If Saddam was able to hide a MIG-25 Foxbat for six years from the US/UK military in the Desert, I wonder what else could be buried in the deserts of Iraq?
Update: 14:02 - Poor spelling corrected. Must do better.
Thursday, March 26, 2009
What Lies Beneath?
As seen at Britannia Radio, here.
If Saddam was able to hide a MIG-25 Foxbat for six years from the US/UK military in the Desert, I wonder what else could be buried in the deserts of Iraq?
Update: 14:02 - Poor spelling corrected. Must do better.
If Saddam was able to hide a MIG-25 Foxbat for six years from the US/UK military in the Desert, I wonder what else could be buried in the deserts of Iraq?
Update: 14:02 - Poor spelling corrected. Must do better.
Hannan On Fox News
He has taken America by storm, here is Dan Hannan on Neil Cuveto.
Before you know it, he will be on the Simpsons.
Before you know it, he will be on the Simpsons.
Wednesday, March 25, 2009
BBC Complaint Email
The longer you go before you show Daniel Hannans video on your main TV news shows the worse you already sullied reputation evolves. The continued absence of Conservative viewpoints from your channel tarnishes a once proud broadcasting record. You have destroyed the service with your ignorance and contempt for free speech and the people you are supposed to serve.
The BBC made a conscious decision to ignore what has become a worldwide phenomenon; you are funded by enforced taxation and work for us. Your fear of a Conservative future has been exposed. You do not and have never represented my point of view, so stop pretending that you are somehow impartial or responsible broadcasters.
You are stood in the middle of a the proverbially crowded room with your trousers around you ankles, fingers in your ears shouting "LA LA LA LA we can't hear you"
Another nail in the corporation’s coffin.
The BBC is supposed to not only be funded for the purpose of providing an excellent broadcasting service, it is supposed to represent all political views in this country in its news and political outputs. Click here and register your complaint.
The BBC made a conscious decision to ignore what has become a worldwide phenomenon; you are funded by enforced taxation and work for us. Your fear of a Conservative future has been exposed. You do not and have never represented my point of view, so stop pretending that you are somehow impartial or responsible broadcasters.
You are stood in the middle of a the proverbially crowded room with your trousers around you ankles, fingers in your ears shouting "LA LA LA LA we can't hear you"
Another nail in the corporation’s coffin.
The BBC is supposed to not only be funded for the purpose of providing an excellent broadcasting service, it is supposed to represent all political views in this country in its news and political outputs. Click here and register your complaint.
Political Betting
May take some time to get a return here, but Ladbrokes are still offering 100/1 for Daniel Hannan to be the next Conservative Leader. I have just put my cash on Daniel Being the next leader.
Daniel is safe in his EU seat and will be returned this spring for another 5 year stint to the EU Parliament, David Cameron looks certain to win an election next year.
I suspect that if things go well Cameron will call his first General Election after four years which will co-incide with the end of Daniel's next term, meaning that he may at that time look to run in Westminster.
Think I am crazy? Ladbrokes are also offering 100/1 for Ken Clarke, John Redwood, Dominic Grieve, Damian Green and Francis Maude. See here.
Daniel is safe in his EU seat and will be returned this spring for another 5 year stint to the EU Parliament, David Cameron looks certain to win an election next year.
I suspect that if things go well Cameron will call his first General Election after four years which will co-incide with the end of Daniel's next term, meaning that he may at that time look to run in Westminster.
Think I am crazy? Ladbrokes are also offering 100/1 for Ken Clarke, John Redwood, Dominic Grieve, Damian Green and Francis Maude. See here.
Recommended Reading
Here is my latest recommended reading list.
Please note, I do not necessarily agree with these posts and articles, however I found them sufficiently interesting to warrant a recommendation:
If you have just come down from a mountain or woken up from last weekends drinking binge, you may not know that the entire free world is watching a video of Daniel Hannan tell Gordon Brown off in the EU Parliament yesterday. I link again to Daniel's blog, where there is much admiration and some adoration being dispensed in the comments. See here.
Frasier Nelson says Gordon Brown is struggling to find buyers for The UK's debts, here.
Dizzy says we cannot be in the EU because we Brits understand the value of queueing, here.
Subrosa publishes a German's view of Islam, here.
And finally... and to be honest I am not sure if the refering Russian Language source is serious or not (?) But, Advanced Media Watch claims that the Russians have used Google Maps to find a Yeti, with picture, here.
Please note, I do not necessarily agree with these posts and articles, however I found them sufficiently interesting to warrant a recommendation:
If you have just come down from a mountain or woken up from last weekends drinking binge, you may not know that the entire free world is watching a video of Daniel Hannan tell Gordon Brown off in the EU Parliament yesterday. I link again to Daniel's blog, where there is much admiration and some adoration being dispensed in the comments. See here.
Frasier Nelson says Gordon Brown is struggling to find buyers for The UK's debts, here.
Dizzy says we cannot be in the EU because we Brits understand the value of queueing, here.
Subrosa publishes a German's view of Islam, here.
And finally... and to be honest I am not sure if the refering Russian Language source is serious or not (?) But, Advanced Media Watch claims that the Russians have used Google Maps to find a Yeti, with picture, here.
Adam Boulton Blog Has Daniel Hannan Clip
Daniel Hannan's video made Adam Boultons blog this morning, here.
As there is a web-round up on their evening Sky News.Com programme, can I encourage everyone to click on the link to Sky as as to drive up the hits on Sky's site, that way perhaps Daniels Speech can will get a mention on the tea-time telly tonight. Perhaps if enough people do, they will show the whole speech.
As there is a web-round up on their evening Sky News.Com programme, can I encourage everyone to click on the link to Sky as as to drive up the hits on Sky's site, that way perhaps Daniels Speech can will get a mention on the tea-time telly tonight. Perhaps if enough people do, they will show the whole speech.
Tuesday, March 24, 2009
Czech Prime Minister Toppled
Big news out of the Czech Republic today, the Czech Prime Minister Mirek Toplanek who was fronting a coalition government has lost a vote of confidence from the lower house today, effectively ending both his reign as PM and that of holder of the EU presidency. The story is here. It is the first time the rotating President has been toppled midway through their term.
The EU presidency sits with the Czech Nation so that executive function may be assumed by Euro-Sceptic President Vaclav Klaus, who I have written about, here and here, written to him here.
President Klaus is an outspoken critic of Global Warming Theories, Communism and the Lisbon Constitutional Treaty. The Czech Republic (with others) has not yet ratified the Treaty, and it is unlikely that the Czech Republic will during their time with the EU Presidency.
One could only speculate what effect this will have in the long term, but it will have pro-EU forces in Brussels fuming.
The EU presidency sits with the Czech Nation so that executive function may be assumed by Euro-Sceptic President Vaclav Klaus, who I have written about, here and here, written to him here.
President Klaus is an outspoken critic of Global Warming Theories, Communism and the Lisbon Constitutional Treaty. The Czech Republic (with others) has not yet ratified the Treaty, and it is unlikely that the Czech Republic will during their time with the EU Presidency.
One could only speculate what effect this will have in the long term, but it will have pro-EU forces in Brussels fuming.
Balanced BBC
There is no mention of this video on the BBC website.
However, this was worth a mention. How do they keep getting away with their political bias?
However, this was worth a mention. How do they keep getting away with their political bias?
Hannan Bitch-Slaps Brown In EU Parliament
You can leave messages of appreciation for Daniel on his blog, here.
An Invitation To Jury Team
I am interested in the Jury Team story so far, and am looking to find out a little more about the candidates in my area. So I thought I might open up the blog to anyone who is running for Jury Team throughout the UK to have their say.
I am not just going to hand the blog over to Jury Team. But if you are a candidate and would like a referral from here, read the below and email me with your answers to daniel1979blog[at]gmail.com I will publish your answers on this blog.
Should anybody have any further questions for you they will then be able to raise them in the comments field of your post. Do not just stick your answers in the comments of this post, email me and then if more that one candidate responds, I will give you each a separate post. In that post I will link to your Jury Team Page, post a photo and give details of how you can be voted for. (You should also, if you don't have already a unique blogger ID and advise that in your email so that if you want to respond to further queries we can know it is you and not some one posing as you)
I have devised some statements for you to answer True or False to, so that I can get a better understanding of your views on the EU. Please answer these and then go on to the questions below which will allow you in your own words help us to understand you and the Jury Team process better.
