The End Justifies the Means?

What a lot of us find unacceptable about the EU is the democracy deficit. That and the constant desire to do us down. I suppose the lack of democracy and the desire to make us bend the knee to the EU elite are the opposite sides of the same coin. The EU is a democracy free area with the lack of democracy amply demonstrated by what is happening to Italy as so tellingly pointed out by Ambrose Evans-Pritchard here. Italy has been given 48 hours to accept measures dictated by the EU. In order to rectify the democratic deficit it is to be hoped Italy will copy Greece and hold a referendum on the EU measures they have been told to adopt. Although I hope a majority of Greeks vote against the austerity package I doubt they will do so as they will be scared into voting in favour as they will be told that the costs of saying no will include their expulsion from the euro and the eventual collapse of the euro and the EU. They will be told not to believe those who maintain that the reintroduction of the drachma will lead to a devaluation which within 2 to 3 years will result in the rebalancing of their economy and sufficient growth to enable old debts to be paid off, if not entirely then at least to a greater extent than propose by the EU. Greece should look at Iceland where they devalued their currency and now some two years later are ploughing ahead financially. It is not true that the rejection of the EU measures will result in armageddon and the Greeks will hopefully be persuaded that voting no will bring freedom. It is not often that I agree with a communist but Fausto Bertinotti believes that Italy is living in a neo-Bonapartist financial system. Like all Jesuits the EU believes the end justifies the means. I instinctively disagree.    

The EU and Climate Change

As Guido reports in his blog today here the great global warming claim is unravelling with Professor Judith Curry blowing the lid off the research of the Berkeley Earth Surface Temperatures project  of which she is a member. As I understand it Professor Curry says that the leader of the project Professor Richard Muller of Berkeley University of California has misled the public by hiding the fact that the project's data shows global warming has stopped. Today Clegg in an article in the Observer maintains that the EU has been wonderful for the economy, climate change, crime and defence. How Clegg can say this is gobsmacking unbelievable. What has the EU done for our economy teetering as we are on the brink of  financial disaster caused by the EU? What has the EU done for us on climate change other than to impose useless carbon cutting measures that will cost us a bomb? What has the EU done for our defence other than some mickey mouse cooperation with the French? Hasn't Clegg heard of NATO? As for crime I have to agree that this has indeed had a field day under the EU with the accounts for this institution unaudited and with corruption rife. I do not imagine though that Clegg was talking about crime in that way but was referring to the EU Arrest Warrant which in truth is an appalling device and which allows people to be arrested and incarcerated in countries that have to put it mildly inferior criminal justice systems  to our own and is definitely something which should be abolished. Why is it that practically every believer in global warming in this country is also a believer in the EU? Whatever the pundits say we are better off out of the EU and despite their scare stories it is neither impossible to leave it nor would it cause us untold damage. On the contrary it would set us free. We will be better off without the climate change policies and I have a feeling that the scales will fall from the eyes of more and more politicians on this issue in months rather than years. Hopefully reality on the EU will happen as quickly - with the total collapse of the euro it is possible and it is quite likely that we are close to this event.    

Gwyneth Paltrow

First of all it was the Chelsea home game to Arsenal that clogged the roads in and around Stamford Bridge at lunchtime (is there no way the King's Road, Wandsworth Bridge Road bottleneck can be sorted out, it may take knocking down a house or two though to do it). This evening it is some unknown event or possibly nothing that is clogging the Chelsea Bridge Road. Caught in Chelsea traffic coming back from golf can be a bit of a bladder challenging experience but nothing is as bad as being caught in one of those endless traffic jams on a motorway. Just as frustrating is waiting in an airport departure lounge for your flight to leave and particularly so when the delay is inflicted by the staff of the airline you're flying on. The Qantas strike is set to cause huge misery to its customers as the pilots and ground staff seem likely to continue their action for as long as it takes to get their way. Traffic jams come and go but this particularly bitter dispute seems destined to last for months and to lose the airline a lot of money. Indeed there is talk of Qantas having to close down certain sections of its business. Cameron and Hague are unaffected by the strike as they are flying back from the Commonwealth summit on Virgin and of course I imagine the Queen flew back yesterday on one of the 'planes of the Queen's Flight, if it still exists. Flying is a funny business and you only appreciate how funny when you are kept on the ground wondering whether you are ever going to get off the ground or not. There are of course other moments of an altogether different kind such as the occasion when one of my friends was upgraded to first class on his way back from New York this week and found himself sleeping in the bed next door to Gwyneth Paltrow.  

An Early Halloween Trick or Treat

Halloween is here and the trick or treat query posed by the eurozone superstar Klaus Regling of the Chinese has resulted in a damp squib of a treat, although perhaps coming cap in hand to the Chinese was perceived by the Chinese as a trick. Who could blame them. The Chinese have made it clear that they are not disposed to become the eurozone's saviour which is consistent with what some commentators were saying a few days back. It is odd or rather embarrassing that the eurozone leaders did not do their homework before their visit. The markets will not be impressed. Neither was Simon Miller in his post today on The Commentator site here. Nor was an old Kazakhstani friend I met today. He specialises in economic issues throughout Europe and the East and told me that from what he hears, but which does not seem to be reported over here, is that the Chinese are not in a good economic state at the moment with workers being laid off and returning to their villages and with those still in jobs having their working days reduced to 4 days a week and the time they work each day reduced from 6 hours to 4 and their income proportionately. He has concerns about Russia which he says is also going through difficult economic times and that the election of Putin as president will be a disaster. He has never thought Putin would prove to be a  democrat. Looking at the European scene he has made bets that neither the CDU in Germany nor Sarkozy in France will be re-elected.      

