What does Labour stand for?

I've blogged about Dave and his issues (clarity of vision mainly - or lack of); the Lib Dems (toast mainly); the Greens (fascist mainly) and UKIP (a welcome spanner in the works).

So what about Labour? What do they espouse? What do they stand for? What are their goals, their solutions, their big ideas for the future of this great country of ours?

What is Mr Miliband shouting from the rooftops about how his party will deliver prosperity to this country?

Erm, well maybe I'm going deaf in my advancing years, but I'm not hearing much at all. Surely a year out from a General Election Her Majesty's opposition is offering a clear alternative, a big idea about a new direction for our country? Yes as the official 'opposition' it is their duty to hold the government to account, to highlight failures, to disagree with policies, but just nay saying is not what we need is it? We need to know what their alternative vision for our future is. What they would do to continue our emergence and recovery from the abject mess that they left the country in last time?

So where is it? Where is the leadership, the big ideas that we can grab a hold of and think 'maybe they are an option in the General Election.'?

They put out a party election broadcast this evening here that was truly the most vacuous piece of footage I've ever seen from any political party. Ed Balls (whose title as best-named MP ever will only be surpassed if a Mr Fuckwit is elected at some time) continues to deny the total mess they left last time and continues to try to talk the country down while the economy is slowly coming back to life.

'Cost of living crisis'? Wages not keeping up with inflation? When you have no wages at all that's a crisis. When there are jobs available for you in a recovering economy, you don't give a shit about hair-splitting stuff like that, you try to get a job and get back to a life of providing for your family. Which was not a realistic prospect when Labour ran the place into the ground and actively encouraged people from poorer countries to come here for work. Effectively pricing many locals out of a job. That's not racist, it's economic reality.

So what does Labour stand for? The working class? When its immigration policy which wasn't simply 'open door' but 'please come on in' has decimated indigenous UK employment? Does it stand for the unemployed who sadly need a helping hand? It would not revoke a single major Tory policy on welfare reform except perhaps the so-called 'bedroom tax' which it introduced. The NHS? Which has been criminally failing patients for years but had its figures hidden under Labour.

Maybe it's 'education, education, education' whose batshit crazy unions have been undermining standards for decades and seeing us falling down international league tables in the interests of crap teachers?

What does Labour stand for? I'd say it's 'failure'. At the very best, all I can come up with is that Labour stands for absolutely nothing, except lining the pockets of its champagne socialists who don't really give a fuck about anyone but themselves.

And yet they're ahead in the polls, more likely than not to form the next government (because of boundary changes that weren't made because of the Lib Dems).

Is the electorate completely mad? I think it is.

Thanks for reading

Keep the pressure on on May 22nd. Vote UKIP

I'm not a UKIP supporter or member. By instinct I'm a Tory; maybe more accurate would be to say a Thatcherite Tory who laments the fact that in his shameless quest for power Mr Blair effectively pulled everyone towards the centre left, including the current crop in government.

I fervently hope that Dave wins the next election with a majority so that he can continue the job of putting this country back on its feet after the abject shambles that Labour left last time. In particular I'd like to see Mr Gove (or his successor at the DfE) complete the job of eradicating the 'blob' that is our underachieving leftie-biased teaching profession and in particular unions like the NUT and NASUWT.

However, for me the biggest issue - and frankly danger - we face is our membership of the EU. I know it's not top of the list of people's concerns, but that does not mean it's not the biggest issue we face as a nation. Double negatives are a no-no aren't they? ;)

It is not seen as 'front and centre' by most people because they are simply not presented with the facts by our main parties or the BBC who have all bought into the 'Common Purpose' bullshit that is embodied in the EU. If we don't get a referendum this time around it may well be too late for us to retain our status as a sovereign nation state, able to govern itself. It will mean that our laws will be made by people we didn't vote for and can't vote out and who know the square root of sod all about where we live.

And that will be a massive kick in the bollocks to the many millions who have fought and died for our ability to govern ourselves. I have blogged endlessly you might think on this issue so I'm not going to regurgitate my arguments, but you can read them here, here, here, here and here.

