coalition would be good, but look to newnewnewer Labour and they have nothing to offer, but more of the same, it is indeed time to get rid of the lot of them, maybe we could put the dêmos back into democracy.


business as usual

david Cameron is as always attempting to sideline the issue of the EU, with the current economic problems of Portugal in the headlines and ongoing or upcoming financial woes with the PIIGS ( that is Portugal, Ireland, Italy, Greece and the big one Spain) the issue cannot go on being brushed under the carpet as he so wishes, it is not only the economy of the eurozone, it is all the other areas the EU has its hands in. Justice, energy, foreign affairs etc etc… the way the leader(s) of the conservative party are dealing with these issues is unsatisfactory to say the least, dismissing them (at their peril). ConHome has this with various links, now Cameron is at the EU summit which is supposed to be on the stability of the eurozone, Libya etc and is being dominated by the Portugese economy.It is now being disputed whether the UK will have to cough up a large amount of cash for the bail-out with Bill Cash asking an urgent question on the 24th March, which was not justifiably answered, leaving both Parliament and the public guessing, whether Cameron and Osborne will pay up or not, though we don’t need the answer stated it is forseen and has already been decided. The UK looks to give its ‘fair share’ because of this coalition, opting out at this point IS an option but Cameron does not want to take it.

A deal has been struck (last night) on the the new ‘euro-pact plus’ which is in effect the emergence of  the EU (including the UK) becoming a transfer union.  which will no doubt further the cost burden on Britain in its payments to the EU. And just for fun it has emerged that London is facing £300 million of EU fines because it is in danger of missing clean air targets set by Brussels, which limit the number of “bad air days” permitted.

Why are we in the EU again? the costs incurred for what the country receives is ludicrous , those in the peripheral european countries are protesting at austerity measures and tomorrow mass protest is expected in London,  even the guardian in an editorial has said “Never before has the EU’s political elite been so far apart from its citizens, or so fragmented.” however whether the elite will listen to the people is a forgone conclusion, only shock tactics are going to work now,

more on that ‘peoples’ pledge.

Today at muffled vociferation has posted on the deception of the peoples pledge, it has made me think about the campaign in more depth, having joined the dots it would seem that those serial con artists Douglas Carswell and Daniel Hannan, are most likely the (real) organizers of this, I have posted previously on the issue of them wanting to close down B.O.O.

And both Carswell and Hannan are on the advisory council and are promoting the pledge. As the post by MF suggests they may just be a bone thrown to the right of the party and the conservatives of the public still hoping that Cameron’s ‘conservatives’ might just one day fight the sceptic cause. It would suit all the culprits, Cameron does not really mention the subject of a referendum or withdrawal unless pressed and Carswell and Hannan, publish books, make television appearances, keep their seats in Parliament(s) and purport to be for all things they set out in the plan.

I may be wrong that those two are not some cons, but having been blocked by Carswell for asking perfectly reasonable questions regarding democracy questioning his eurosceptic credentials, his lapdog adherence to every word that comes from Dan Hannans mouth, and his stooge like performance in Camerons precense. It would seem he has something to hide. As equally does Hannan, just why they wanted to shut down B.O.O. still remains unclear.

the peoples pledge, is in effect the same as the pledge by all Liberal Democrats (ALL) signed the NUS pledge card to stop any increase in tuition fees, and yet reneged. Cameron reneged on his pledge to the sun of holding a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty as did the nulab and libdems when they put the policy in their manifesto’s all those years ago.

So even if these MPs who are being targeted sign the pledge, who or what is to say they will stick to it? There is no evidence to suggest they would, and the party line always take percedence over personal belief. I have not signed the peoples pledge as yet, and am not planning on doing so. As it says on the site the aim is not to exit europe but to have a referendum, the idea sounds great until you dig a little deeper.

If a referendum is held, will the reult be taken into account if a NO vote is produced or would the country be forced to vote again (as in Ireland). None of the three main parties proposes exit and with the referendum funding policy being changed who’s guessing that the lib/lab/con wont conspire against an out campaign and if an IN vote is won the sceptic cause will be lost for a generation.