German Hegemony

There are some who think the effort to resolve the euro crisis is world war 3. It certainly seems that way when Merkel makes statements like the one she made yesterday that nobody should take for granted another 50 years of peace and prosperity in Europe - 'if the euro fails, Europe fails.' That is scaremongering and patently a non sequitur. It simply does not follow that if the EU collapses or even just the eurozone that there is likely to be a war. On the contrary there is likely to be considerable friction as a result of the bits of sticking plaster already patched over the euro, including the stitch up yesterday. What was done yesterday will calm the markets for a month or so but as the problems with Greek debt continue and the economic mess in Italy, Spain and even France gets worse so the deal done yesterday will come unstuck. We have been told that the euro countries now truly understand the enormity of the euro problems. Clearly they don't as otherwise they would be trying to sort out the underlying problems rather than just the symptoms. See Ambrose Evans-Pritchard article here in the Telegraph today. Could the measures taken yesterday be the next step to German hegemony over Europe? Archbishop Cranmer reminds us that Chancellor Kohl stated 'the future belongs to the Germans.... when we build the house of Europe.... In the next two years we will make the process of European integration irreversible. This is a really big battle, but it is worth the fight.' Archbishop Cranmer also has a quote from a 1994 CDU document in his blog here today in which it is said that if European integration does not progress Germany might be called upon or tempted by its own security restraints to try to effect stabilisation on its own and in the traditional way. Thank goodness we are not wholly in Europe but an offshore island with connections with kith and kin type countries throughout the non-European world. When Germany achieves its desire to whom will the other countries like France turn to for help?    

Something Different

I attended a meeting today to listen to an investment manager giving advice to a family member who has sold a property and does not know what to do with the proceeds. My relation always sees a glass half empty and is notoriously sceptical about the benefits of stocks and shares. The advice given was to me common sense, that my relation should only follow a conservative growth investment programme and that the portfolio should be put together with the idea of counteracting inflation which is likely to continue at around 5% for a year or so. My relation would ideally like to leave his money on deposit in a bank but even with a likely increase in interest rates over time he accepted that despite the increase in risk by investing in stocks and shares inflation over say five years might reduce the value of his money by 25%. The investment manager mentioned an investment in property but unless the investment was in London where special factors apply (a flight to safety by Arabs, Greeks, Italians and others) he thought the value of property had to fall further as a result of the rebalancing of the economy. As to the investments to be made he proposed a diversified portfolio of companies with strong management, little debt and revenues from widely dispersed parts of the world including the BRIC countries. In all he thought a portfolio of the kind he was suggesting would generate revenues of 3% to 4% of the sum invested. He was also of the view that gilts were not a good investment at the moment as they were too expensive and that the portfolio should not include corporate bonds as these were not capital growth investments. We also considered an inheritance tax saving vehicle in a Business Property Relief investment but this was outside my relation's minimum risk approach. What we were told was interesting and made a welcome change from discussing the euro, the EU and politics although we did not escape entirely from the continuing euro story. One of those present thought it would survive with Greece still part of the eurozone whilst the rest of us thought it might survive but without Greece and some of the other PIIGS. My view remains unchanged even after the announcements made this evening following the meeting of the EU leaders.        

Petition Again Until You Get The Right Answer!

There is no getting away from the fact that Cameron made a bad mistake not allowing a free vote on last night's referendum motion. Will the public like him any the less as a result? Strangely in my view they will not. It is not that he is an unlikeable fellow but he is not exactly someone that one can feel strongly about one way or the other. Yes, he commands some respect and maybe that's enough to see him through the difficulties his action has brought. I do not buy the theory that it was worth him imposing the 3 line whip as otherwise he would have been plagued by questions about the date of the referendum and its content. The motion for a referendum would have had to have been won for questions about the referendum date and its content to have arisen and in my estimation the motion was never going to be won anyway. As it is Cameron is already being asked what the referendum would cover and he will have to do better than the answers he has given today if he wants to park the issue. Cameron is also lucky that Labour has a leader who will never be considered as having what it takes to be a Prime Minister and so any thoughts he may have of trying to make capital out of the Tory differences on the referendum motion will not give him much traction. Better though for those who feel cheated by the line taken by the Tory hierarchy to sign a new petition which you can access on Guido's blog site here.     

