Blog Code of Practice

To gain post rights and contribute to the LPUK members' blog please send an email to blogger@lpuk.org quoting your full name and membership number.

In addition to contribute to the blog you must follow the code of practice set out below.

Code of Practice

1. Posts must not contain swear words

2. The basis of a post must not be a personal attack

3. A Member must not publish more than three posts in a day

4. Posts must focus on UK politics or Libertarian issues

Consequences

Members who break these rules will be given one warning by the blog admin. If they persist their post rights will be removed for a period of three months after which they can re-apply for their post rights.

Negligence enshrined in Law (if you are the State)

Debbie Purdy won, and I am pleased there is going to be some clarification in the Law from the DPP

BUT

Andre Power lost

I lost! Mr Justice Blair agreed with the defendants that the case should be dismissed because agents/servants of the Crown who are negligent in their duties are not liable in law, so they can do what they like and we have no recourse. Does anyone see the bitter irony in this? The Ministry of Justice at The Royal Courts of Justice won by arguing that Justice should not apply to the select elite who work for them

We officially now have a two tier legal system one for the righteous and one for the rest of us. The Crown can sue ABC Ltd or Joe Bloggs but ABC Ltd or Joe Bloggs cannot sue the Crown for negligence.

The irony of it being another Blair who made this decision.

The Law

Today Debbie Purdy is awaiting for a decision from the Law Lords on whether her partner would be prosecuted when she decides to end her life when it becomes intolerable.

For all the moralising by the Church and the State, Debbie Purdy's Life is her own, it does not belong to the State or the Established Church. For her partner to be with her on her final journey to Switzerland, is surely not a crime but an act of compassion and love.

Today Andre Power is in the High Court, when Treasury Solicitors will argue that the Civil Service is not responsible in Law for the negligence and incompetence of its employees. Two tier legal system will come in today if he loses as it will enshrine in Law that you cannot sue the State for incompetence.

Politics.co.uk is running with this story has the lead today. However you heard it first here folks

The Police have finally realised that they are fighting a losing battle against the drug culture, as did the prohibitionists did in pre war America.

The Law is something very few of us want to get involved in, because ninety five per cent of us cannot 'afford' Justice. However the Law is imposed on us and has a direct influence on the way we live our lives. Unless we can all economically insure ourselves against prosecution. The battle between the State and the individual will be lost.

UPDATE Corby Borough Council has been found to be be negligent in the way they disposed of toxic waste from a disused Steel Works, so why do the treasury solicitors think they are above the Law ?

Blog Update

The NCC has decided, due to certain problems with the blog recently, to remove post rights on the blog to all non-NCC Party members. This is for only a short period while we draw up a code of practice for the blog.

Once this is done we will allow members to re-apply for their post rights.

If you have any questions about this please feel free to contact the blog admin at robert.waller@lpuk.org.

Marxism of the Right

Interesting post by Julian over at Liberal Vision today pointing to a conservative attack on libertarianism.

Supposedly we're all right wing Marxist...

[L]ibertarianism is basically the Marxism of the Right. If Marxism is the delusion that one can run society purely on altruism and collectivism, then libertarianism is the mirror-image delusion that one can run it purely on selfishness and individualism. Society in fact requires both individualism and collectivism, both selfishness and altruism, to function. Like Marxism, libertarianism offers the fraudulent intellectual security of a complete a priori account of the political good without the effort of empirical investigation. Like Marxism, it aspires, overtly or covertly, to reduce social life to economics. And like Marxism, it has its historical myths and a genius for making its followers feel like an elect unbound by the moral rules of their society.

Interesting stuff even if it is nonsense. Provides a great insight into how true Conservatives view us.

Esther All The Way !

All you need is a millionaire and and be a celeb.

No policies needed, because we all love and admire her because we 'know' her from the Telly.

Thats Politics in the dumbed down celebrity 21st Britain.

Katie Price where are you ?