Anything to do with those like Carswell and Hannan need to be gone over with a fine tooth comb, as i suspect they have different motivations than those who would like to see Britain out of europe. Maybe UKIP is the only hope (at the moment)?

questions questions.

it is the oil of Libya, the removalof Gadaffi only or the pursuit of democracy as the West sees it. That Cameron has gone into this war so lightly, there are many questions to be answered which government ministers do not want to answer clearly and transparently.
-What is the final objective? If it is to remove Gadaffi, who will take his place?
-who are these so-called ‘rebels’?Are they really the good guys, Britain should be dealing with?
-How does the government know the rebels are not islamists? Are all the uprisings initiated by them?
-How long will this operation last? Is it mission creep?
-What are the motives? oil, takeover, democracy?
-Does this government know what it is doing? Or is it rather, like all its other policy. Gung-ho type plans which turn out to be mistakes soon after?
-Is the government to open up the SDSR again? Surely our armed forces and troops will need more, and to be better equipped in order to complete this mission. Which is at present unclear and indefinite in its objectives.
-Is Bahrain, Syria, Yemen next?

So many questions, to which we have no clear answers, yet, the media is treating Cameron as a hero who has gotten his own hands dirty. Its easy enough to order troops to go in to battle, much harder to see the process through. Without the full facts
The aims of making Libya a democratic country and protecting civilians are all fine and well, but what of other nations, as Syria Yemen or Bahrain? Cameron, has jumped into this war with much the same attitude he has shown thus far to governance. quick with an idea, but always lacking a plan.

Massie writes

“again, the seventh time in 21 years that British forces have gone into action but none of those previous interventions, not even Kosovo, were begun with this lack of clarity. Afghanistan and Iraq developed mission-sprawl but in each case the initial goal was pretty clear. Not so here, not least since no-one seems able to agree on what the goal should be. This does not seem an especially promising way to start a war.”

The problem with this big-idea is that it has grave unforseen consequences, up against a ‘mad-dog’ ruler with 40 years rule behind him and is not willing to stand down anytime soon, Gadaffi is experienced in using the military, Cameron is not.

Cameron said only last month “you can’t drop democracy from 40,000 feet”. Yet this is what he says now he is trying to do. As for those who unsurprisingly support Cameron and the governments actions, it is much the same that they accuse Gadaffi and the like of -propaganda- when the likely casualties and repurcussions are felt, they’ll still be heaping praise on them.

Now that the Arab League has condemned the no fly zone and that the US is having second thoughts, what are the British government going to do, u-turns are not an option this time.

Who are yooouuu… fighting?

David Cameron today in the House of Commons, stated “We simply cannot stand back and let a dictator – whose people have rejected him – kill his people indiscriminately. To do so would send a chilling signal to others striving for democracy across the region.” Again, it must be said Cameron should look to his own backyard and see that the people of Britain are striving for democracy, not- the ritual of crossng an X by a  would-be MPs name at 4 or 5 year intervals. As it is the British only have this to name as the luxury of being a ‘democratic nation’.

Cameron might be reminded that, he did not object at the time Tony Blair was posing for photo’s with Gadaffi, and that he has been guilty of doing the same with other so-called dictators.

Cameron also said “I can tell this House that Britain will deploy Tornados and Typhoons as well as air-to-air refuelling and surveillance aircraft. “Preparations to deploy those aircraft have already started and in the coming hours they will move to air bases from where they can start to take the necessary action.”

Will he now re-open the SDSR? Has he thought what may happen if the aircraft that Britain can still call its own, fails or is shot down is there a back up/ or plan B?

Crucial though is, the aim, we know who it is we are supposed to be  fighting -Gadaffi and his regime- but who for, just who are the rebels, Cameron, Hague, Obama, Clinton, etc none of whom have spelt out who these ‘rebels’ are.It has been done before, Western governments themselves dictating to other countries how to live. This may be a ‘win’ for Cameron as so many failygraph commentators are putting it, but I would not bet on such an outcome.

Who knows it may just  be a worse regime waiting in the wings, waiting for Gadaffi and the rest to be toppled, nobody knows.And that is the point, once again this government has rushed to conclusions and has not thought through what may come next.

Clegg’s coup.