Cameron and Hague Miscalculate Gravely

In my estimation the Tory leadership has been on the wrong foot from the very beginning on the EU referendum motion. Indeed not only have they totally misjudged the whole issue but they have shown an arrogance and immaturity, nay stupidity, that is quite frankly very worrying. Will I have any confidence that they will dare ask for all those powers to be repatriated from the EU that I want repatriated? Bluntly, no. Furthermore it may be Cameron's opinion that it is in our interest to be in the EU but do I agree with that? No I do not as I see a life outside a sclerotic institution, which is run by bureaucrats and fronted by third rate politicians like commie Barroso, van Rompuy, Baroness Ashton and the like and which costs huge sums of money for little or no advantage to us, as an invitation to join the world. Cameron likes to pretend that the rebellion on the vote on the referendum is a distraction which only leads one to conclude that he does not have the stomach for the row that is going to develop with the other leaders of the EU once we ask for repatriation. Difficult to have a row with those he must now consider colleagues but that comes with the job which he tells us he so enjoys. His stance on the 3 line whip is stupid from another perspective. He will now have against him a significant number of his own supporters which will inevitably make them feel free to rebel on other issues. Cameron's and Hague's attitude makes me angry since it could easily result in a change of government at the next election at worse or another coalition at best. They have seriously weakened themselves and quite unnecessarily. As to what powers should be repatriated I think the Adam Smith Institute have got it right and suggest you read their suggestions here.           

Sarkozy Gets Narky

Sarkozy, Merkel and all the great European elite got the euro wrong right from the start. Sarkozy knows it, they all know it as been amply demonstrated by Sarkozy telling Cameron Britain should not attend the summit to discuss the rescue of the European banks. The Chinese are saying that the they want to see systematic and fundamental fiscal and financial reform in Europe and that to achieve this extraordinary political courage and judgement is required. Liam Halligan here in today's Telegraph says he believes that what the Chinese are saying is that the eurozone will ether have to construct a fiscal union or break up the eurozone. Which of the lightweight European leaders will have the guts to break up the euro? None in my estimation, which means they will choose to move towards a fiscal union that is never going to happen. So yet again the EU will choose the worst of all possible worlds. The UK has a golden opportunity to use this debacle to show the leadership and hope the rest of the EU is looking for. Cameron should therefore tell his  EU counterparts that as opinion polls show that most Britons want to continue some relationship with the EU that by seeking to renegotiate our terms of membership now can be used as an excuse for a more fundamental change to the EU structure including the eurozone. Furthermore that Greece will exit the eurozone and that other countries will also be allowed to leave but in an orderly fashion. Since something positive is being done this could well calm the markets and give the EU and eurozone say 6 months in which to renegotiate. To demonstrate that Cameron is serious he will allow a free vote on the referendum issue. Wishful thinking? Probably, but no more so than d'Ancona's rather fanciful article in the Telegraph today here.    

The Heat of the Moment

It would have been better for Gaddafi to have been captured and sent to trial than being killed but where were those now saying the killing was wrong when Osama bin Laden was murdered in cold blood? None of them uttered a word of condemnation against Obama who ordered Osama to be killed so one can only assume that murdering someone is alright when ordered by a godlike creature like Obama but not when in the febrile heat of what must have been a highly volatile, adrenalin filled situation the rebel troops suddenly found they had captured the man they had been fighting against. The BBC condoned Obama's actions and thereby let us down and is doing so again by its holier than thou condemnation of the actions of the Libyan rebel soldiers. It is regrettable that Gaddafi was killed for all sorts of reasons (not least because of Lockerbie, Yvonne Fletcher and Tony Blair)  but completely understandable as well. What would any of us do suddenly finding amongst us the leader of the enemy we had been fighting. The leader who was responsible for all the loss of life and misery meted out on the rebels and their supporters. The leader who brutalised those of his fellow countrymen who had tried to stand up to him during the long years of his dictatorship, who had stolen so much of his country's wealth for the self aggrandisement of himself, his family and his cronies. Without the discipline of a regular army instilled into them was it any wonder that one of the rebels lost control and shot the man he saw as a beast no more worthy of mercy than a malaria carrying mosquito.    

Trafalgar Day, Austerlitz and the new Continental System

This day in 1805 the Battle of Trafalgar was won and for 120 years the Royal Navy on behalf of Britannia ruled the seven seas as ordered so to do in the words of that immortal anthem Rule Britannia. For as we all know Britons never, never shall be slaves. What a joke though that statement of defiance, Britain against the rest of the world, seems to be today. What a pusillanimous lot our forebears would think we were for failing to do our duty and standing up to all the crap heaped upon us by the EU to which for the sake of a peaceful existence we have become slaves. We can see how we have given up by the way the Dean of St Paul's has given in to the Occupy crowd. Although only a Canon at St Paul's the Rev Richard Harris Barham (Thomas Ingoldsby of The Jackdaw of Rheims fame) would no more have allowed the Occupy rabble into the Churchyard than joined the Roman Catholic church. He was a Tory after all and will have rejoiced at Nelson's victory and at the freedom England had won this day all those many years ago. Shortly afterwards in December 1805 Napoleon won the Battle of Austerlitz and set up as Daniel Hannan reminds us here the Continental System which was a kind of customs union for the great benefit of France and the detriment of Britain. Britain's subsequent blockade of the continent though led eventually to Napoleon's undoing. The EU has us in a straitjacket from which we need to free ourselves and the only way we can do it is to withdraw from its grasp. There is nothing wrong in Cameron trying to emulate Nelson and there is nothing wrong in Osborne seeking to do as Barham would have done and remove the rabble from our Churchyard by freeing us from the new Continental System. After all Osborne and Barham both went to the same school.      