Please answer True or False to these statements:
1. The EU should have even more control over the governing of member states including the UK.
2. The EU is the future of Continental Europe; the UK should be less resistant to this and more willing to be engaged with EU partners.
3. The EU is fundamentally undemocratic in how it is made up and how it functions.
4. If elected to the EU Parliament I will always vote in favour of returning legislative powers to member states.
5. Counties like Iceland and Norway should be made to join the EU.
6. Ireland was wrong to vote NO in their referendum on the Lisbon Treaty.
7. The main reason why people are against the EU in the UK is because the Tabloid media runs scare stories.
8. I believe the UK should be a part of a federal Europe, whether as the UK or as component nations or regions.
9. The UK should leave the EU as swiftly and as amicably as possible.
10. The UK Parliament should be sovereign. No laws made by the EU should be above the law making decisions of the UK Parliament.
11. The UK and France should give up their seats on the UN Security Council in favour of an EU representative.
12. The city of London and UK financial institutions should be regulated by the EU.
13. The EU has kept peace in Europe for 60 years.
14. If the UK left the EU, it’s economy would never recover.
15. Plans should be made for the UK to join the EURO within the next five year sitting of the EU parliament
16. UK armed forces should answer to a European Military Chain of Command.
17. The EU should be allowed to collect taxes directly from European citizens and/or businesses.
18. There will never be war in Europe as long as the EU is strong.
19. The UK should not be allowed to declare war without the approval of the EU
20. The UK should be allowed a referendum whether it accepts the EU Lisbon Constitutional Treaty before it comes into force.
21. I am prepared to give up some small freedoms so that the UK and/or the EU governments can better protect us from terrorists.
22. The EU should have control of EU wide policing to make standard the same across Europe, as well as centrally gather intelligence.
23. UK Common Law is incompatible with European Courts. We should protect Common Law.
24. People who stand opposed to the EU should be punished.
And because I could not resist
25. The Eurovision Song Contest is a wonderful form of European entertainment and the voting is in no way rigged.
I am not just going to hand the blog over to Jury Team. But if you are a candidate and would like a referral from here, read the below and email me with your answers to daniel1979blog[at]gmail.com I will publish your answers on this blog.
Should anybody have any further questions for you they will then be able to raise them in the comments field of your post. Do not just stick your answers in the comments of this post, email me and then if more that one candidate responds, I will give you each a separate post. In that post I will link to your Jury Team Page, post a photo and give details of how you can be voted for. (You should also, if you don't have already a unique blogger ID and advise that in your email so that if you want to respond to further queries we can know it is you and not some one posing as you)
I have devised some statements for you to answer True or False to, so that I can get a better understanding of your views on the EU. Please answer these and then go on to the questions below which will allow you in your own words help us to understand you and the Jury Team process better.
Please answer True or False to these statements:
1. The EU should have even more control over the governing of member states including the UK.
2. The EU is the future of Continental Europe; the UK should be less resistant to this and more willing to be engaged with EU partners.
3. The EU is fundamentally undemocratic in how it is made up and how it functions.
4. If elected to the EU Parliament I will always vote in favour of returning legislative powers to member states.
5. Counties like Iceland and Norway should be made to join the EU.
6. Ireland was wrong to vote NO in their referendum on the Lisbon Treaty.
7. The main reason why people are against the EU in the UK is because the Tabloid media runs scare stories.
8. I believe the UK should be a part of a federal Europe, whether as the UK or as component nations or regions.
9. The UK should leave the EU as swiftly and as amicably as possible.
10. The UK Parliament should be sovereign. No laws made by the EU should be above the law making decisions of the UK Parliament.
11. The UK and France should give up their seats on the UN Security Council in favour of an EU representative.
12. The city of London and UK financial institutions should be regulated by the EU.
13. The EU has kept peace in Europe for 60 years.
14. If the UK left the EU, it’s economy would never recover.
15. Plans should be made for the UK to join the EURO within the next five year sitting of the EU parliament
16. UK armed forces should answer to a European Military Chain of Command.
17. The EU should be allowed to collect taxes directly from European citizens and/or businesses.
18. There will never be war in Europe as long as the EU is strong.
19. The UK should not be allowed to declare war without the approval of the EU
20. The UK should be allowed a referendum whether it accepts the EU Lisbon Constitutional Treaty before it comes into force.
21. I am prepared to give up some small freedoms so that the UK and/or the EU governments can better protect us from terrorists.
22. The EU should have control of EU wide policing to make standard the same across Europe, as well as centrally gather intelligence.
23. UK Common Law is incompatible with European Courts. We should protect Common Law.
24. People who stand opposed to the EU should be punished.
And because I could not resist
25. The Eurovision Song Contest is a wonderful form of European entertainment and the voting is in no way rigged.
In no more than 200 words for each question, please tell us about the following:
Q. If you are elected to the EU Parliament, by what method and frequency will your expenses be made public?
Q. Have you ever stood for an elected position before?
Q. Do you have you own website or blog?
Q. Do you regularly read any particular newspapers or magazines? Who are your favourite writers/Journalists?
Q. Why did you decide to stand for Jury Team instead of an existing political party?
Q. What is the very first thing you will do in your official capacity if elected?
Q. And, as you have been good enough to answer the above, in no more than 1,000 of your own words, tell us why we should vote for you.
Monday, March 23, 2009
Recommended Reading
Here is my latest recommended reading list.
Please note, I do not necessarily agree with these posts and articles, however I found them sufficiently interesting to warrant a recommendation:
David Vance comments on the Dalai Lama being refused a visa to attend a peace conference in South Africa, here.
Steve Green says "Gordon Brown - I want a spending cut you Muppet!" here.
Daniel Hannan asks if there are any circumstances in which the Guardianistas wouldn't want to join the EURO, here.
Tom Clougherty asks how much a minimal state would cost, here.
Tori Egherman in a guest post at Harry's Place encourages the idea of opening an American embassy in Tehran, here.
Please note, I do not necessarily agree with these posts and articles, however I found them sufficiently interesting to warrant a recommendation:
David Vance comments on the Dalai Lama being refused a visa to attend a peace conference in South Africa, here.
Steve Green says "Gordon Brown - I want a spending cut you Muppet!" here.
Daniel Hannan asks if there are any circumstances in which the Guardianistas wouldn't want to join the EURO, here.
Tom Clougherty asks how much a minimal state would cost, here.
Tori Egherman in a guest post at Harry's Place encourages the idea of opening an American embassy in Tehran, here.
Sunday, March 22, 2009
Left Wing PM Poll Closes
I asked who you thought the best left-wing Prime Minister of the last 100 year is and this poll has now closed.
The winner is David Lloyd George. I am a little surprised given some of his background, but he is remembered as being the PM that introduced state pensions, and before he was PM was one of the chief influences on companies who were largely ignoring trade union demands, in getting elected union representatives and their concerns heard.
Here is the Poll results:
Sir Henry Campbell-Bannerman - 6% (2)
H.H. Asquith - 0% (0)
David Lloyd George - 32% (10)
Ramsay MacDonald - 16% (5)
Clement Attlee - 16% (5)
Harold Wilson - 6% (2)
James Callaghan - 0% (0)
Tony Blair - 22% (7)
As Lloyd George is your choice, here is a (hopefully balanced) summary of his political life and activities. David Lloyd George succeeded H. H. Asquith as PM in 1916 after securing Conservative and Media support in pressuring Asquith to resign as PM in the middle of World War 1. He is also the only Welsh Prime Minister of the UK ever, and the only PM who did not have English as his first language.
He was Prime Minister from 1916 to 1922. I found out today that Asquith lived in Sutton Courtney which was then Berkshire but is now Oxfordshire and would have lived just a few minutes walk from my nan when she was a child.
Lloyd George and Asquith we very different Liberals and represented different sections of the Liberal Party and clashed often. Asquith as PM still was keen to seek Irish Home Rule, Lloyd George had in caused many problems through his fierce opposition to the second Boer war, he spoke on Welsh temperance reform, Welsh home rule, Welsh Education and Schools and especially on the disestablishment and dis-endowment of the Church of England in Wales. Lloyd George and three other Welsh Liberals tied their arguments to the Irish Home Rule bids which were much more well supported they even exited the party (refusing the Whip) for 6 weeks to force Parliament to recognise Welsh Independence issues. When they returned Lloyd George formed Cymru Fydd ("Wales Will Be") which was a popular political movement, however became unpopular in Wales when dilution for support of the Liberal Party cost them the 1895 election.