Fraser Nelson has a post on the coffeehouse on Clegg’s victory over conservative’s in his appointing members of the Bill of Rights (BoR) commission, including Helena Kennedy who is partially responsible for the implementation of the HRA, making sure Labour introduced it. Nelson claims this shall leave the ECHR ‘intact’ meaning no-change. As is known Clegg is a firm europhile who, is for european integration, Britain in Europe, a former MEP, etc etc… So we can probably expet more competencies to be transferred.

The post also has a snippet of James Forsyth’s article which goes further, and is a reminder of how incompetent this government is (Cameron’s ‘triumph’ in getting his no-fly zone et al, today will end in disaster) The governance of this country is dictated by lawyers in Europe/ Strasbourg.

“Lawyers are the masters now. In each government department, the final word often rests with them. Ministers live in fear of being warned that they are on ‘unsound legal ground’ — and they are warned all too regularly. They suspect, with justification, that the QCs on civil servants’ speed dial are usually from left-wing chambers. Things are so bad that in at least one instance, a minister asked the Conservative party for advice on whether a policy he wanted to pursue was legal or not. ‘You can, in theory, defy the lawyer,’ says one minister. ‘But if you spent tens of thousands of pounds on a legal action which you then lost, and it emerged that you were advised not to fight, you would be in an awkward position.’ The result is, again, a sense of powerlessness, even loneliness. It is felt across government.”

To all those who would like to, it is no point blaming nulab, since a majority ‘conservative’ coalition government is in power now, and could if it were up to it, return sovereignty to Parliament, yet it wishes not to.

Nelson, says “Cameron has other battles to fight now” in regards to the Libya situation, but this issue has been on the doorstep for a number of years, maybe he should not go galavanting on the world stage and think of  the people of this country first, instead he will rue the day and continue his quest in being the ‘heir to Blair’

Scared Cam?

More on the peoples pledge, and Cameron and the political elites, refusal to hold a referendum, the Mail has an article by Harry Phibbs quoting Cameron in November 2009 on the Marr show Cameron declared: ‘I don’t want an “in or out” referendum because I don’t think “out” is in Britain’s interests.’

And just who gave Cameron the right to decide for us all, he is in government but not in power, and most importantly without mandate. The coalition is built on backroom deals of which I, nor anyone else in Britain voted for, if he wishes to state his policy for remaining in Europe, he needs to set-out what grounds these plans are based. Too, he needs to come forward to the country and ask for said mandate.

Phibbs then goes on to say “Yet while we have been granted a referendum on switching to the AV system – which would reduce our democracy to a confused mush – we are being denied a referendum on the big change that would strengthen our democracy. That change would be the withdrawal from the European Union so that we could become a self-governing nation deciding for ourselves the laws that we should live under.”

I have come to the conclusion, that one reason amongst many, but a very important one, is that the politicians of  Britain wish to remain in the EU, because they cannot govern alone, on the basis that, they have for so long been told what  to do by Brussels’ they’d be lost without, no more masquerading as important people on the EU/world stage, and none of the pretending to be doing something while ticking boxes, they would actually have to make plans and policy, without the templates handed from the EU. It is that they are frightened, yes there may be some benefit of membership of the EU, but none of which are not available from being on the outside, too America manages to trade with the world quite well, it is unlikely as many have stated that Britain would become a pariah state akin to Libya and others, since (however useless our system of democracy is) Britain is unlikely to become so dictatorial that the people are worshiping images of David Cameron and the like.


The peoples pledge seems different to previous in-out campaigns, the mood of the country, the media attention and the cross-party support, all make this campaign have a better chance than any before.  It is now up to the reluctant politicians to take the initiative and announce a referendum on this very important issue before its too late.

in-out in-out shake it all about

Today, comes good news and hope for those of us who wish to see, the politicians of Westminster squirm then relent and grant the public the referendum they not only want but deserve.

Only last week quisling Cameron, declared that he wishes to stay in the European Union and that an in-out referendum was out of the question, as most know a referendum on the issue of Europe has not been held since 1975 that even was only on the issue of the EEC, David Cameron , nick clegg, Ed Miliband etc, can try to put this off as they wish, but in the end the political class will  suffer the consequences; those being  the result of an even more frustrated electorate delivering an out answer.