Gaddafi's Death?

Even if Gaddafi is not yet dead and the body that looks awfully like him is just a lookalike Cameron deserves a huge round of applause for having virtually single handedly persuaded the Americans and the UN to support the Libyan rebels. Cameron's actions showed a bravery of which the rest of his countrymen can be proud. Another situation has arisen which requires equal bravery from Cameron. It involves the EU. First he must not impose a 3 line whip on Conservative MPs to vote on Monday against the motion calling for an EU Referendum. The motion is only declaratory and allowing a free vote will confirm to a lot of people in the country that this government is there for them and not for an elite clique who believe they know best. It was of course Labour (Douglas Jay) who always thought the man in Whitehall knew best, which history demonstrates is so not true - look for example at Churchill's fight on rearmament before the war. Cameron cannot afford to be seen as part of an elitist clique and this needs to be made clear for the sake of the country, the party and his government. Secondly it must also be made clear to France and Germany that we will not put up with a block vote from the eurozone countries and that whether that is the case or not we need to renegotiate our terms of engagement with the EU if we are not going to resile from it altogether. I will not hide from you my desire that we should leave this uncompetitive, inward looking and outdated venture which is the EU. It holds us back from growth through socialist type regulation and taxation. I realise that leaving may not be on the cards quite yet though but a wonderful opportunity has arisen to renegotiate our status to something similar to the Swiss status. We must grasp this opportunity with both hands, however unwelcome it may be for the rest of the EU at this time. To fail to do so is to fail the country. Hence the reason for saying that Cameron needs to be brave in the face of the deep unpopularity he will generate from the the rest of the EU when he demands renegotiation.

27 October

I have emailed my MP Greg Hands and asked him to vote in favour of the motion to be proposed on 27 October that there be a referendum on the EU. As Greg Hands is now in the whips' office I assume he will not be able to do so, even if he wants to, unless Cameron allows a free vote which for some reason Cameron says he is not going to permit. Why have the Tories become so reluctant to press EU issues? Is it because of the coalition agreement or is it because of some fear of how the other EU countries will react? Frankly why should we care how the other EU countries react considering what they owe this country for all the help we have given them over the centuries. If I were a conspiracy theorist I might think that the pusillanimous way we deal with the EU countries is because they have something over us but I know it's not that. It is our civil servants who have been totally mesmerised by the EU and who, like all elitists, are generally left inclined, think their opinions are superior to those of the rest of us and that thus for our own good we must learn to love the EU. Well it is clear that we don't and we won't so ya boo sucks. How our civil servants could think that someone like the awful Delors or the commie Barroso or the idiotic van Rompuy or the arrogant Guy Verhofstadt are worthy of anything other than derision is impossible to understand. What a mess we have landed ourselves in. What madness it was to join the Common market. We must now most urgently extract ourselves so please ask your MP to vote in favour of the motion on 27 October for a referendum on the EU.    

Depressing Times

The price of silver follows the price of gold down. Gold is going down as the US dollar rises as a result of  market uncertainty over the euro. The Germans say the meeting of EU leaders this weekend will not resolve the euro crisis and the markets this morning traded lower. There are rumours that the EFSF will be used to raise €2 or €3 trillion for eurozone bank and sovereign bail outs. Such leveraging we are told by some commentators will likely lead to a downgrade of France's AAA rating which is already under pressure as the country with the worst deficit in the eurozone. If France's AAA rating gets downgraded it will possibly lead to the break up of the euro says Professor Belke of the German think tank DIW Institute. What an unbelievable mess. It is not a surprise though as the mess was foreseen before the euro was set up. Why in the good years did not those in charge of the euro work out a plan to deal with inevitable disasters like the current one? At the very least those in charge have been negligent in the extreme. The tragedy is the mess remains unresolved and is likely to remain unresolved until the whole thing blows up. Better by far to bring the whole crazy experiment to an orderly end now and before the Occupy people get their act together and attract followers of a more sophisticated kind than those we have heard interviewed thus far. The idea that China is going to help the euro seems somewhat forlorn as their economy loses some of its gilt through the slowdown in its growth because of both the problems in the EU and US  economies. In the meantime inflation grows in the UK. What a depressing day.    

Who are the Money Changers?