During the arms race between Britain and Germany in the build up to WW1, Lloyd George proposed from his position as Chancellor that armament spending be reduced, this policy was adopted by Asquith as PM and the Liberals but was deeply unpopular with the Admiralty, The Conservatives and the public. This action was so unpopular that it was eventually reversed, and where Lloyd Georges proposal of cutting spending had been to reduce the planned six dreadnoughts to four, eventually the number became eight, such was the fierceness of the debate that proposed increases were the result.
Asquith had already introduced the State Pension when he was Chancellor to Sir Henry Campbell-Bannerman, but Lloyd George expanded spending on this and secured spending to support the sick and the elderly. This was put up as the "Peoples Budget" and was a deeply unpopular idea as far as the House of Lords were concerned and they took the unusual steps of rejecting it. The Lords did not normally interfere with financial bills in this way. This brought about a Constitutional Crisis, and Asquith was forced to call a General Election. The election resulted in a hung parliament with the Liberals winning just two seats more than the Conservatives. Asquith formed a minority government with the Irish Nationalists.
The new government passed the "Peoples Budget" as they had an electoral mandate to do so.
In 1916 Liberals, Conservatives and the Public were growing unhappy at Asquith's direction of the War. He was perceived as having a lack of vigour and bringing out dated thinking. As such, Andrew Bonar Law helped Lloyd George succeed to the recently vacated position of Secretary of State for War. Asquith gave Lloyd George the position, but with a greatly reduced portfolio which took no time to frustrate Lloyd George.
Lloyd George rallied for a committee to be set up to manage the war for which he would be part of, Asquith agreed providing the committee reported to him and that he would be able to attend at his discretion. Lloyd George, through Lord Northcliffe (owner of the Times and the Daily Mail) reported this as Asquith being sidelined. Asquith withdrew his support for the committee, and David Lloyd George resigned, prompting Conservatives to withdraw their support for Asquith who himself was forced to resign as PM (but not as leader of the Liberal Party).
Bonar Law refused to form a government as Asquith refused to serve under anybody else, so it fell to David Lloyd George who formed a coalition government , though leading Liberals refused to serve under David Lloyd George, or anybody other than Asquith. As Prime Minister he saw to an expansion of spending at home that saw more and more men escape wartime service and work on public works projects, this was attributed to a weakened forces presence in the War.
In 1917 he ordered forces that would were needed in France to Italy and Palestine, this prompted the resignations of service chiefs Admiral Jellicoe and General Robertson. The offensive saw British troops attack the Ottoman Empire in Palestine and the conquest of that land. Arthur Balfour in the now famous Balfour Declaration of 1917 stated in a letter to Baron Rothschild:
--
Dear Lord Rothschild,
I have much pleasure in conveying to you, on behalf of His Majesty's Government, the following declaration of sympathy with Jewish Zionist aspirations which has been submitted to, and approved by, the Cabinet:
"His Majesty's Government view with favour the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, and will use their best endeavours to facilitate the achievement of this object, it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine, or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country."
I should be grateful if you would bring this declaration to the knowledge of the Zionist Federation.
Yours sincerely
Arthur James Balfour
--
At the same time as diverting "British" forces away from the front line to manufacturing, and forays in Palestine and Italy, he extended conscription to Ireland, this was exceptionally unpopular and led to the Home Rule Party to be completely wiped out in the subsequent 1918 election being replaced by Sinn Fein who immediately declared Independence. The IRA (known today as the Old IRA to distinguish from later formations of the IRA) began a guerrilla war against the British Government in Ireland.
Home rule had been sought in 1912 and the Parliament Act of 1911 had been passed to not allow the Lords to reject anything that had been sought in an election campaign, though it could delay it by two years. in 1912 the Third Home Rule act was passed, and was expected to be implemented in 1914. This Independence was interrupted by the outbreak of WWI but was to be granted at the end of the war. So the conscription imposed upon Ireland was seen as a way of conscription Irish men onto the front-line. Irish volunteers were returning with stories of horrible atrocities and there was little public opinion in favour to Irish citizens serving in the British war.
The 1918 elections gave Irish Republicanism a boost, which had been crushed in the intervening war years. Sinn Fein refused to sit in the UK Parliament and declared to set up an Irish Parliament (the First Dail) and in 1919 at its first meeting they reaffirmed their previous claims to Independence, issued a letter to free nations of the world and immediately redesignated Irish volunteers into the Irish Republican Army. Between 1919 and 1921 they waged war against the British Administration in Ireland. On the same day in 1919 in Co. Tipperary Sean Treacy and Dan Breen killed two Royal Irish Constabulary Officers who were escorting explosives. This act was deliberately intended by the pair to bring about a War of Independence (which it did).
At the end of WWI it was David Lloyd Georges' express wish that Germany pay for the costs incurred for the prosecution of the entire war, including pensions. He summarised his 1918 election as a six point programme.
1. The trial of Kaiser Wilhelm II
2. Punishment of those guilty atrocities
3. Fullest indemnity from Germany
4. Britain for the British, socially and industrially
5. Rehabilitation of the broken war
6. A happier county for all
He stood as head of the "National Liberal" coalition and won a landslide victory though The Conservative controlled more seats within this coalition. Asquith's Liberals won just 33 seats.
At the Versailles Peace Conference David Lloyd George clashed with French Premier Georges Clemenceau and American President Woodrow Wilson. When asked how he did at the conference he replied "Not bad, considering I was seated between Jesus Christ and Napoleon". John Maynard Keynes was critical of Lloyd George saying in his book The Economic Consequences of Peace that Lloyd George was a "half-human visitor to our age from the hag-ridden magic and enchanted woods of Celtic antiquity."
The Conservative influences and with the Anglo-Irish war being fought put great strains on his leadership. In 1922 the Conservative demonstrated that David Lloyd George had been profiting from the sale of peerages and he fell from power.
David Lloyd George is remembered fondly for his time as PM, but there were a number of things that he is associated with that were less than honourable. As mentioned the Conservative proved that he had abused his position as Prime Minister for financial gain for himself and for the Liberal party.
In 1925 the Honours (Prevention of Abuses) Act was passed, to make illegal the sale of peerages and honours, modelled on the abuses that David Lloyd George had participated in. The only person who has ever been successfully prosecuted under this act is Maundy Gregory who was Lloyd George's "Honours Broker."
The act was the basis of the cash for peerages investigation in 2006/07 when Police officially interviewed sitting Prime Minister Tony Blair over allegations that Loaned to the Labour Party had been made quid pro quo for peerages and honours.
Later in life, and apologies in advance for the language but this is a direct quotation, but David Lloyd George is quoted by Frances Stevenson (secretary and second wife) in her diary as saying:
"Debate last night in the House on Air—strong demonstrations in favour of increased no. of fighting planes. D. [David Lloyd George] says it could have been avoided but for Simon's [Sir John Simon's] mismanagement. At Geneva other countries would have agreed not to use aeroplanes for bombing purposes, but we insisted on reserving the right, as D. puts it, to bomb niggers! Whereupon the whole thing fell through, & we add 5 millions to our air armaments expenditure."
Apparently he, and others in Government felt it was important that the British Government retain the right to bomb British colonies as and when they deemed it necessary. [From Conquest to Collapse: European Empires from 1815 to 1960, Pantheon Books, New York, 1982. Page 200]
Lloyd George in 1923 resolved (Politically at least) his differences with Asquith, and the Liberal Party was re-united for the 1924 election which they lost. In six years David Lloyd George had gone from being the man the Conservatives had described as "A dictator for life, if he wishes," to being an known crook.
In 1924 the Socialist Labour Party overtook the reformed Liberal Party to become the second biggest Party in Parliament after the Conservatives. The proud party that had been formed to fight the corn laws and champion peoples rights and small government were now a shadow of their former selves, the Socialist were now speaking for the poor and the working classes.
In 1926 he finally succeeded Asquith as leader of the Liberal party leader, but support continued to diminish. He needed to pay to support candidates from his own funds at the 1929 election where they won just 60 seats. In 1945 and in ill-health with it looking like he would lose his constituency he was awarded a peerage, but he never had chance to attend the Lords as a Peer as he died a few months later in his home in Wales.
Hopefully I will be able to give a bit of a round up on whomever wins the new poll on the Best Conservative PM in a few weeks time. All the above was sourced via some books at home and via Wikipedia.
The winner is David Lloyd George. I am a little surprised given some of his background, but he is remembered as being the PM that introduced state pensions, and before he was PM was one of the chief influences on companies who were largely ignoring trade union demands, in getting elected union representatives and their concerns heard.