The peoples pledge, is an initiative of the left, in favour of membership but realising the democratic deficit of EU membership and the people of this nation need to have a say. Caroline Lucas of the Green party, Keith Vaz of Labour and other unexpected names have cropped up, are in favour but want the decision to rest with the people and whatever you may think of them they have to be applauded for this.

David Cameron like Blair, Brown and Clegg pledged to hold a referendum then reneged, (“I know best. Your views are irrelevant. Get used to it.”)promised to claw back sovereignty and competences, and has reneged, (the EU Bill is nothing but a token gesture). He is now so in hock with the EU, Merkel, Sarkozi, etc. He yearns for the next EU summit, as it is known these summits and gatherings are pure photo opportunities and serve only to cause more trouble back in the leader own backyards when they return home.

It is now time for a referendum, and I urge everyone to sign the pledge , the country has been betrayed by our leaders repeatedly on this issue, and it will be them who are left on the back-foot for not initiating this themselves.

The media seems also to be waking up to the elephant in the room, the Daily Mail, Express, and Guardian have recently started printing (talking) about the issue more prominently, it is only thoe who have ‘power’ who would not  like a referendum, realising that a no vote would end their cosy dwellings once and for all.

sign the pledge

more churnalism

In addition to my last post comical centrists Jackie Ashley of the Guardian has proclaimed the Liberal Democrats to be of the left not the centre, and writes “no mainstream party these days has a position so simplistic you can reduce it to a slogan” she is not only naive but blind, dumb and stupid, as a political ‘journalist’ on must question that as a self-proclaimed ‘guardian columnist and political interviewer’ if she is doing her job properly.

One good quote from the article is that of Nye Bevan, writing in the Observer in 1953: “We know what happens to people who stay in the middle of the road. They get run down.”

who’s driving?

comical centrists

This is what is on offer to the electorate the three main parties at Westminster, are all pitching for the centre, in their own absurd ways, \’alarm clock britain\’ is Nick Clegg’s offerings, -who thought that one up?- at the Liberal Democrat spring conference, he spoke of his party belonging to the “radical centre”, the party of those commited to the traditions and beliefs of  social democracy – no surprise there then. Clegg said: “We are liberals and we own the freehold to the centre ground of British politics. Our politics is the politics of the radical centre. We are governing from the middle, for the middle.”        It actually makes you weep, after the 13 years of nuLab none of the parties has realised that voter apathy is in large part due to the main parties concentrating on the centre ground, thus there are no clear dividing lines between them.

As for Nick Clegg’s claims of being “the heirs to Mill, Lloyd George, Keynes, Beveridge, Grimond. We are the true radicals of British politics”an insult to all those he mentioned and those with true liberal beliefs, if there ever was one.Clegg will have to do far more if he is to regain any points in the polls, in reality it is more likely he will be out on his arse by the time voters can have their say.

Not to be outdone, the squeezed middle is Ed Miliband’s catchphrase for -you guessed it- the middle or centre voters, he wants to ‘reconnect’ Labour with the people who deserted it, when they realised not only what a farce nulab was but that their own pockets where being bled dry by nuLab policies. Miliband though, it would seem does not know himself , just who the people he is trying to reach are- he has had various definitions, of his term ‘squeezed middle’ – one is “those above and below 45k” so that means everyone then. Just like the  Cameroons he also calls his idea the ‘good society’ his vision which maintains the Whitehall centrist agenda and which  is for everyone and no-one.

David Cameron’s  Big Society is no different, it has been well publicised, and yet the phrase has too been mocked and questioned,and still nobody is any the wiser of what it actually stands for. This is David Cameron’s own fault since he has tried to encompass all areas of government policy into the ‘big society’, hence it is all BS.

If this is what is on offer to the British public, what hope is there. The ‘others’ don’t seem to be able to gain enough support to boot these lots out, and so the question comes to mind, is it the publics fault, if they did not vote for this nothingness, then they would not offer it. Or is it the politicians who are intent on imposing their centrist/ middle/ safe/ soft ideas on the people through their various ways of manipulation.

So who’s to blame?