The occupation of St Paul's Churchyard by this ridiculously named Occupy group poses a question which is difficult to answer. What can be done with people who are persuaded to take this kind of action based on a quarter truth? They state that the global financial crisis was caused by the banks. In truth it is the politicians who must bear the biggest share of the blame. Politicians like Clinton, Blair, Brown and Ed Balls. Clinton because he changed the law in the US not only to allow but also to insist on sub-prime lending and Blair, Brown and Ed Balls for ramping up debt to a truly criminal degree. When local politicians allow their local authority to undertake unauthorised expenditure they are surcharged to recover public money. Unfortunately the same restrictions do not apply to the national government but this is not something that even appears in the charter Occupy have issued today. We also know that if the Occupy members vote they will vote Labour or Green. There will not be one Tory amongst them. They say they will not tolerate making any payment to bail out the banks. Fair enough as I agree that one of the stupidest things Brown did was to bail out the banks. Banks must be allowed to fail and our taxes should have been used to compensate those who would have otherwise lost money as a result of their bank going bust. However we have democratically had to swallow the bank bail out policy of the Labour government and much against my wishes Osborne is prepared to pay more to the IMF to support the eurozone. Unless we cut somewhere else we simply do not have the money and will not be treated as serious about reducing our deficit unless we refuse any request from the IMF. I understand Osborne's dilemma but when someone is drowning do you jump in the water with him and put yourself in danger or do you try to save them from the bank? I guess it depends who is in the water but who came to rescue us when we were in difficulties in the ERM? Nobody and that is why we got out. It did us no harm afterwards and should be a course of action we advise the PIIGS and probably France to take. What to do about Occupy? Make sure that the costs they will otherwise add to Londoners' local taxes for the action they are taking is billed to them and otherwise to point out at every opportunity how ridiculous their so called demands are.    

BBC and Climate Change

Lord Lawson has written an article in the Sunday Times which throws a very disturbing light on BBC bias. Lord Lawson thinks that the reason the BBC is unwilling to give airtime to those with a different point of view about the effects of global warming is because all three main political parties accept the global warming story and the consequences as portrayed by warmists like Professor Jones. As Lord Lawson surmises some might point out that as the three main parties are unanimous on the warming issue the BBC is under an obligation, in the public interest, to give adequate airtime to informed dissent.  What exactly Jones knows about climate change though is a mystery to me as he is a geneticist and I wonder why the BBC or anyone else for that matter gives him the airtime he gets or even listens to him. I wonder what Jones would say about a climatologist who decided to write a controversial paper on genetics and who stated that anyone who disagreed was a denier? In any event as noted in a previous blog Osborne has started what I trust will be a more reasonable approach to climate change that in short order will ensure the policies proposed by Huhne are set aside for the good of all our pockets and for the protection of our countryside against the devastation wind farms are causing. Once the new register of lobbyists is up and running it will be fascinating to learn who has been lobbying the likes of Huhne and other senior politicians about wind farms, photovoltaic panels and so on.

A Walk in the Park

Interesting article in the Times this morning by Matthew Parris here in which he maintains that the leadership of the right of the Conservative Party has now passed from the old guard represented by the likes of David Davis and Liam Fox to the younger generation of MPs who were elected for the first time last year. James Forsyth agrees with him as can be seen from his blog in the Coffee House section of the Spectator online here. In the meantime John Redwood makes the valid claim in his blog this morning here that trying to label people right wing is confusing since there are those who want out of the EU altogether and yet there are those who are happy to remain in it so long as the terms of membership are changed to something perhaps akin to to the terms Switzerland enjoys. John Redwood also points out that such views are not restricted to the Tories but that there are elements within the other parties which share the same point of view. Those who are generally described as right wing are likely to have similar views on climate change, want cheaper energy, lower taxation and much less regulation. However in common with all other conservatives they want  a return to sustainable economics which they know can only be achieved by deficit reduction and they know that this has to take priority. As to Liam Fox a friend I met today who knows him well told me that Fox is in a sense his own worst enemy as he is so certain that all he does is right that he will not listen to any suggestions about changing his approach even if from a well meant source. The same friend also knows Oliver Letwin well and told me that Letwin has always made it a rule, like any good constituency MP, to reply himself to letters from his constituents and to this end each morning between 6.30 and 8.30 he is on the 'phone to his secretary dictating answers to those letters of which his secretary presumably has kept either a copy or the original. Once he has answered each letter he then disposes of the copy/original. When caught by the 'pap' who sold his photos to the Mirror, Letwin was taking advantage of a beautiful morning by walking in the park whilst dictating to his secretary and disposing of the letters he had answered in the bins so thoughtfully provided by the Royal Parks people.         

The Fox Hunts No More.

I got it wrong. Fox has resigned after all. It seems the funding of Werrity's activities were coming in part at least from a lobbyist and a corporate intelligence company. Philip Hammond is said to be Fox's replacement but who is going to replace Hammond and will that change the government policy on HS2, another airport and Dover? Could work out for the best at the end of the day although Fox will no doubt be missed at Defence where his policies were already beginning to bear fruit. Hopefully Hammond will be able to follow continue with the changes mapped out by Fox - there is no reason to think he will not do so. Cameron has received some criticism for the way he has conducted the investigation into the stories about Fox but I think he handled it well. He set down a perfectly sensible and reasonable procedure and stuck to it calmly and with dignity. Fox was never someone who commanded a big public following and so will soon be forgotten by voters although the same will not be true of Conservative right wingers who will be upset by the loss of one of their own who also became some kind of beacon to those like him who came from a lower middle class background and were educated in a state school. Can he come back at some stage? If Laws can come back at some point for committing a rather more serious sin then I can see no reason why Fox should not do so. We'll no doubt find out. In the meantime we must hope our finances are sorted out, the euro is abandoned and our relationship with the EU is re-organise to our advantage instead of, as it is at the moment to our disadvantage. What is it about politicians or at least most of them that they fail to foresee the damage they do?      