The point of this blog is to urge you to keep up the pressure on our politicians on the issue of the EU and the need for a referendum. The EU has gone way beyond the mandate we signed up for in the early 70s when it was designed (supposedly) as a trading bloc. It is now set on a course to create a united states of Europe with central governance, defense, financial policies including tax, laws, courts etc. We did not sign up for that and we simply need - and deserve, since we're paying for all this - to have our say before it goes any further.

Yes it's true to say that the Tories are the only party that can currently deliver a referendum (or have said they will do) but that has come about because of the pressure exerted at last year's local elections. If Mr Miliband feels he's likely to lose in 2015 he might be forced by public opinion to accede to our demand for a referendum. Frankly I don't really care who delivers it, just that it happens.

And that means, in my humble opinion, that we need to keep up the pressure on this crucial issue. It is sad that our politicians feel that they can do what the hell they like even when most people want a  referendum. But thanks to twitter and other media, they can now be forced to do what we want, if the message is powerful enough and the threat to their cushy lifestyles is strong enough.

The Tories have said they will deliver a referendum, so at the European Elections, there's not much point voting for them - they're already 'on side'. The Lib Dems have pledged not to offer a referendum at any time and are increasingly irrelevant if there's any justice at all in the world. That leaves Labour who are so pro-EU it's painful... or UKIP.

If you really care about the UK as a nation state, about controlling our future lives with some influence over our law-makers and politicians, you'll do the right thing on May 22nd.

You may have to hold your nose, I understand that - incidentally you might investigate UKIP policies sometime and find out for yourself that they are in no way a racist party, rather than just taking scared 'establishment' commentators at face value - but I hope you will vote for UKIP in May. It is not just about what's right for the people of the UK, but also for the millions who are suffering in southern Europe as a direct result of the EU. Being anti EU is not anti Europe; it's pro a diverse, fair, successful Europe for all of its citizens.

Thanks for reading

Driving and swearing (this is a sweary blog you have been warned)

If I had a sound recorder in the car when I'm driving it would sound like this:

'OK come on you fuckwit press firmly on the right hand pedal and let's get moving'.

Or: 'You could get a fucking bus through there madam'.

Or: 'don't mention it fuckwit' (when I've let someone through and he/she hasn't acknowledged it with a wave).

Other even more naughty words may well escape my lips during the course of many single journeys. I have to admit that I'm not a patient driver sometimes. Well, anytime actually.

Years ago when my now 21 year-old son Angus was but a babe (about three) we traveled 'en famile' into the metropolis that is Market Harborough.

With she who must be obeyed and a young child in the car I was obviously on best behaviour, no swearing at all allowed.

Then someone cut me up at the island. I said nothing, kept my eyes firmly on the road ahead.

And then a small piping voice came from the back seat: 'Bloody idiant' it said.

'Idiant' is now common currency in our househiold. We're all 'bloody idiants' nowadays.

Thanks for reading.

Food banks

As I understand it food banks are there to help people who cannot afford to feed themselves? So they're a good thing then?

It's sad that they're needed in our modern society but they fulfil a function. We simply cannot have people starving on the streets of a modern, first world economy like Britain. So they're a good thing then? So why is the left using their existence as a stick with which to beat the government?

And they're paid for by whom? Obviously even in our 'printed money' times someone has to pay for them?

Well it's a mixture of charities The Trussell Trust being the biggest provider and local authority funding (£3 million of public money to date) and they are designed to help people who have their benefits stopped unfairly or are otherwise in crisis. And that's a good, possibly a great thing if it is helping to feed people who would otherwise go hungry.

I'm proud that our modern society takes care of people who are worse off. It's what we should be doing as a society.

But why is their existence (the food banks) such a big political football? 'That they're needed is a disgrace' cite the left.

Trussell Trust Charity chairman Chris Mould said: "That 900,000 people have received three days' food from a food bank, close to triple the numbers helped last year, is shocking in 21st century Britain.

"But perhaps most worrying of all this figure is just the tip of the iceberg of UK food poverty, it doesn't include those helped by other emergency food providers, those living in towns where there is no food bank, people who are too ashamed to seek help or the large number of people who are only just coping by eating less and buying cheap food.