Here is the Poll results:
Sir Henry Campbell-Bannerman - 6% (2)
H.H. Asquith - 0% (0)
David Lloyd George - 32% (10)
Ramsay MacDonald - 16% (5)
Clement Attlee - 16% (5)
Harold Wilson - 6% (2)
James Callaghan - 0% (0)
Tony Blair - 22% (7)
As Lloyd George is your choice, here is a (hopefully balanced) summary of his political life and activities. David Lloyd George succeeded H. H. Asquith as PM in 1916 after securing Conservative and Media support in pressuring Asquith to resign as PM in the middle of World War 1. He is also the only Welsh Prime Minister of the UK ever, and the only PM who did not have English as his first language.
He was Prime Minister from 1916 to 1922. I found out today that Asquith lived in Sutton Courtney which was then Berkshire but is now Oxfordshire and would have lived just a few minutes walk from my nan when she was a child.
Lloyd George and Asquith we very different Liberals and represented different sections of the Liberal Party and clashed often. Asquith as PM still was keen to seek Irish Home Rule, Lloyd George had in caused many problems through his fierce opposition to the second Boer war, he spoke on Welsh temperance reform, Welsh home rule, Welsh Education and Schools and especially on the disestablishment and dis-endowment of the Church of England in Wales. Lloyd George and three other Welsh Liberals tied their arguments to the Irish Home Rule bids which were much more well supported they even exited the party (refusing the Whip) for 6 weeks to force Parliament to recognise Welsh Independence issues. When they returned Lloyd George formed Cymru Fydd ("Wales Will Be") which was a popular political movement, however became unpopular in Wales when dilution for support of the Liberal Party cost them the 1895 election.
During the arms race between Britain and Germany in the build up to WW1, Lloyd George proposed from his position as Chancellor that armament spending be reduced, this policy was adopted by Asquith as PM and the Liberals but was deeply unpopular with the Admiralty, The Conservatives and the public. This action was so unpopular that it was eventually reversed, and where Lloyd Georges proposal of cutting spending had been to reduce the planned six dreadnoughts to four, eventually the number became eight, such was the fierceness of the debate that proposed increases were the result.
Asquith had already introduced the State Pension when he was Chancellor to Sir Henry Campbell-Bannerman, but Lloyd George expanded spending on this and secured spending to support the sick and the elderly. This was put up as the "Peoples Budget" and was a deeply unpopular idea as far as the House of Lords were concerned and they took the unusual steps of rejecting it. The Lords did not normally interfere with financial bills in this way. This brought about a Constitutional Crisis, and Asquith was forced to call a General Election. The election resulted in a hung parliament with the Liberals winning just two seats more than the Conservatives. Asquith formed a minority government with the Irish Nationalists.
The new government passed the "Peoples Budget" as they had an electoral mandate to do so.
In 1916 Liberals, Conservatives and the Public were growing unhappy at Asquith's direction of the War. He was perceived as having a lack of vigour and bringing out dated thinking. As such, Andrew Bonar Law helped Lloyd George succeed to the recently vacated position of Secretary of State for War. Asquith gave Lloyd George the position, but with a greatly reduced portfolio which took no time to frustrate Lloyd George.
Lloyd George rallied for a committee to be set up to manage the war for which he would be part of, Asquith agreed providing the committee reported to him and that he would be able to attend at his discretion. Lloyd George, through Lord Northcliffe (owner of the Times and the Daily Mail) reported this as Asquith being sidelined. Asquith withdrew his support for the committee, and David Lloyd George resigned, prompting Conservatives to withdraw their support for Asquith who himself was forced to resign as PM (but not as leader of the Liberal Party).
Bonar Law refused to form a government as Asquith refused to serve under anybody else, so it fell to David Lloyd George who formed a coalition government , though leading Liberals refused to serve under David Lloyd George, or anybody other than Asquith. As Prime Minister he saw to an expansion of spending at home that saw more and more men escape wartime service and work on public works projects, this was attributed to a weakened forces presence in the War.
In 1917 he ordered forces that would were needed in France to Italy and Palestine, this prompted the resignations of service chiefs Admiral Jellicoe and General Robertson. The offensive saw British troops attack the Ottoman Empire in Palestine and the conquest of that land. Arthur Balfour in the now famous Balfour Declaration of 1917 stated in a letter to Baron Rothschild:
--
Dear Lord Rothschild,
I have much pleasure in conveying to you, on behalf of His Majesty's Government, the following declaration of sympathy with Jewish Zionist aspirations which has been submitted to, and approved by, the Cabinet:
"His Majesty's Government view with favour the establishment in Palestine of a national home for the Jewish people, and will use their best endeavours to facilitate the achievement of this object, it being clearly understood that nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine, or the rights and political status enjoyed by Jews in any other country."
I should be grateful if you would bring this declaration to the knowledge of the Zionist Federation.
Yours sincerely
Arthur James Balfour
--
At the same time as diverting "British" forces away from the front line to manufacturing, and forays in Palestine and Italy, he extended conscription to Ireland, this was exceptionally unpopular and led to the Home Rule Party to be completely wiped out in the subsequent 1918 election being replaced by Sinn Fein who immediately declared Independence. The IRA (known today as the Old IRA to distinguish from later formations of the IRA) began a guerrilla war against the British Government in Ireland.
Home rule had been sought in 1912 and the Parliament Act of 1911 had been passed to not allow the Lords to reject anything that had been sought in an election campaign, though it could delay it by two years. in 1912 the Third Home Rule act was passed, and was expected to be implemented in 1914. This Independence was interrupted by the outbreak of WWI but was to be granted at the end of the war. So the conscription imposed upon Ireland was seen as a way of conscription Irish men onto the front-line. Irish volunteers were returning with stories of horrible atrocities and there was little public opinion in favour to Irish citizens serving in the British war.
The 1918 elections gave Irish Republicanism a boost, which had been crushed in the intervening war years. Sinn Fein refused to sit in the UK Parliament and declared to set up an Irish Parliament (the First Dail) and in 1919 at its first meeting they reaffirmed their previous claims to Independence, issued a letter to free nations of the world and immediately redesignated Irish volunteers into the Irish Republican Army. Between 1919 and 1921 they waged war against the British Administration in Ireland. On the same day in 1919 in Co. Tipperary Sean Treacy and Dan Breen killed two Royal Irish Constabulary Officers who were escorting explosives. This act was deliberately intended by the pair to bring about a War of Independence (which it did).
At the end of WWI it was David Lloyd Georges' express wish that Germany pay for the costs incurred for the prosecution of the entire war, including pensions. He summarised his 1918 election as a six point programme.
1. The trial of Kaiser Wilhelm II
2. Punishment of those guilty atrocities
3. Fullest indemnity from Germany
4. Britain for the British, socially and industrially
5. Rehabilitation of the broken war
6. A happier county for all
He stood as head of the "National Liberal" coalition and won a landslide victory though The Conservative controlled more seats within this coalition. Asquith's Liberals won just 33 seats.
At the Versailles Peace Conference David Lloyd George clashed with French Premier Georges Clemenceau and American President Woodrow Wilson. When asked how he did at the conference he replied "Not bad, considering I was seated between Jesus Christ and Napoleon". John Maynard Keynes was critical of Lloyd George saying in his book The Economic Consequences of Peace that Lloyd George was a "half-human visitor to our age from the hag-ridden magic and enchanted woods of Celtic antiquity."
The Conservative influences and with the Anglo-Irish war being fought put great strains on his leadership. In 1922 the Conservative demonstrated that David Lloyd George had been profiting from the sale of peerages and he fell from power.
David Lloyd George is remembered fondly for his time as PM, but there were a number of things that he is associated with that were less than honourable. As mentioned the Conservative proved that he had abused his position as Prime Minister for financial gain for himself and for the Liberal party.
In 1925 the Honours (Prevention of Abuses) Act was passed, to make illegal the sale of peerages and honours, modelled on the abuses that David Lloyd George had participated in. The only person who has ever been successfully prosecuted under this act is Maundy Gregory who was Lloyd George's "Honours Broker."
The act was the basis of the cash for peerages investigation in 2006/07 when Police officially interviewed sitting Prime Minister Tony Blair over allegations that Loaned to the Labour Party had been made quid pro quo for peerages and honours.