Strong and Effective

The best news programme on television is Jeff Randall Live. Good well researched interviews on the issues which affect us all and in particular our prosperity. I cannot understand though why they have to withdraw or postpone it when there is some reality type event unfolding. Very few reality type events need continuous coverage. They are as boring and futile as Big Brother. The Jackson Doctor's trial falls into the Big Brother category but who is watching it? Not even a fan of Jackson is going to follow the trial as it is like watching paint dry. All it merits is no more than the most cursory report in a main news bulletin. Sky News should have another channel for reality type news or another channel for serious news just like the BBC with its taxpayer funded channels. Our broadcasting laws must be changed so that channels like Sky News can take a different political stance to the one taken by the left leaning BBC. No doubt the Labour party would object just as they object to anything that smacks of redressing the balance in broadcasting to somewhere in the middle. Talking about Labour reminds me that Miliband gave a press conference today at which he complained that Cameron is being weak and ineffective over the Fox affair. He, of course, is such a strong and effective leader of his party that he was unable to hold the press conference on his own but needed Balls to support him. His strength and effectiveness have been amply displayed in another sphere as it seems Dan Hodges has lost his job at the New Statesman because he was less than gushing about the great Labour Leader. See Guido Fawkes here.

Cynicism and Slovakia

With unemployment up horrifically and youth unemployment up to an even greater extent those without jobs must be as miserable as hell. Despite Miliband trying to pin the blame on the government everyone knows that if the last government had behaved with any sense and decency we would not be in the dreadful state we're in. Miliband is though right to question whether we are doing the right thing to solve the problems Labour caused. Osborne will have to look at taxes and regulations when preparing his Autumn Statement, including regulations imposed on us by the EU. It is time to reclaim our own country to get out of this mess which the EU will make worse if the proposed increase in the EU budget goes through. Taxes must be reduced to ensure we are all left with more in our pockets so that we can buy more and thereby improve the profits of the producers, encourage them to take on more staff and result in   more revenue for the government coffers. Increased revenues with a significant reduction in government spending will bring the deficit and debt levels down to manageable proportions. We especially need to get on with this in order to survive the euro crisis which is going to affect us all. We must not pay any more for bail outs whether to the EU or the IMF and if the stupid Germans, French and the rest wish to persist with the euro then we must insist that the Germans pay for it. There is nothing fair about insisting that the PIIGS bear all the pain when Germany was very glad to be in a monetary union with them thus enabling German exports to boom by selling its goods at a cheaper price in euros rather than at the more expensive deutschemark price. Slovakia seems to be the only country in the eurozone with not only the sense to see how the euro has failed and needs to be reformed but to have the guts to vote against the EU machine. Its vote will though be reversed as one of the coalition parties, having achieved its goal of a new general election, will now vote in favour of the bail out when the question is put again in a day or so. Such is politics. Cynicism is the politest way of describing it.    

Farming, Trees and the Wind

Spoke to a 'Farmer' today who believes in global warming but it seems he is a landowner who leases his land to 3 real farmers. He also owns a forest and wants to chop it down even though the trees are not yet ready to be harvested as he can earn more from farming the wind. He is having a little difficulty getting the necessary permissions although a wind farm company his helping him sort out his problem. He was a little upset when I told him that contrary to the lies we have been fed the science on global warming is not settled and that I was glad Osborne and the Treasury are taking a tougher line on emission levels. We will now only match the emission levels of the other EU countries and only when they reduce their levels. The 'Farmer' did say though that anyone who believed in global warming and other green/animal issues without any qualification was like a religious fanatic or fundamentalist and dangerous. It is not often that a ranter like me gets to agree with a believer in global warming. We also agreed that we must go hell for leather building nuclear power stations. In order to do this the obnoxious Huhne must be dropped. I wonder whether his views on global warming and other green issues make him a fundamentalist? Fox seems to be a bit of a fundamentalist as far as his relationship with Mr Werrity is concerned meeting him as he did some forty times but the Spectator this evening has a plausible explanation about how they were able to do so here. My bet is that Fox will keep his job.

Hubs Of All Kinds

Do we need a high speed train system (HS2) or should we spend less on a quality upgrade of the existing network? My inclination is that we need the latter. Do we need a new airport or will Heathwick suffice so long as Gatwick gets a second runway. A second runway at Gatwick has been mooted several times in the past only to have been turned down. What will make the result different if proposed again? I  must say I like Boris's proposal of a new hub airport in the Thames Estuary instead - see his article in today's Telegraph here. It has all the pizzazz to tickle the imagination a big project of this kind should generate and will attract a huge number of supporters. It will be something we can be proud of and can be built for the most part with private money and any which needs to be spent out of taxes can come from money saved from not building HS2. The rest of the money saved on not building HS2 can be used to ensure Dover carries out the building of its second terminal so that it can remain the busiest European  shipping hub rather than losing business to Calais. Dover and the Kent coast is generally run down and seedy and expanding the port will give a significant and much needed boost to the local economy. Who knows the powers that be may then be persuaded to upgrade the A21 to something approaching a proper road. How are ambulances going to get through the traffic to the new Pembury hospital without upgrading the road which often has 15/30 minute jams in that area? This is a question which frightens me.