Peter Schiff for Senate

There's been a lot of negativity around here lately so I thought I'd share something positive from across the pond.

Libertarians are beginning to make their mark in America and there is no reason why we can't make ours here.

It will take time and a lot of hard work but if we keep banging away we'll get there eventually.

Curious?

Via Thomas Byrne, I find this nasty bit of gutter politics:



It looks really unpleasant, and it looks right out of the Damian McBride playbook. And I think lots of people are all to happy to believe the worst of the Labour Party.

But I don't believe Tom made any such post.

Tom is a Labour man through and through and I'm sure he would gladly knife the Libertarians for the hell of it, but I can't see him using language like that in public. I think he's too smart. I also can't find the original quote on the Lancaster Unity website and some light googling hasn't shown it up anywhere else either. And finally, the template for the comments doesn't match the template Lancaster Unity use either.

I reckon it's a fake, designed by someone to try and stir up animosity and name-calling. So, in order to keep the perpetrator happy, I have a name to call the perpetrator: you're scum.

Originally swearblogged here.

Compassion is much overrated

When politicians announce that they are compassionate I reach for my wallet because I know that I shall be parted from even more of my hard-earned cash. I also know that a politician's compassion usually means more power for the state, for our elected dictators (though not legislators) and for the unelected regulators.

Helen has it nailed.

The Little man breaks an Airline Company

They broke his Guitar


He's made their share price fall to cost the company millions of dollars

He got nowhere with their policies

Now hes a worldwide phenomenon in just two weeks since releasing the song.

Take heed If he can do it So can we.

We have sown the seeds, Our sapling is still invisible besides the trees of Statism in this country.

We need to feed miracle-gro to this sapling

Watch this...

Watch all 5 parts.

LPUK Fail

Oh boy. This post isn't going to make me any friends. I suppose that's one of the many benefits of being unpopular. You have nothing to lose.

It does seem a great many have missed the point of my earlier post. The first point was that UKIP did not achieve anything of note even after years in the game and so it's entirely unrealistic to expect anything of LPUK at this point. It accomplished little and no-one expected it to either. Least of all me.

The second point being that the Tories are likely to seize power with only a minor fraction of the electorate behind it. This is no attempt to spin the result. I appreciate what one of our members has pointed out...

I hear what you're saying, but if you use your formula to discuss the LPUK's democratic popularity, then you reduce us to the size of an ant on Mount Kilimanjaro.

That is undeniably true but that does not make the point any less worth making and if readers can get over their parochial navel gazing for one moment, they may realise the significance of it. The point being that we are looking at a collapse of democratic consent for government. When one party of little merit, with no concrete ideological roots, with no idea of what it will do with power when it gets it, can walk into government with only a tiny fraction of the electorate voting for it, with no effective opposition, it is a crisis of democracy.

This goes far beyond the petty exploits of a minority party which is going nowhere fast. By the time LPUK gets even half the votes that UKIP does it will be game over. The erosion of democracy is accelerating to the point where even if UKIP won several seats it would be of zero significance. Therefore the party needs to think very seriously about what it can achieve and a strategy for doing it. The party needs to change something in the world so it can be recognised as a force in politics. Wasting vast money on by-elections is a poor use of resources as we have seen. We need more bang for our buck.

You dont have to be in power to make a difference. I have some ideas which have been so far ignored. I will raise them again soon.

Also, what is lacking is a single campaign issue to claim as its' own that chimes with the electorate. Elections are fought on issues not ideologies. Voters tend to vote when they're pissed off and when they think something will change. I certainly haven't seen any keynote distinguishing policy that taps into the public mood. If you want an anti-immigration party, you have the BNP, if you want an anti-EU party you have UKIP. What is the LPUK handle? Civil liberties? Pah!! Way down the list with the electorate.