Later in life, and apologies in advance for the language but this is a direct quotation, but David Lloyd George is quoted by Frances Stevenson (secretary and second wife) in her diary as saying:
"Debate last night in the House on Air—strong demonstrations in favour of increased no. of fighting planes. D. [David Lloyd George] says it could have been avoided but for Simon's [Sir John Simon's] mismanagement. At Geneva other countries would have agreed not to use aeroplanes for bombing purposes, but we insisted on reserving the right, as D. puts it, to bomb niggers! Whereupon the whole thing fell through, & we add 5 millions to our air armaments expenditure."
Apparently he, and others in Government felt it was important that the British Government retain the right to bomb British colonies as and when they deemed it necessary. [From Conquest to Collapse: European Empires from 1815 to 1960, Pantheon Books, New York, 1982. Page 200]
Lloyd George in 1923 resolved (Politically at least) his differences with Asquith, and the Liberal Party was re-united for the 1924 election which they lost. In six years David Lloyd George had gone from being the man the Conservatives had described as "A dictator for life, if he wishes," to being an known crook.
In 1924 the Socialist Labour Party overtook the reformed Liberal Party to become the second biggest Party in Parliament after the Conservatives. The proud party that had been formed to fight the corn laws and champion peoples rights and small government were now a shadow of their former selves, the Socialist were now speaking for the poor and the working classes.
In 1926 he finally succeeded Asquith as leader of the Liberal party leader, but support continued to diminish. He needed to pay to support candidates from his own funds at the 1929 election where they won just 60 seats. In 1945 and in ill-health with it looking like he would lose his constituency he was awarded a peerage, but he never had chance to attend the Lords as a Peer as he died a few months later in his home in Wales.
Hopefully I will be able to give a bit of a round up on whomever wins the new poll on the Best Conservative PM in a few weeks time. All the above was sourced via some books at home and via Wikipedia.
Saturday, March 21, 2009
New Poll
The Left-wing PM Poll is to close very soon, no prizes for predicting this new poll.
Who is the best Conservative PM of the last 100 years?
Please register your vote using the poll on the right of this blog, if you would like to elaborate on your selection, feel free to do so in the comments field on this post.
Who is the best Conservative PM of the last 100 years?
Please register your vote using the poll on the right of this blog, if you would like to elaborate on your selection, feel free to do so in the comments field on this post.
Whips
I don't just like reading and commenting on politics, I am intrigued by political structures and strategies, so I occasionally find some time and read up on certain things.
I was refreshing my memory on the Whip system today and found some interesting stuff on the Whips on the internet that I did not know about before, and I recall this was one of the things about politics that it took me some time to understand. So for the benefit of those who do not know much about the Whip system, and for the critique from those who do, here is my attempt at a little informative article.
Whipping is the act undertaken by a political party whereby the leadership of that party indicates to its voting members how and when the party leadership wishes the member to vote.
The Whip will dictate to members how to vote, and act as enforcers of voting discipline. A Whip will use inducements and punishments in getting party members to vote, and will dispense the appropriate discipline where they see fit. The process is largely secretive and is a political party function, rather than a government function so much secrecy prevails as the business of the Whip is that of the Party, rather than the government.
The term Whip is sometimes also used to indicate a political parties endorsement of a candidate, with the phrase "withdraw the whip" is used to indicate when an MP is expelled from a party. (Though, in the case of an MP they retain their seat as they are elected by their constituents, but the party will run somebody else in that ward in the next election, and the expelled candidate will no longer be privy to party communications and instructions.)
In the UK the party that is in Government appoints a Chief Whip. It is the responsibility of the Chief Whip to ensure that the Government always has sufficient votes in the House to win a vote.
The Chief Whip to the Government is traditionally also appointed to the position Parliamentary Secretary to the Treasury so as to allow the Chief Whip a seat in the Cabinet. Subsequent benefits of that position with the Treasury, the Chief Whip has official residence at 12 Downing Street (Though the office is currently working out of 9 Downing Street) and a Cabinet Ministers Salary.
Interestingly, there are only three official residences left in Downing Street.
The PM gets the first for being first Lord of the Treasury, recently the Chancellor of the Exchequer gets the second for being the Second Lord of the Treasury (though sometimes the residence is given to the second in command, or Deputy PM) and the last goes to the Parliamentary Secretary to the Treasury who as we have established is the Chief Whip.
The Chief Whip speaks with massive influence and is said to have the voice of the Prime Minister, and their influence is often feared even by Cabinet members.
Whips in the House of Commons do not speak in debates, and they never speak to press or on appear on Radio or TV in the capacity of being a Whip, thus their roles remain very secretive.
The current Chief Whip is Nick Brown and the Deputy Chief Whip is Thomas McAvoy. There are a number of senior positions under the Chief Whip, all of whom are appointed to positions in the Treasury and/or to the Royal Household though they do not actually operate in any way under those positions, but act in their positions as Whips.
There is a similar system in place in the Lords, but they are appointed in a different way. They also sometimes do speak in the Lords in debates.
At the start of each week the Chief Whip will fax a letter to all members of the party to inform them of the schedule for the days ahead. The letters will always include the phrase "Your attendance is absolutely essential" next to each debate when there will be a vote. This sentence will always be underlined, either once, twice or three times depending on the consequences that will be imposed upon someone who does not turn up. Hence the phrases one-line whip, two-line (or double-line) whip and three-line whip. The direction for the vote is not included.
In the chamber the Whips will indicate to members of their party how they want them to vote by using hand signals. These signals, nor the letters sent each week are not recorded by Hansard as they are considered internal matters to the political parties. The Whips are protected by the privileges of the palaces of Westminster, and have been known to use threats, blackmail, intimidation and extortion to get MP's to vote how they wish them to. It is these tactics that are both often criticised and resented by MP's.
I have mentioned consequences, and these will vary depending on the MP and the importance attached to the vote. Disciplinary actions are actually normally agreed in advance of any transgressions. Allowances can be made for individuals who have long distances to travel, or who are away on official business and occasionally if the individual has political circumstances that need to be considered. The Whip is usually removed when the vote is on a matter on conscience or religion, however, this is happening less and less as time goes by. Theoretically anybody disregarding a three-line whip will have the Party Whip removed. (I think that makes sense.)
Any Government that is formed with a majority vote should win every vote under the Whip system, unless there is mass revolt. Such a revolt can be damaging to the party's leadership, and can be politically damaging if they require opposition votes.
The parties in opposition will run a Whip team to organise themselves in a similar fashion to the Government of the day. There is some co-operation between different parties Whips, sometimes by agreement and sometimes not there will be what has become known as pairing. This is where each MP has a pair, and then will not be required to attend if their pair is not on lower priority votes. This is why you will often see a sparsely attended Commons chamber on the TV as the Whips will have calculated the right number of people to be in attendance to support a debate. If the opposition was to bring in more votes, the Government Whip will look to their "pair" to also vote... thus cancelling it out. As a result, often only the least required number of MP's will attend.
Criticism of the whip system is often focused around MP's not voting using their own discretion or reasoning, and MP's under the system are frequently compared to sheep, for the way in which they are herded through the voting lobbies. There are stories that MP's have arrived in ambulances and that MP's have been called in off of their sick beds to vote and some died soon after.
Defenders of the Whip system cite the expectation voters have for parties to vote in certain ways, for example you would typically expect a Conservative MP to attend and vote for lower taxes, and with a Labour MP you would expect attendance and voting towards State provided social care. The argument being that the Whip system ensures that people who vote for the party rather than the candidate are well represented.
I hope you have found this interesting, and that I have got my facts right on the above. The Whips are a very important part of our system of politics, but because of their secretive nature and because they are feared by many they are not often talked about.
I was refreshing my memory on the Whip system today and found some interesting stuff on the Whips on the internet that I did not know about before, and I recall this was one of the things about politics that it took me some time to understand. So for the benefit of those who do not know much about the Whip system, and for the critique from those who do, here is my attempt at a little informative article.
Whipping is the act undertaken by a political party whereby the leadership of that party indicates to its voting members how and when the party leadership wishes the member to vote.
The Whip will dictate to members how to vote, and act as enforcers of voting discipline. A Whip will use inducements and punishments in getting party members to vote, and will dispense the appropriate discipline where they see fit. The process is largely secretive and is a political party function, rather than a government function so much secrecy prevails as the business of the Whip is that of the Party, rather than the government.
The term Whip is sometimes also used to indicate a political parties endorsement of a candidate, with the phrase "withdraw the whip" is used to indicate when an MP is expelled from a party. (Though, in the case of an MP they retain their seat as they are elected by their constituents, but the party will run somebody else in that ward in the next election, and the expelled candidate will no longer be privy to party communications and instructions.)