The Housewife's Squeezed Purse

I have great respect for Ruth Lea. She was a highly successful Director General of the Centre for Policy Studies and wrote a number of excellent treatises on the economy. She has written a blog for ConservativeHome today here which sets out a defence of the Bank of England's latest round of QE. It is the first defence of QE that I have seen and for the sake of the country I hope she is correct although my instinct is that she is wrong. Janet Daley has also written about the economy today in the Telegraph here in which she maintains that a reduction in the cost of living will encourage housewives to open their purses which will then result in more trade and greater economic growth to the benefit of us all. Janet Daley makes a number of suggestions for swelling the nation's purses including reducing the cost of heating and energy to cutting taxes. We are told to expect some big, controversial announcements from Osborne in his Autumn Statement and hopefully he will flesh out what he has said about green taxes. Delaying the whole green programme including green taxes will certainly help with the cost of living and leave more in our purses so that wee can spend more.

Midnight in Paris

Misery following the French win over England in the Rugby World Cup this morning and then joy seeing Midnight in Paris this afternoon. Schizophrenia? Midnight in Paris is one of Woody Allen's best films or at least one of those I have enjoyed the most. His two most disappointing films were the London ones because in my view he never quite captured the subtlety of English humour and the way class works. His view of class was of a pre '60s stereotype. Anyway I enjoyed watching Midnight in Paris infinitely more than the England/France game. As always in a Woody Allen film the acting was a joy to watch, even Carla Bruni did her bits well. A pity that her husband has been such a disappointing President, shown up particularly badly by the euro crisis where instead of leadership he has shown cowardice. He should have  taken France out of the euro together with the rest of the Latin countries or alternatively he should have insisted Germany and the northern states leave to set up their own monetary union. As it is the global economy is heading for the disaster that even Mervyn King sees looming down the track with the rest of us on the sidelines looking at a slow motion train crash. Will we never learn that what sounds too good to be true always is? The EU in theory sounded like a good idea but it has turned out to be exactly as the sages predicted. The euro to many, many people sounded like a bad idea but to the idealistic dreamers who believe in central planning it was always going to work because they had the will, if not the solution, to make it work. However the dreamers try to resuscitate it the euro is dead or soon will be. Pretension is giving way to reality as it always has to.    

Grrr.

I hate to say it but I am deeply disappointed, nay angry, that a Conservative Chancellor can have given the go ahead for more quantitative easing. The QE that has already taken place has done nothing to encourage growth. Indeed the reverse as it has brought inflation in its wake and thus has made goods more expensive, led to diminished sales and slowed the economy. Already Mervyn King is somewhat of an iffy economist having been one of those opposed to Mrs Thatcher's economic medicine all those years ago and been proved comprehensively wrong. Osborne should have stood up to him and the other members of the Committee which still has on it members chosen by Brown. There will be no bright dawn now and if the opposition were not so discredited themselves there would be no likelihood of a Conservative victory at the next election. The Tories will be seen as having got their economic policy massively wrong and voters will wonder which of the parties is the bigger disaster on this vital issue. Until this moment there would have been no doubt that they would have viewed Labour as economic illiterates but now they will have to choose which is the lesser illiterate of the two main parties. Up until this moment I was quietly pleased with the way the Conservatives in government were behaving and indeed on schools, welfare, the Home Office issues, foreign affairs, planning and defence they are still doing well. It is on the economy, health, climate change and the EU where they are going sadly wrong. Oh yes and on privatising the Forestry Commission. Grrr.  

Like Henry's Speech before Agincourt?

I did not watch or listen to Cameron's speech but read it instead as I had done with Osborne's speech. It was a well crafted speech and its emphasis on leadership could equally have been on character. To me "overcoming challenge, confounding the sceptics, reinventing ourselves" is about character. This is what will be needed in the months ahead and in particular to control the flow of idiotic directives flowing out of Brussels of the kind Cameron referred to and will not be done without renegotiating our relationship with that institution which is the antithesis of the country Cameron wants Britain to be and a huge brake on our development. Cameron was right to refer to the need for fast transport and broadband but what is he going to do about airports and about the challenge to Dover by Calais? The other grouse I have is Cameron's seeming total acceptance of the green agenda. Scepticism is sometimes a conservative virtue particularly when those pushing their own agendas tell you things like 'the science is settled'. A sure sign that those who say those kind of things are trying to pull the wool over your eyes. The science is not settled any more than it's certain I can play a par round of golf. Nor can I accept that we should be spending more and more on the NHS year in and year out. The NHS is hopelessly overstaffed, bureaucratic, wasteful and thus far too expensive. If we are to be stuck with the existing NHS structure then we should at least make a determined effort to make it more efficient and drive down costs by introducing real competition and use the savings in part to reduce what the taxpayers pump into it and in part to fund new equipment. For example I understand that in France and Holland they are able to pick up cancerous polyps when they are at a size that our scanning machines are unable to identify. Possibly this is more to do with the radiated molecules injected into the patient than the scanning machinery? Cameron's speech was otherwise a great success and entirely suitable for these dangerous times. A bit of Henry's speech before Agincourt.        