And even if LPUK got a grip, while the other minnow parties may boast moderate successes they are still pitiful and for all the apparent success of UKIP they have accomplished nothing other than to make a handful of people quite wealthy indeed. UKIP may have tilted general election victories even further away from the Tories but how did that help? The hope was that the Tories would eventually see the light and change their policies but they have not. They have merely counted on the gradual erosion of public will so that eventually the pool of voters will be so small that they can win with media support and the dumbest of the dumb voting on brands and styling.

That Chloe Smith is a dull careerist appointee to Norwich North is symptomatic of this. She offered no opinions, no solutions and no substance whatsoever. We are seeing a party machine at work appointing dumb and malleable, vaguely telegenic girlies of both sexes with zero life experience and zero experience of running anything. That this isn't open to full frontal attack is absurd. But then it wouldn't be when we're pushing an 18 year old boy would it? No offence Thomas. Either we push strong characters who make a real difference in the community they live in or we shouldn't bother. I can think of better ways to spend the money.

We need to answer the question; What can we do in the time we have left as a democratic nation that will be worth the effort? This ain't no time for self-delusions of any kind.

As a final thought, I move that this blog be terminated or at least heavily edited. I was instructed to keep my blogs to myself unless they were about Norwich North. Those of you who bothered to read my posts will know I did make an effort in this regard but was asked to slow down and had some quite lengthy posts deleted. I therefore gave all you members a free reign to do as you like and what did we see in the final week? Nuff said. Interesting how we find such eloquence and writing finesse in the comments when it comes to having a go at the party (and me for that matter) but not when it comes to contributing to the blog.

Anyway, that's my tuppence ha'penny. Make of it what you will. I've got a website to go and write. So have you for that matter.

Number crunching

411. That's how many votes UKIP got in the 1997 Wirral South by-election. That was after four years of operation. Even in 2000 at the Tottenham by-election UKIP scored a meagre 136. Make of that what you will. What is interesting is that while the dull careerist Chloe Smith may have polled 39% of the votes cast, she did not even inspire 19% of the electorate to vote for her. She therefore has no popular mandate whatsoever. To say that another way, 81% of people in Norwich North did not vote for her. That's really saying something.

Norwich North By Election

Was this a poor result for us- yes it was, but everybody lost bar Chloe Smith, and even she cannot go to take her seat until October.

Did all of the parties have equal access to the media, no they did not, sorry as I am to say this the Monsters have a far higher ‘profile’ than the LPUK.

Was Norwich the best place for us to campaign, absolutely not, we had two members in Norfolk at the beginning of the campaign, we now have twenty four and at least thirty six people who now understand the difference between Liberalism and Social Democracy.

This campaign was not about politics, it was about the need to tell Labour that their time is up. The result showed that. This was not a ringing endorsement of the Conservatives, but certainly showed the depth of loathing of the Darien Labour Party.

Do we give up and wring our hands, no we do not, however bad this result was, Tom was a good performer when he was allowed near a microphone despite his years, it gave our activists a chance to engage with the public, some travelling as far afield as Cornwall.

This afternoon a former Lib Dem Councillor has rung me to say that he is resigning from the Lib Dems and is joining the LPUK, as he sees that in this two and a half party State, he can no longer get the 'half' to accept classic Liberal principles

At the end of the day a High tax, High Spending, Centralising, Authoritarian Party won the day. So not much has changed.

Andrew Withers LPUK Chairman

The Benefits Of Having An Elected Chief Constable

US enforcement agents on Thursday arrested dozens of politicians and rabbis in an anti-corruption sweep alleging money laundering, extortion, bribery and even trafficking in human organs. The stunning New Jersey swoop netted 44 people across a state long seen as one of the most corrupt and crime-ridden in the country.

Five rabbis were among the suspects, along with the mayors of the cities of Hoboken, Secaucus and Ridgefield, the Jersey City deputy mayor and council president, two state assembly members, and numerous other politicians, prosecutors said. Acting US Attorney Ralph Marra told a press conference the arrests demonstrated "the pervasive nature of public corruption in this state." The money laundering ring allegedly stretched from New Jersey and New York to Israel and Switzerland, while US politicians easily exploited loopholes in state law to disguise bribes as contributions in bitterly fought campaigns. "The politicians willingly put themselves up for sale," said Marra, while "clergymen cloak their extensive criminal activity behind a facade of rectitude."