In the UK the party that is in Government appoints a Chief Whip. It is the responsibility of the Chief Whip to ensure that the Government always has sufficient votes in the House to win a vote.
The Chief Whip to the Government is traditionally also appointed to the position Parliamentary Secretary to the Treasury so as to allow the Chief Whip a seat in the Cabinet. Subsequent benefits of that position with the Treasury, the Chief Whip has official residence at 12 Downing Street (Though the office is currently working out of 9 Downing Street) and a Cabinet Ministers Salary.
Interestingly, there are only three official residences left in Downing Street.
The PM gets the first for being first Lord of the Treasury, recently the Chancellor of the Exchequer gets the second for being the Second Lord of the Treasury (though sometimes the residence is given to the second in command, or Deputy PM) and the last goes to the Parliamentary Secretary to the Treasury who as we have established is the Chief Whip.
The Chief Whip speaks with massive influence and is said to have the voice of the Prime Minister, and their influence is often feared even by Cabinet members.
Whips in the House of Commons do not speak in debates, and they never speak to press or on appear on Radio or TV in the capacity of being a Whip, thus their roles remain very secretive.
The current Chief Whip is Nick Brown and the Deputy Chief Whip is Thomas McAvoy. There are a number of senior positions under the Chief Whip, all of whom are appointed to positions in the Treasury and/or to the Royal Household though they do not actually operate in any way under those positions, but act in their positions as Whips.
There is a similar system in place in the Lords, but they are appointed in a different way. They also sometimes do speak in the Lords in debates.
At the start of each week the Chief Whip will fax a letter to all members of the party to inform them of the schedule for the days ahead. The letters will always include the phrase "Your attendance is absolutely essential" next to each debate when there will be a vote. This sentence will always be underlined, either once, twice or three times depending on the consequences that will be imposed upon someone who does not turn up. Hence the phrases one-line whip, two-line (or double-line) whip and three-line whip. The direction for the vote is not included.
In the chamber the Whips will indicate to members of their party how they want them to vote by using hand signals. These signals, nor the letters sent each week are not recorded by Hansard as they are considered internal matters to the political parties. The Whips are protected by the privileges of the palaces of Westminster, and have been known to use threats, blackmail, intimidation and extortion to get MP's to vote how they wish them to. It is these tactics that are both often criticised and resented by MP's.
I have mentioned consequences, and these will vary depending on the MP and the importance attached to the vote. Disciplinary actions are actually normally agreed in advance of any transgressions. Allowances can be made for individuals who have long distances to travel, or who are away on official business and occasionally if the individual has political circumstances that need to be considered. The Whip is usually removed when the vote is on a matter on conscience or religion, however, this is happening less and less as time goes by. Theoretically anybody disregarding a three-line whip will have the Party Whip removed. (I think that makes sense.)
Any Government that is formed with a majority vote should win every vote under the Whip system, unless there is mass revolt. Such a revolt can be damaging to the party's leadership, and can be politically damaging if they require opposition votes.
The parties in opposition will run a Whip team to organise themselves in a similar fashion to the Government of the day. There is some co-operation between different parties Whips, sometimes by agreement and sometimes not there will be what has become known as pairing. This is where each MP has a pair, and then will not be required to attend if their pair is not on lower priority votes. This is why you will often see a sparsely attended Commons chamber on the TV as the Whips will have calculated the right number of people to be in attendance to support a debate. If the opposition was to bring in more votes, the Government Whip will look to their "pair" to also vote... thus cancelling it out. As a result, often only the least required number of MP's will attend.
Criticism of the whip system is often focused around MP's not voting using their own discretion or reasoning, and MP's under the system are frequently compared to sheep, for the way in which they are herded through the voting lobbies. There are stories that MP's have arrived in ambulances and that MP's have been called in off of their sick beds to vote and some died soon after.
Defenders of the Whip system cite the expectation voters have for parties to vote in certain ways, for example you would typically expect a Conservative MP to attend and vote for lower taxes, and with a Labour MP you would expect attendance and voting towards State provided social care. The argument being that the Whip system ensures that people who vote for the party rather than the candidate are well represented.
I hope you have found this interesting, and that I have got my facts right on the above. The Whips are a very important part of our system of politics, but because of their secretive nature and because they are feared by many they are not often talked about.
Recommended Reading
Here is my latest recommended reading list.
Please note, I do not necessarily agree with these posts and articles, however I found them sufficiently interesting to warrant a recommendation:
Archbishop Cranmer says Germany has legalised paedophilia, here.
Scunnert is encouraging his readers to protest GATS before it is too late, here.
John Redwood says borrowing makes us poorer, here.
Future of the Conservative Party blog calls on the UK to invade Zimbabwe to remove Mugabe, here.
The Raven says Labour have just 15 months to rig the next election, here.
Please note, I do not necessarily agree with these posts and articles, however I found them sufficiently interesting to warrant a recommendation:
Archbishop Cranmer says Germany has legalised paedophilia, here.
Scunnert is encouraging his readers to protest GATS before it is too late, here.
John Redwood says borrowing makes us poorer, here.
Future of the Conservative Party blog calls on the UK to invade Zimbabwe to remove Mugabe, here.
The Raven says Labour have just 15 months to rig the next election, here.
Friday, March 20, 2009
Open Thread
I haven't put up an open thread for some time.
Let me know what you do and do not like about the blog, and/or what I have posted. And let me know if there is anything you would like more or less of.
Messages of general merriment also welcome.
Let me know what you do and do not like about the blog, and/or what I have posted. And let me know if there is anything you would like more or less of.
Messages of general merriment also welcome.
Thursday, March 19, 2009
Recommended Reading
Here is my latest recommended reading list.
Please note, I do not necessarily agree with these posts and articles, however I found them sufficiently interesting to warrant a recommendation:
The Adam Smith Institute blog asks if the UK is the sick man of the world, here.
A Tory writes to James Purnell about a family that has claimed £220,000 in benefits to eat and be lazy, here.
Notasheepmaybeagoat points out that Gordon Brown has contradicted his 2002 speech to the Labour Conference, here.
Derek Bennett says that a BBC poll shows that people agree with UKIP, here.
IanPJ says that Jury Team are there to further the interests of the EU by destroying political parties, here.
Please note, I do not necessarily agree with these posts and articles, however I found them sufficiently interesting to warrant a recommendation:
The Adam Smith Institute blog asks if the UK is the sick man of the world, here.
A Tory writes to James Purnell about a family that has claimed £220,000 in benefits to eat and be lazy, here.
Notasheepmaybeagoat points out that Gordon Brown has contradicted his 2002 speech to the Labour Conference, here.
Derek Bennett says that a BBC poll shows that people agree with UKIP, here.
IanPJ says that Jury Team are there to further the interests of the EU by destroying political parties, here.
Wednesday, March 18, 2009
Recommended Reading
Here is my latest recommended reading list.
Please note, I do not necessarily agree with these posts and articles, however i found them sufficiently interesting to warrant a recommendation:
Mr Eugenides talks abour Sir Liam Donaldson's proposals for a minimum alcohol price, here.
Lord Elvis says Ken Livingstone is a fare dodger, here.
Bishop Hill says the BBC holds the law in contempt, here.
Danny Tammuz and Jury Team are targetting Harriet Harman's seat, here.
Ray Winstone is looking for some respect in this video, here.
Please note, I do not necessarily agree with these posts and articles, however i found them sufficiently interesting to warrant a recommendation:
Mr Eugenides talks abour Sir Liam Donaldson's proposals for a minimum alcohol price, here.
Lord Elvis says Ken Livingstone is a fare dodger, here.
Bishop Hill says the BBC holds the law in contempt, here.
Danny Tammuz and Jury Team are targetting Harriet Harman's seat, here.
Ray Winstone is looking for some respect in this video, here.
Teleprompter President
Despite my warnings a few weeks ago, here. Seems President Obama is having more teleprompter problems as reported by Sky News:
A teleprompt blunder has led to Barack Obama thanking himself in a speech at the White House in a St Patrick's Day celebration.
Irish Prime Minister Brian Cowen was just a few paragraphs into an address in Washington when he realised it all sounded a bit too familiar.
It was. He was repeating the speech President Barack Obama had just read from the same teleprompter.
Mr Cowen stopped, turned to the president and said: "That's your speech."
A laughing Mr Obama returned to the podium to take over but it seems the script had finally been switched and the US president ended up thanking himself for inviting everyone to the party.