"In the last year we've seen things get worse, rather than better, for many people on low-incomes. It's been extremely tough for a lot of people, with parents not eating properly in order to feed their children and more people than ever experiencing seemingly unfair and harsh benefits sanctions.

"Unless there is determined policy action to ensure that the benefits of national economic recovery reach people on low-incomes we won't see life get better for the poorest anytime soon."

(International Business Times April 16th 2014)

But this does beg a couple of questions about who is using these food banks: There may always be some people who fall through the safety net of benefits - which may or may not be their own fault and may or may not be fair. This additional safety net (food banks) is therefore a welcome thing if it allows people to survive in the short term and then to claim the benefits that they need or, outrageous as it may sound, get a job.

As I say it's sad that they are needed in our C21st Britain and, like the growth of food banks across Europe and the US in recent years it is clearly connected to the economic downturn. But 900,000 feels like a very high number of people to have fallen through our existing arrangements which, I would contend, are generous.

The fact is that living on benefits is not poverty. It's simply not starvation rations as Mr Mould suggests.

As was much lauded last year, benefits means £53 a week for food. After one has had one's housing, heating, water, council tax and other general living expenses paid by the taxpayer. That's generous. That's easily livable. One can feed, healthily, a family of three people for £53 a week (and then have £106 left over for other things - 3 people). They do not have to starve themselves to feed their kids or buy 'cheap' (=crap) food. So why do we need food banks?  Who is using them?

If it's not people on benefits, perhaps it's people in low-paid jobs? But people in low-paid jobs also get a top-up of benefits these days - more here. So it can't be them either.

Maybe it's immigrants who have nowhere else to turn? If so, it's good that we provide food for them. I may want us to have more control over our borders and perhaps to see fewer economic migrants coming to the UK, but I don't blame them for wanting to come and nor would I want them to starve on Britain's streets. But 900,000 last year?

You don't think it might be people who are in receipt of benefits but who squander their money on (let's just call them) non-essentials and then expect the state/charities to bail them out do you? I hope, sincerely, that this is not the case, but it sometimes feels a bit like it might be.

In any case, making use of others' generosity and a process that is helping people in genuine need, as a stick with which to beat the current government is demeaning to Labour and its supporters. Labour had been in office for 11 years in 2008 when the global financial crisis that has caused so much hardship here and around the world struck. And in their purview was the City Of London's financial markets which, along with New York, are the biggest financial powerhouses in the world and were undoubtedly the root cause of the problem we have all been facing ever since.

They are essentially why we need food banks and for Labour now to criticise their existence beggars belief.

Thanks for reading

BBC News or propaganda?

This was the BBC's take on the need for renewables and our journey away from 'dirty' fuel today: here

Have a read.

There is no questioning of the premise of the report. No assessment of its validity. No balanced take on what is a growing skepticism about the science. Not a single mention of the fact that the earth has not been warming now for 17 years.

Is this journalism? Really? Is the BBC there to report on the story, the facts, or just to broadcast the propaganda that is put out by the UN and the IPCC?

It seems to me that we are forced, by law, to pay for the BBC. One in ten court cases in the UK are about non-payment of the license fee. And therefore we should be able to be confident that the BBC is delivering on its charter to provide balanced and unbiased news into our living rooms.

The thing is that when a broadcaster, with a global footprint, influence and credibility, starts to be a vehicle of propaganda, we're all in trouble.  When a news organisation starts to deliver the news from one side of the argument only, it becomes a propaganda vehicle and not a reliable source of news.

Because it has an agenda. It is trying to influence rather than inform. It becomes a campaigning body rather than a credible source of unbiased news.

The BBC has become just such a propaganda vehicle, sadly. Its stance on Palestine (anti Israel); the EU (pro because it receives funding from the EU), anti the legitimate political party that is UKIP, and most noticeably it's 'the science is settled' approach to climate change, are making a mockery of its credibility. And yet I am forced to pay for it?

The pay-offs and gagging orders, the cover-up of sexual misdeeds when senior BBC personnel knew about Stuart Hall, Savile etc., are all coming home to roost.

I happen to think that the BBC is one of the best things we've given to the world. It does great things, produces great programmes (especially on Radio 4) but the time has come - they had a chance to fess up and change things when Mr Hall was appointed as the DG, but they haven't.