Although New Jersey is more famous for a history of Italian Mafia families, it was Jewish clergy who allegedly played a central role in this crime network. The Department of Justice said in a statement that the international network "laundered at least tens of millions of dollars through charitable, non-profit entities controlled by rabbis in New York and New Jersey." The bribe-taking meanwhile was connected to fund raising efforts in "heavily contested mayoral and city council campaigns in Jersey City and Hoboken."

Authorities raided several synagogues and among those arrested was the chief rabbi of Syrian Jews in the United States. One rabbi, Levy Izhak Rosenbaum, was also charged with conspiring to broker the sale of a human kidney for transplant. Marra said that Rosenbaum's "business was to entice vulnerable people to give up a kidney for 10,000 dollars which he would turn around and sell for 160,000 dollars." He'd allegedly been peddling kidneys for a decade. Raids began shortly after dawn, officials said, targeting a who's who of state leaders.

Television footage showed FBI and tax agents bringing a stream of handcuffed suspects, including rabbis wearing traditional Orthodox Jewish garb, into custody in the city of Newark. Other suspects were shown being put onto a bus. The operation was believed to be one of the biggest such actions ever in a state deeply associated with organized crime, and famous as the setting of the hit Mafia television drama the "Sopranos." Officials said the arrests were part of an ongoing 10-year probe into statewide corruption code-named "Bid Rig."

If found guilty, suspects face prison sentences of up to 20 years for political extortion and money laundering, 10 years for offering bribes to officials, and five years for conspiring to transport human organs. Democratic State Governor Jon Corzine said "the scale of corruption we're seeing as this unfolds is simply outrageous and cannot be tolerated." "Any corruption is unacceptable -- anywhere, anytime, by anybody," he said in a statement. The dramatic crackdown came as Chris Christie, a crusading former US attorney, stepped up his campaign against Corzine in an election this November. Christie, a Republican, previously won fame for his relentless and successful prosecution of political corruption in New Jersey. Corzine is battling widespread dissatisfaction with his performance as the state reels from the national recession, spending cuts, and shorter working weeks for state employees.

FBI agent Weysan Dun was quick to deny any political motivation behind the arrests, a majority of which appeared to involve Democrats, rather than Republicans. "This investigation has transcended multiple administrations of both political parties," he said. This is "not about politics, certainly not about religion. It is about crime. It is about criminals who use politics and religion."


Cross posted from Anna Racoon

This would just not happen here as Cash for Peerages showed, as the MP's expenses showed. Policing is done by patronage. Each Chief Constable should be directly elected and accountable to his area, not appointed by a Home Secretary who has difficulty in knowing where they live and have never managed anything larger than a classroom full of kids.

The Scales of Justice Are About To Tip In Favour Of The State

One of the most significant hearings of recent times is passing by unheralded on July 30th at The Royal Courts of Justice and it is one that will ultimately affect every private citizen in the UK if it is found in favour of the Defendants, being The Ministry of Justice, represented by the Treasury Solicitors.

Andre Power, the Plaintiff, had a County Court Judgement emplaced on him for £254,000 by mistake via Her Majesty’s Court Service. Mr. Power was unaware of this for thirteen months whilst seeking funding for his company to launch a business, four years in the creation and with investment by the principals of over £400,000. Unfortunately, as HMCS failed to advise Mr. Power that a CCJ for £254,000 showing unpaid was now registered against his name on public credit files such as “Experian”, he/the company failed to raise any funding, despite the company having no indebtedness whatsoever, save for a £15,000 bank loan, which was paid up to date at that time.