A teleprompt blunder has led to Barack Obama thanking himself in a speech at the White House in a St Patrick's Day celebration.
Irish Prime Minister Brian Cowen was just a few paragraphs into an address in Washington when he realised it all sounded a bit too familiar.
It was. He was repeating the speech President Barack Obama had just read from the same teleprompter.
Mr Cowen stopped, turned to the president and said: "That's your speech."
A laughing Mr Obama returned to the podium to take over but it seems the script had finally been switched and the US president ended up thanking himself for inviting everyone to the party.
David Cameron Meets With Tory MP's
The basis for what I am about to write is from this, by Frasier Nelson on the Spectator, where he has put up details sent to him of a meeting between David Cameron and Tory MP's held in the Boothroyd Room.
The purpose of the meeting was to address MP's concerns on whether his recent apology was the signal for a change of direction and strategy. During this meeting internal polling was used to show that the Tories are being seen as still being vulnerable on the NHS, and need to take steps to not be seen as anti-NHS.
However, apparently Europe is bottom of priorities. Really?
OK, OK, as I am not a Conservative Party Member, and I can't lobby the party internally. But bottom of Priorities?
How will the Conservative speak about issues of National Security in the upcoming campaign without addressing cross EU commanded deployments of armed forces? How about the "Buy European" procurement policy which is looking increasingly likely to be denying vital equipment to our already stretched armed forces in the coming years?
How can they pledge to fix the economy with Gordon Brown looking for Geo-Political, or an EU QUANGO to regulate the economy for them?
How will the Conservatives not talk about Europe when the EU, without legal competencies is inserting their version of European History into our schools text books, and has a massive Education budget?
How will the Conservatives campaign for smaller and more accountable government when the EU controls so much and is growing further still? How can they campaign on for a reduced tax bill when the EU costs us so much, and will cost us more in the future? The EU controls to varying extents some of our tax rates already. How can the Conservatives reform local government, when local government is fixated on fulfilling EU regulations?
How can the Conservatives talk about immigration when they will not control the legislation, the policy or the borders?
How can the Conservatives talk about trade when trade deals are made for us by the EU?
The Conservatives it seems will fight the next election campaign on building an image that shows them as not as nasty or as incompetent as the current government. They are just going to do their best not to annoy or offend people.
On this strategy; If David Cameron becomes Prime Minister, how can we be sure that he is truly representing our best interests; especially if he is too afraid to pick a fight with the people he disagrees with? The Labour Party has decimated things in The UK that people knew and loved, and there is a large chunk of people that still do not have representatives willing to fight for them and their values.
To quote Ron Silverman (badly) Conservatives seem willing to cower more and more into the corner saying "please, don't hurt me."
We practically have a Vichy government now, and the EU's influence and control is ever increasing, as are it's costs. What is shrinking is our level of accountability, whoch was exceptionally poor already. I want to see a centre-right party in this country who is made up of people willing to speak out against what they do not believe in, and for the things they do believe in. And readers of this blog, and many other blogs seem to agree with me. So I wonder who the Conservatives are polling and what they are asking, because this sounds to me like a dodgy statistic.
If the Conservatives want to win the next election, there are millions of votes out there for the candidate or party that is prepared to stand between big government and the people and take an individuals side. We need Leadership and Guardians. We need freedoms enshrined, not loaned.
Brown and New-Labour represent placemen and outdated ideology. Step forward the people who want vision, and thought-provoking devotion to democracy and civil representation. We are sick of the QUANGOs and so called experts messing things up and then swanning off into the sunset with a big fat pay off. I want a Conservative MP to fail in the first two years of Government and to be sacked without pay off and held to account; and then have a Conservative PM to say, "that's what is supposed to happen when people get things wrong."
Anyway, I have said before, and will say again, at best the Conservatives will get a loaned vote from me, but I will look at who is running at the time and vote with the person who most closely represents my values and aspirations. It still seems unlikely that it will be a Conservative candidate.
The purpose of the meeting was to address MP's concerns on whether his recent apology was the signal for a change of direction and strategy. During this meeting internal polling was used to show that the Tories are being seen as still being vulnerable on the NHS, and need to take steps to not be seen as anti-NHS.
However, apparently Europe is bottom of priorities. Really?
OK, OK, as I am not a Conservative Party Member, and I can't lobby the party internally. But bottom of Priorities?
How will the Conservative speak about issues of National Security in the upcoming campaign without addressing cross EU commanded deployments of armed forces? How about the "Buy European" procurement policy which is looking increasingly likely to be denying vital equipment to our already stretched armed forces in the coming years?
How can they pledge to fix the economy with Gordon Brown looking for Geo-Political, or an EU QUANGO to regulate the economy for them?
How will the Conservatives not talk about Europe when the EU, without legal competencies is inserting their version of European History into our schools text books, and has a massive Education budget?
How will the Conservatives campaign for smaller and more accountable government when the EU controls so much and is growing further still? How can they campaign on for a reduced tax bill when the EU costs us so much, and will cost us more in the future? The EU controls to varying extents some of our tax rates already. How can the Conservatives reform local government, when local government is fixated on fulfilling EU regulations?
How can the Conservatives talk about immigration when they will not control the legislation, the policy or the borders?
How can the Conservatives talk about trade when trade deals are made for us by the EU?
The Conservatives it seems will fight the next election campaign on building an image that shows them as not as nasty or as incompetent as the current government. They are just going to do their best not to annoy or offend people.
On this strategy; If David Cameron becomes Prime Minister, how can we be sure that he is truly representing our best interests; especially if he is too afraid to pick a fight with the people he disagrees with? The Labour Party has decimated things in The UK that people knew and loved, and there is a large chunk of people that still do not have representatives willing to fight for them and their values.
To quote Ron Silverman (badly) Conservatives seem willing to cower more and more into the corner saying "please, don't hurt me."
We practically have a Vichy government now, and the EU's influence and control is ever increasing, as are it's costs. What is shrinking is our level of accountability, whoch was exceptionally poor already. I want to see a centre-right party in this country who is made up of people willing to speak out against what they do not believe in, and for the things they do believe in. And readers of this blog, and many other blogs seem to agree with me. So I wonder who the Conservatives are polling and what they are asking, because this sounds to me like a dodgy statistic.
If the Conservatives want to win the next election, there are millions of votes out there for the candidate or party that is prepared to stand between big government and the people and take an individuals side. We need Leadership and Guardians. We need freedoms enshrined, not loaned.
Brown and New-Labour represent placemen and outdated ideology. Step forward the people who want vision, and thought-provoking devotion to democracy and civil representation. We are sick of the QUANGOs and so called experts messing things up and then swanning off into the sunset with a big fat pay off. I want a Conservative MP to fail in the first two years of Government and to be sacked without pay off and held to account; and then have a Conservative PM to say, "that's what is supposed to happen when people get things wrong."
Anyway, I have said before, and will say again, at best the Conservatives will get a loaned vote from me, but I will look at who is running at the time and vote with the person who most closely represents my values and aspirations. It still seems unlikely that it will be a Conservative candidate.
Tuesday, March 17, 2009
Obama Is For Federalised Europe
Some more pieces on the EU Federalist puzzle have fallen into place today with President Obama's public backing of a Federal Europe, we are about to see a change to the open foreign policy between the US and Europe.
Nile Gardiner writing in the Daily Telegraph, here, says that President Obama will be travelling to Europe in two weeks as the first President to be openly supportive of the creation of a Federal Europe. On his visit he will strongly back a European Security and Defence Policy.
With France very recently seeking to re-join the NATO fold and with NATO and the EU's command structures increasingly converging, the defence cornerstone of an EU Federalist state is being maneuvered into position.
It would seem that NATO will be the defence partner to a Federalise Europe, and when the time is right the America and Canada will withdraw from its command and logistics structure and Norway will then be forced to come into the EU or go it alone. Such a move may also secure Turkeys ascension into the Union.
This of course leaves the UK in a precarious position. With previous US presidents being cautious of a Franco-German led Federalised Europe, there has been sufficient support for NATO within North America and The UK Governments to present to the voters a counter-balanced international view. That is to say that The UK is looking further than the EU in it's diplomatic relationships.
However, in the last decade, and bound legally by The Lisbon Constitutional Treaty UK Foreign policy has become more EU centric,and dependant. It will cease to exist as a competency at the end of this year, as Foreign Policy will be headed by an EU International Commissioner, and policy within the EU will be considered internal.