This AGW bullshit is the last straw for me. I don't expect propaganda from our national broadcaster. I pay for balance and journalism and I'm not getting it. The BBC is no longer fit for purpose. It's time it was cut loose into the commercial world to sink or swim.

And it's entirely their own fault that this is now the case.

Thanks for reading.

Why do we accept this shit?

It sometimes feels like I'm banging my head against a brick wall. That nothing I can say or do will make any difference.

When did we abrogate our will? Our desire to do the right thing?

When did we accept that money-grabbing people will do what they want to do? Irrespective of what's right and fair and equitable?

I'm a Tory, by instinct. I believe in small government, low taxes, enterprise, wealth generation, but also helping those who are not as fortunate to survive, endure, live to fight another day.

We're losing that connection. It's now a 'take what you can' world. Fuck the poor. And that's not a Tory thing, it's a societal thing. Do you think that Mr Miliband or Balls gives a fuck about you? Any more than Dave or Gideon does? Any more than Mr Clegg does? If anything he's the worst of the lot. Wouldn't know a principal if it bit him on the arse.

But he's not the issue. He's part of it no doubt as deputy PM (God help us), but it's a much bigger malaise than the fucking Lib Dems. They, frankly, are irrelevant. At least I think (and fervently hope)  they will be after the next general election.

It sounds like I'm a raving socialist, advocating equality and fairness, criticising the bankers and the energy companies.

But at the same time criticising the growing client state, ridiculous welfare rewards for no effort? The diversity and 'tolerance' agenda. We'll tolerate your pseudo religious (muslim) agenda until you take control and subject us to (Sharia) laws that are the polar opposite of the freedoms that our ancestors fought and spilled blood for? And what we really want, freedom. Or we'll be called 'racist'? 

We're fiddling while Rome burns. We're sleepwalking into disaster.

Giving up our representation and political power to unelected socialist EU governance. Accepting religious-driven morals that were created when those devising them thought that the earth was flat. And which were defined when controlling women was the objective in a medieval way.

And our smug lefty, BBC-influenced establishment is turning a blind eye to what is really going on. At the 'top' people are making serious money in the current shambles in our 'fuck you' society. No one seems to give a fuck about the future or our kids' aspirations so long as they can get rich quick. They seem to believe that they will be OK if they give up our choices, our control, our vision and our views of this once proud country so long as they can make a quick buck.

It feels as though we're just bit part players in an overall quest wherein some people are just raping this country for their own gain before leaving us to our fate at the hands of religious fundementalists who will turn our streets into a war zone.

Tell me I'm wrong. Give me credible evidence that this is not so.

It's very nearly time to stand up and fight for our values, or fuck off to America and try to make our last stand there.

'To what avail
the plow or sail?
Or land or life
if freedom fail.'

Emerson. It's engraved in the statue of Liberty. I saw it once and it's never left me.

It's not too late, but it's getting close to that. Wake up.

I'm pro Europe - being anti EU is entirely compatible with that

I've simply had enough of this 'if you're pro Europe you must be pro the EU' bullshit. This could get a bit sweary (you have been warned)..

Europe is a geographical construct. It's where we happen to live. Unless we devise some way of controlling the tectonic plates, like we think (utterly madly) that we can control the climate, this is not going to change anytime soon. Are the British isles located close to Europe? Yes they are. Does this fact make them part of the geographical place we call 'Europe'? Because of our history. our trading status, our proximity, our to-and-fro immigration and contacts? Yes it does. Will our leaving or staying in the EU make any difference to that status? No. Not a single jot of difference.

So please stop conflating these two things. We are European, that's a fact. Personally I love Europe. I have worked in many parts of it, have friends and colleagues in many parts of it. I love the different cultures, food, music, history, lifestyles that Europe has to offer. I am pro Europe.

To. My. Core.

But my stance in wanting us to leave the EU makes me anti Europe? Off you jolly-well fuck with that idea.

My fight with the EU is not because I'm anti Europe, it's because I am pro Europe. Pro it's diversity, its distinctiveness, its sheer, priceless value as a place to explore and enjoy. It's differences are what makes life worthwhile.