A Circuit Judge has ruled that the CCJ should never have been emplaced on Mr. Power’s name and it has been removed, after showing on credit files for thirteen months. Mr, Power has had four separate apologies and clear admissions of negligence from HMCS in correspondence thereafter. However, they declined to pay any compensation on the basis of spurious and unfounded allegations that there must have been further debts (though not specified) which prevented the company from being funded. Therefore, Mr. Power started a legal action for compensation.

Included in his submissions were letters from noted funding groups stating that they would decline any such funding requests where due diligence revealed the Managing Director of the company had an unpaid CCJ registered on his name for £254,000. However, none of this has been argued before a Judge as yet. The first hearing was on 6th March 2009 before a Master Foster. The Defendants asked that the case be struck off based on an alleged precedent. Mr. Power received the “skeleton argument” for this action some five minutes before entering the Court. In a previous court case a man who was given two years and three months imprisonment after being found guilty, was accidentally sentenced to two years and six months. As some of the sentence was due to run concurrently, a mistake had been made in the totting up of the sentence and he served an extra three months. At some point, (presumably after completing his sentence) despite himself, his legal representatives, the Judge and the court staff, all missing the original error, he sued for the compensation for the loss of three months liberty.

The Judge upheld the Defence’s claim that a civil servant who makes a mistake whilst discharging the normal duties of his job cannot be liable in law for such a mistake and therefore found against the Plaintiff. This same precedent was therefore represented to Master Foster as the reason Mr. Power’s claim should be struck off. And Master Foster allowed this flimsy reasoning to stand and found in favour of the Defendant’s, although immediately granting Mr. Power the Right to Appeal.

This appeal is to be heard on July 30th.

Mr. Power will argue that the precedent cited bears no resemblance or comparison to his case. Firstly, he was not guilty of any offence in the first place, as proofed by a Circuit Judge ruling that the CCJ was wrongly emplaced on his name in the first place. Secondly, Mr. Power was never advised of the CCJ so unlike the chap cited in the precedent who was present when he was found guilty and sentenced, he had no opportunity to redress the situation.

Thirdly, the Treasury Solicitor’s argument that a civil servant who makes a mistake whilst going about his job cannot be declared negligent is also being contested by Mr. Power. He maintains that it was precisely because civil servant/s (unknown to this day) were NOT doing their job properly in the first place that this situation arose. If they had been discharging their duties, for which they are paid from the public purse, then this circumstance could never have occurred.

If this precedent is allowed to stand, thus preventing Mr. Power from ever seeking compensation before a Judge in an open court then a dangerous and unsettling precedent is in place that would have shocking repercussions for every private citizen in the UK. It would mean any civil/public servant and/or offices of the civil service could commit any act of wilful negligence without fear of legal action and with absolute impunity.

You are already aware of the growing disparity between private business and public employ. We pay the taxes for civil servants wages and pensions. Indeed our pensions have collapsed whilst theirs have been growing. We work under an ever burgeoning set of directorial responsibilities, red tape and laws that prevent us from ever running our businesses in such a cavalier fashion. And of course we have no such protection in law from claims against us resulting from the negligent actions of our staff and ourselves if they are proofed to have negligently impacted on any of our fellow citizens.

We work longer hours and enjoy significantly less absence from work due to sickness, holiday time and sundry days off. If this precedent is allowed to stand it will mean a new two tier society has been created, effectively an act of apartheid, legislated via the highest court in the land. It will mean that all the millions of civil/public servants will be working under a completely different circumstance to the army of self employed and private businesses who fund their existence. The only examples of such civil service power over the people can be found in communist, fascist and totalitarian regimes. They have never been implemented in any state before that has declared itself to be a “democracy”.


The power of the individual will therefore be subsumed before the power of the State. No longer will we be able to sue any state body or its representatives. Indeed, they will be able to perform all manner of objectionable and dubious acts against the citizen without the citizen having any recourse in law. Would any taxpayer willingly pay taxes to support an unelected elite in the pursuit and maintenance of this goal? Therefore, if you wish to make a stand against the erosion of that most historic right, whereby both public and private citizens are held to be under the same principles of English law and jurisprudence, then I ask that this case be given as much prominence and publicity before it is too late and we are drawn into an “us and them” gulag mentality whereby the private individual no longer enjoys the same legal rights and privileges as the Government employee.
I received the above email this afternoon at the Libertarian Party Offices, and having spoken to Mr Power who has given me permission to publicise this case which could establish the legal precedent that no Civil Servant can be held accountable for his or her negligence.