So I make one more plea, perhaps upon deaf ears and to the already converted, but ask yourselves, when and where did you vote for a Federal Europe? Where and when did you vote for a Common European Defence Policy? Where and when did you vote to grant this (and previous) Governments the authority that we no longer wish to have self determination, and seek subservience to a post-democratic Union of Europe?
How many lines in the sand must we cross before The UK wakes up to what it is surrendering? We need an open and honest debate about the EU; it is in fact long over due. But we need it now, and yet despite European Elections coming soon there is no talk in our media and in our conversations about Federalising Europe. Do we not already have sufficient evidence that centralising decision making away from voters makes our society weaker and less cohesive?
If the EU and a Federalised Europe is truly the answer, then let it be decided by open debate and persuasion of opinions, rather than by subversive tactics and non-democratic means.
Part of the problem is a lack of coherent vision by alternative theories, but let me set some out. Let these mull around in your brain for the afternoon, and think about if you would prefer A Federal Europe, to one of the below. The other problem is that people opposed to further integration are divided by their positions on how little EU we should have. We need more cooperation between these people and groups.
Free Trade Europe. The EU is not the sum of all European Institutions, there is the Council of Europe and EFTA which are entirely separate. The UK is relatively comfortable within The Council of Europe, and loves EFTA, so why not be like Norway and get the hell out of the EU? It is the trading deal people did vote for in the 1970's without the Federalisation.
EFTA Countries are in the EEA (except Switzerland) but are free to conclude free trade agreements with other countries internationally.
Ask yourself how the UK can best trade its way out of this current recession and you will see that we need to be making independent trade deals with countries like China, India, Singapore and South Korea.
The Commonwealth. The UK has pretty much turned it's back on the Commonwealth and citizens of Commonwealth countries no longer enjoy the same privileges that were once available.
When the UK undertook a space programme in the 60's and early 70's we looked to Australia as partner. Not so long ago The British Empire reigned over a quarter of all people on our planet.
No one in the UK wants to return to Empirical Transnational Influence, there are many, many countries outside of Europe where we share more commonality in Politics, law making, language and history. Re-establishing The Commonwealth as a trade organisation would benefit the UK, and help some of the worlds poorest countries and people.
Anglosphere. As with the Commonwealth it would be a geo-political concept, yet more centralised around an even more tight knit, and familiar cultural basis. Would also allow for the United States to participate, and centre around the English Speaking countries of the world.
See also the Anglosphere Institute, here.
Open To Suggestions. Think you have a better idea? Let me, and everyone know in the comments.
Nile Gardiner writing in the Daily Telegraph, here, says that President Obama will be travelling to Europe in two weeks as the first President to be openly supportive of the creation of a Federal Europe. On his visit he will strongly back a European Security and Defence Policy.
With France very recently seeking to re-join the NATO fold and with NATO and the EU's command structures increasingly converging, the defence cornerstone of an EU Federalist state is being maneuvered into position.
It would seem that NATO will be the defence partner to a Federalise Europe, and when the time is right the America and Canada will withdraw from its command and logistics structure and Norway will then be forced to come into the EU or go it alone. Such a move may also secure Turkeys ascension into the Union.
This of course leaves the UK in a precarious position. With previous US presidents being cautious of a Franco-German led Federalised Europe, there has been sufficient support for NATO within North America and The UK Governments to present to the voters a counter-balanced international view. That is to say that The UK is looking further than the EU in it's diplomatic relationships.
However, in the last decade, and bound legally by The Lisbon Constitutional Treaty UK Foreign policy has become more EU centric,and dependant. It will cease to exist as a competency at the end of this year, as Foreign Policy will be headed by an EU International Commissioner, and policy within the EU will be considered internal.
So I make one more plea, perhaps upon deaf ears and to the already converted, but ask yourselves, when and where did you vote for a Federal Europe? Where and when did you vote for a Common European Defence Policy? Where and when did you vote to grant this (and previous) Governments the authority that we no longer wish to have self determination, and seek subservience to a post-democratic Union of Europe?
How many lines in the sand must we cross before The UK wakes up to what it is surrendering? We need an open and honest debate about the EU; it is in fact long over due. But we need it now, and yet despite European Elections coming soon there is no talk in our media and in our conversations about Federalising Europe. Do we not already have sufficient evidence that centralising decision making away from voters makes our society weaker and less cohesive?
If the EU and a Federalised Europe is truly the answer, then let it be decided by open debate and persuasion of opinions, rather than by subversive tactics and non-democratic means.
Part of the problem is a lack of coherent vision by alternative theories, but let me set some out. Let these mull around in your brain for the afternoon, and think about if you would prefer A Federal Europe, to one of the below. The other problem is that people opposed to further integration are divided by their positions on how little EU we should have. We need more cooperation between these people and groups.
Free Trade Europe. The EU is not the sum of all European Institutions, there is the Council of Europe and EFTA which are entirely separate. The UK is relatively comfortable within The Council of Europe, and loves EFTA, so why not be like Norway and get the hell out of the EU? It is the trading deal people did vote for in the 1970's without the Federalisation.
EFTA Countries are in the EEA (except Switzerland) but are free to conclude free trade agreements with other countries internationally.
Ask yourself how the UK can best trade its way out of this current recession and you will see that we need to be making independent trade deals with countries like China, India, Singapore and South Korea.
The Commonwealth. The UK has pretty much turned it's back on the Commonwealth and citizens of Commonwealth countries no longer enjoy the same privileges that were once available.
When the UK undertook a space programme in the 60's and early 70's we looked to Australia as partner. Not so long ago The British Empire reigned over a quarter of all people on our planet.
No one in the UK wants to return to Empirical Transnational Influence, there are many, many countries outside of Europe where we share more commonality in Politics, law making, language and history. Re-establishing The Commonwealth as a trade organisation would benefit the UK, and help some of the worlds poorest countries and people.
Anglosphere. As with the Commonwealth it would be a geo-political concept, yet more centralised around an even more tight knit, and familiar cultural basis. Would also allow for the United States to participate, and centre around the English Speaking countries of the world.
See also the Anglosphere Institute, here.
Open To Suggestions. Think you have a better idea? Let me, and everyone know in the comments.
Monday, March 16, 2009
Recommended Reading
Usually on a Saturday I post my Recommended Reading post with ten or a dozen posts from the past week.
It have never really rendered any positive feedback, and I feel it may be too much in one go. Thus, I will keep a Saturday list but much reduced and will post sporadically during the week five or six articles or blog posts that have caught my attention.
So, here as recommended by Daniel1979 is my latest recommended reading list.
Please note, I do not necessarily agree with these posts and articles, however i found them sufficiently interesting to warrant a recommendation:
1. The All Seeing Eye wishes the Dead Tree Press RIP, here.
2. Alex Singleton lists his 10 most dangerous left-wing ideas in the 21st century, and encourages you to list yours, here.
3. Frasier Nelson lists David Cameron's 5 reasons to vote Tory (as prompted by Rhoda Klapp), here.
4. Test how Conservative you are via Iain Dale's Diary, here. Iain promises a league table of leading bloggers.
5. Doug Carswell calls on Keith Vaz to quit, here.
6. Letters from a Tory writes to his readers and asks if teen magazines are pushing the boundaries of acceptability, here.
It have never really rendered any positive feedback, and I feel it may be too much in one go. Thus, I will keep a Saturday list but much reduced and will post sporadically during the week five or six articles or blog posts that have caught my attention.
So, here as recommended by Daniel1979 is my latest recommended reading list.
Please note, I do not necessarily agree with these posts and articles, however i found them sufficiently interesting to warrant a recommendation:
1. The All Seeing Eye wishes the Dead Tree Press RIP, here.
2. Alex Singleton lists his 10 most dangerous left-wing ideas in the 21st century, and encourages you to list yours, here.
3. Frasier Nelson lists David Cameron's 5 reasons to vote Tory (as prompted by Rhoda Klapp), here.
4. Test how Conservative you are via Iain Dale's Diary, here. Iain promises a league table of leading bloggers.
5. Doug Carswell calls on Keith Vaz to quit, here.
6. Letters from a Tory writes to his readers and asks if teen magazines are pushing the boundaries of acceptability, here.
Remembering Ron Silver
I have just seen this tribute via Danny Finkelstein that Ron Silver, AKA Bruno Gianelli has passed away. As a fan of the West Wing I know how good an actor he was. I found the above to be a powerful statement, from one of my favourite TV characters.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)