You can, within Europe, go to Scandinavia and enjoy the (expensive) lifestyle and cuisine, gravadlax, pickled herring, clean air, cold seas, Fjords, Aquavit, wonderful scenery and really lovely people.

You can enjoy wonderful places in the Low Countries, Germany (the Rhine is spectacular), French cuisine and coastlines on the Atlantic and the Med, history and culture. Great wines and great food. You can go to Spain for the sunshine and great food and music too. Italy for history and wonderful food. You can ski in Switzerland and Austria or go hiking in the summer months.

You can go to Belgium. Just kidding. Bruges is a fantastic place to visit.

The point is (I've never been to Greece or Cyprus more fool me but they're great places too), that these wonderful places are wonderful because they have their own identities and culture, food etc.

I would, of course, include the UK in my list of wonderful European places, and my ancestral home of Ireland.

The EU wants to make all this 'one place'. With universal laws on taxes, employment, defense, quality standards, governance; and it wants to offer all of these standardized things to other countries which are not even close to sharing our values and laws.

It wants us to be like America. A place that I also love, but where I wouldn't want to live. Essentially it wants us to have the same road intersections as they do in America. With a fast food outlet, a nail shop, a self storage place, a fuel station and a local mall where one can buy 'Gap' clothing so that we can all look the same. No local great restaurants or crap restaurants, but all meeting the same homogenised standards of quality and health and safety.

I may be exaggerating a little here, it'll be more Germanic in Europe than it is in the States but would you really want Germany to be deciding on restaurant fayre? Instead of the French or Spanish or Italians? I think not.

What the EU has done and is doing, via the single currency, is handicapping every country that is not as strong in its manufacturing base as Germany. Everyone then. Including the UK. You see Germany is now using the Euro (yo-yo) which is a currency that is valued on international markets in a way which takes account of weaker states like Greece, Ireland, France - everyone else frankly - and is therefore enjoying massively better exchange rates than it would if it was just Germany and the Deutschmark. Germany is booming. Everyone else is suffering. Including the UK.

Unemployment levels in southern Europe are historically high. Youth unemployment levels are grotesque (50% plus in some areas). And this is not because of a global downturn, but directly because of the EU. Eurozone countries cannot devalue their currencies in order to balance their economies because they are part of the EU and the Euro. So their people suffer. Massively. Far right and far left groups are on the rise in these places. Riots and demonstrations are happening (in Belgium and Spain over the last two days) but are not being reported by the MSM including the BBC.

Far from making a European war untenable, the actions of the EU are making it more likely.     

So who is anti Europe?

Well obviously UKIP and by media-fuelled association, the far right. The BNP, Madam Le Penn, Mr Hitler, Thatcher?

And who is 'pro' Europe? Those measured, sane people Mr Clegg, Mandelson, Heseltine. Ken Clarke. If we leave the EU it will cost us 3.5 million jobs in the UK.

A figure that is rising by the day.

So that's clear then. If you love Europe, like I do, you should be clearly on the side of Mandelson, Clegg et al.*

There is just a small problem with this view. So small that I'm almost embarrassed to point it out. It's mainly a technical issue and not really relevant, but I feel that I must mention it for fairness.

You see the problem is that it is utter bollocks.

The fundamental question we have to answer is: is the EU good for Europe. That's it's raison d'etre. It's sole purpose. 

The EU is supposed to be 'good' for all of the people of Europe. Is that happening in Spain, Italy, Greece, Ireland? France maybe? Holland? The last two are teetering on the brink of collapse.

The people - especially young people - but this affects everyone, are suffering. Because of the global economic crisis. But also clearly and certainly because of the EU.

The people who 'love' the EU are certainly not the people who 'love' Europe.

It's time we woke up to this nonsense. A UK exit would almost certainly render the whole project null and void. They couldn't go on without the UK funding.

And then we'd get the Europe that we all love back. Think about that.

We'd also get control of our own country back, where the people we vote for (and vote out) would have our local and national interests at heart. Instead of being unelected law-makers who have never heard of the village, town or city in which you the voter lives.

It's a massive issue but we're being bored into not thinking it is. Wake up. This is our country and our Europe at stake.

Thanks for reading.