For the first time, the ' rulers' will have enhanced legal protection from the consequences of their incompetence over us the 'ruled'. No more messy inquests into the shooting of unarmed electricians on the underground, no legal consequences for battering an innocent bystander at a demonstration so that he dies. You can now lose your life,your property and your wealth, and you will not be able to sue the State for redress.

In the dying days of this corrupt Parliament, the Treasury Solicitors are ging to argue that Civil Servants have no duty of care to the public and cannot be sued for negligence

If you wish to discuss this further please contact Andre Power anytime on 01702 389005.

Last Chance For Liberty

Tomorrow is the day, I have done my best over the past few weeks to convey the message of liberty to the people of Norwich North, however what I can do has now ended. The responsibility now passes to each and every voter in Norwich North, I urge you all to stand up and tell Labour, The Conservatives and the Lib Dems that we are sick of them taking and taking from the British people and never giving back. Enough is enough, tomorrow is your first chance to vote for the only party that will not take anything from you, be it your money or your liberties.

Perhaps you believe that one of the big three has changed and can be trusted with your vote, to this I say simply if you vote the same, you’ll get the same. The big three have dominated politics for generations and have constantly and consistently taken hard won liberties from the British people, many times they have claimed to have shifted position but they always remain parties of big state interference in everyday lives.

Vote Libertarian for real change. Vote Libertarian for honesty and open government. Vote Libertarian for your rights and liberties. Vote Libertarian simply to send the big three a message.

If you vote the same, you’ll get the same.

Thomas Burridge on Future Radio - Norwich

Future Radio Interview

Thomas was interviewed by Future Radio, the popular community radio in Norwich.

Thomas Burridge of the Libertarian Party talks to Tim MacWilliam about Libertarian Party policies and why to vote for him at the upcoming by-election.

The audio is available on the Future Radio website.

The man in the clouds

One of my favourites, was 'the man in the clouds'.

A tough-as-old-boots veteran of the Bosnian wars, he had lost a leg, and crushed his spine so badly that he wore a permanent corset. It made sitting in a wheelchair unbearable for him, and walking without one almost impossible.

He taught me a lot of what it meant to be dependant on carers. Broadened my education in a lot of ways.

When he was ready to come out of rehab, the social worker visited. The check sheet she had didn't allow for a lot of detail, so he went down as 'wheelchair dependant'. He was Welsh, that helped, spoke Welsh too, even better; the new assembly was just flexing its muscles, they had a fancy new apartment block for 'the disabled' - an amphorphous job lot as anyone who is not disabled knows. The boxes started to fill up merrily.

The check sheet went off to the Assembly and came back with an offer of a brand new apartment. Independance loomed once more. The ambulance delivered him to a concrete wasteland in South Wales. 4th floor to be precise. Ground floor was reserved for 'the ambulatory'.

He had spent months relearning how to make a cup of tea, and care for himself, so no carers. Just a lady who cleaned and shopped for him. Kindly soul, he told me, bit of a busybody, but 'there you go'.

'Would I like a cup of tea'?, he enquired. If I would, could I be so kind as to plug in the kettle for him? Mystified, I stared round the kitchen looking for the plug socket. Nowhere in sight. He giggled, and explained why he had asked me to do it - you had to be in a wheelchair to even see the socket. Perfectly designed for someone in a wheelchair - but hopeless for someone who wanted to walk as much as possible and couldn't 'bend in the middle'.