Service and the NHS

My wife had a mammogram today at a large London hospital. Needless to say when she arrived and wanted to ask directions from reception the receptionist was too busy talking to a friend of his about his weekend to deal with her and became somewhat shirty with her when she tried to interrupt. She had to wait until he'd finished his conversation before he deigned to tell her where to go. Furthermore on arrival at the mammogram reception when she asked how long the wait would be before her turn the nurse or whoever told she would have to wait as long as it took. So much for the NHS which is supposed to be so wonderful. It isn't wonderful since the vast majority who work in it have a vested interest in it remaining as it is. A place for them rather than for the patients. Monopolies are all the same be they government or privately owned. The NHS would improve significantly if it were subjected to real competition but that is never going to happen for ideological rather than any other reason. Any change to the NHS will always be resisted in case the cosy vested interests have to change their ways to provide a proper service. This must surely be recognised by the mainstream media (apart of course from the BBC which is a monopoly too) but why do they always scream when even the minimalist changes the government wishes to introduce are discussed? One has to rely on blogs and specialist journals like the Spectator to get a more reasoned view. The end does not justify the means and so what a pity those opposed to any reform misrepresent the benefits that change can bring.  

Osborne's Speech

I did not watch or hear Osborne's speech but I read it and it reads well. Whether credit easing for small and medium size businesses will work remains to be seen and there are some who fear it risks devolving into a crisis like the sub-prime loans crisis. The details will not be announced until late November so we will not know until then how risky the idea might be. Osborne made clear that he does not believe in tax cuts at this time since it would involve increasing borrowing to make up the lost revenue. I do not agree with this since there are plenty of funds waiting to be invested in business but which are being accumulated instead because of the current economic uncertainties. A tax reduction would leave more money in the pockets of taxpayers, give them confidence to spend part of it and thereby increase trade thus giving more confidence to investors to put at least part of their accumulated funds into businesses. Instead we have a freeze on council tax worth £72 which is a little disappointing although in these hard economic times is better than nothing. Osborne's views on quantitative easing and global warming remain very worrying since one is an inflation booster (making the cost of living worse) and the other is based on unproven science (best postponed altogether until we have scientific certainty). Osborne did though announce a review of our climate change policies to ensure we cut our carbon emissions no faster and no slower than other EU countries and I suppose we have to give thanks for the smallest of mercies.

The Cost of Building

I do not know if it's true but I was told this afternoon that one reason why new house builds have been so disappointing in recent years is because Prescott introduced a requirement that a significant percentage of new housing developments had to be for affordable housing and that the housing associations to whom the affordable housing was to be transferred had to be sold at a significant discount to market price. This apparently has so skewed the economics of developing a site that, in the present financial state we find ourselves in, many developers are not prepared to risk their financial future by carrying out a development, particularly on brown field sites which can be expensive to prepare for building. It is thought however that developers will be likely to take the risk of carrying out a development on a green field site once the changes to the planning laws proposed by the government have gone through as the cost of acquiring and preparing a green field site for development is often significantly less than the cost of buying and preparing a brown field site. If this is so and in order to encourage further house building on brown field sites why doesn't the government change Prescott's policy so that the cost of building on brown field sites is made sufficiently profitable to attract the developers? The government could at the same time make building on green field sites more expensive and thereby mollify its opponents to its plan to make our planning laws less prescriptive. Perhaps the government already have changes to Prescott's regulation in mind. I do hope so. The government did not change the planning permission though for the tower being built near Vauxhall Bridge (known locally I'm told as Prescott's Prick) and reduce its height to something more reasonable. I suppose we have to be thankful that it had already been reduced from 63 floors to 50 but once built it will alter London's skyline as will the other towers for which permission to build cannot now be refused. The huge site in and around Nine Elms Lane and now being prepared for development will no doubt contain many tall buildings.  

Growing Pains

Frankly does it matter whether or not Louise Mensch has had a face lift? Does it really matter to us that Michael Jackson's doctor is on trial for involuntary manslaughter? It beggars belief though that the Guardian would think we would be interested in Louise Mensch's face, attractive though it is, or in Sky's continuous coverage of the Michael Jackson's doctor's trial. What matters much more is the economy and whether or not Andrew Tyrie is right in calling for tax cuts. We are told that you can't have tax cuts and reduce borrowing but you could if you cut faster and deeper. The talk of increased borrowing following on as night follows day from tax cuts is a bit of red herring. The whole point of tax cuts is to leave people wealthier and feeling better off. People feeling better off will likely feel like spending more and people spending more must improve our GDP. I think Tyrie is right and that we should cut taxes to encourage growth. Osborne has said he is not for turning but is also reported as saying that he is prepared to be flexible. Seems to me to be a slight contradiction in terms. ConservativeHome have been running a poll  which indicates that 41.6% of those polled believe that the cuts should be faster and deeper. Sadly it seems unlikely that Osborne will take much notice of the poll. Fiddling around with the length of time before which you can take your boss to a tribunal, though welcome, is not going to help growth by much. Nor is a further bout of quantitative easing which will bring with it a real risk of high inflation. Reducing the minimum wage might help but again this is fiddling at the edges and is not on offer anyway.