He showed me round the apartment, it took all of six seconds, you couldn't swing a rat in there. A huge metal contraption loomed over the single bed, a hoist for carers who needed to turn someone in the night. Perfect for someone to lumber into who wasn't too steady on their determined feet. Single bed too - the disabled never share their bed of course. Everyone knows that.

There was a TV, and a phone - on the wall, by the door........

I asked what he did all day, and the reply has stuck with me to this day - 'I watch the clouds'..........

Some charity, I forget which, turned up every alternate Thursday, and took him out for the day. It was the time of the demise of the Millennium Dome, and he had me rolling on the floor laughing at his description of the job lot of tickets 'for the disabled' that had been given to the charity in order to 'up' the attendance figure at the Dome. some of the recipients were so powerfully disabled, that it had taken until 4pm to get everybody and their carers 'loaded up' and down to London - by which time there was only time to have a quick cup of foul tea, and a wheelie round the entrance lobby and it was time to return to Wales....for the carers went off duty at 10pm. On balance, he preferred the fortnightly trip to the local Garden Centre, at least he had time to drink his coffee whilst the carers bought their gardening supplies.

He may be reading this, my friend, 'the man in the clouds', for I made sure that he had a computer delivered, so he could at least 'talk' to the rest of the world. Perhaps it was to save my own embarassemnt - for he had had one more task to ask of me - all I can say is, if you haven't gone shopping for 'Gay' Porn around the late night garages of South Wales as a middle aged woman, then you really haven't lived - seems the busy body cleaner had thrown his 'collection' out!

I was thinking of him this morning, when I read of this campaign.

A disabled punk band has launched a campaign to fight for the rights of disabled people to be able to party late. Their campaign, "Stay Up Late," encourages carers to support disabled people who want to stay out past 10pm. "We started the campaign because we'd be playing a gig and something strange happens at 9pm when people would start to go home. We were also frustrated with asking to go on earlier in the evening so that our fans would still be there. It's not very punk to go on at 8.30pm."

As Libertarians, we rant and rave about petty legal restrictions on our lives. It is easy to forget that some people live with the most minute control of their lives - those who cannot vote with their feet, cannot do anything that their 'person in charge' doesn't want to do.

Please support this campaign. 'Heavy Load', the rock group involved, have a web page HERE - and they have also set up a seperate web site for the campaign - HERE. Or you can join their facebook group HERE.

As ye go to the electorate...

Norwich is soon to be bothered with one of Mr Browns "eco-towns" which will not be "eco" nor a "town" for that matter. I was going to write a suitably harsh appraisal but Simon Jenkins in Teh Grauniad has done it for me. And a good job he's done of it.

LPUK in No 2 Slot

The postal ballots are out

LPUK Leader to visit Norwich North

Wednesday 15th July 17:30

Libertarian Party leader - Ian Parker-Joseph, colloquially known as IanPJ, will be visiting Norwich North on Thursday through to Sunday morning to help bolster the Libertarian Party campaign of candidate Thomas Burridge.

Mr Parker-Joseph said of the campaign:

"We are pleased with the way things have been developing in this campaign so far. Support has been coming in from far and wide, with LPUK activists arriving last weekend from all over the country to help Thomas in Norwich City centre and elsewhere in the constituency. Thomas has attracted a good deal of media attention, has spent a lot of time talking with potential voters about their concerns and issues, and helping them to understand how the Libertarian Party would deliver honest, people first policies in parliament".

He went on to say: "Giving people back their everyday lives free from government interference and intrusion, lower overall taxation, scrapping IHT and CGT to help pensioners, reducing corporation tax to stimulate more companies to expand and create new jobs, reform of the NHS to make Hospitals and clinics as effecient and cost effective as private hospitals, reform of the education sector to put the parents firmly in control of exactly how, where and when their children are educated, putting the local people back in charge of their local services by removing the corporate entanglements with government and curtailing the powers of the RDA's are all Libertarian Party policies that have been well received by the voters of Norwich North"

Having IanPJ's experience to hand will raise the game in this important first parliamentary election outing for the Libertarian Party.

Andrew Withers Party Chairman visited Norwich last week to meet local Party members and put the final touches to the local leaflet campaign

Rob Waller the LPUK South East Regional organiser spent Saturday with volunteers from London and the South East giving out leaflets and talking to shoppers in the city centre. Sarah McCartney the South West Regional organiser has travelled all the way from Calstock in Cornwall to support the by election.


ENDS

For more information, or to arrange an interview, contact the Libertarian Party Norwich North Campaign Office on 01603 850573 or the media enquiries mobile on 07505 228618.

Further details are available on our campaign website: http://www.thomasburridge.com
Alternatively, visit the Libertarian Party website: http://www.lpuk.org

Brown lies about helicopter procurement.

The Daily Politics has the (somewhat foul-mouthed) story.

The acquisition of military equipment should never, repeat NEVER, be a jobs programme. How many times do we need to learn that particular lesson? The aircraft carriers we need like a hole in the f**king head, but which are being built, conveniently, in Gordon Brown’s backyard being another such disgraceful example.

Peelian Principles Fail

Treating this with caution with it being from the Daily Mail, but Peelian Principles 2 and 3 are looking very shaky indeed...

• The ability of the police to perform their duties is dependent upon the public approval of police actions.
• Police must secure the willing co-operation of the public in voluntary observation of the law to be able to secure and maintain the respect of the public.

Fail.

Shady dealings

Does anyone remember Air America?

Air America is a 1990 film starring Mel Gibson and Robert Downey Jr. as Air America pilots, during the Vietnam War, flying missions in Laos. The plot is adapted from Christopher Robbins' 1979 non-fiction book, chronicling the CIA financed "civillian" airline during the Vietnam War to transport weapons and supplies (and heroin) within Laos and other areas of Indochina subsequent to the North Vietnamese invasion of Laos.

Well, it seems we have our very own sub-contracted version in Afghanistan...

Defence secretary Bob Ainsworth, it seems, has been rather less than frank about the availability of helicopter support for "Our Boys" in Afghanistan – but in a rather unusual way. There was one more helicopter available to deliver supplies than he was admitting.

The downside of this intriguing piece of news, however, might just explain his reticence. The additional machine was leased via Nato, operated by a Moldovan charter company, Pecotox Air, which has been banned from EU airspace for safety reasons and which has been implicated in arms trafficking.

These embarrassing details would not have emerged but for the unfortunate incident yesterday when it was reported the helicopter, a giant Mi-26T, registration ER-MCV (pictured above), was shot down by the Taleban a mile from the British military base in Sangin.

Misleadingly, the AP report (link above) cited the Moldovan operator claiming that the aircraft had been "ferrying humanitarian aid" when the crash took place, a detail quickly corrected by Reuters which had Western forces confirming that the helicopter had been "bringing supplies to a British base at Sangin." According to the Los Angeles Times, it was contracted specifically to supply British forces.

Read the whole thing. Dr Richard North is following the story on Defence of the Realm. Apparently the print media have been subject to "D notices" preventing them from releasing the details. Bloggers, on the other hand, have no such restrictions. Stay tuned.

European Unity

EU parliament gets a new head - does anyone care? asks Darren Ennis of Reuters.

Let's see... Daily Referendum... PMQ's, EU Referendum... Helicopters in Afghanistan, Iain Fale... nothing of any consequence (as usual). In fact the only blog so far giving it the light of day is Tory Diary. Proof indeed that nobody gives a rats ass.

At last the nation is united on Europe! We're all bored to death by it.

Joined up thinking...

A hockey club left homeless when a popular sports club closed could have a new base in Norwich, thanks to a £1m plan to put two full-size synthetic pitches on a high school playing field.

...

Two Norwich police beat bases could be closed and replaced with a “state-of-the-art” station on a chunk of a city high school's playing field.

Aaaaaaaalrighty then.

No activity untouched by the dead hand of the state

Norwich door staff arrested in police clampdown...

Police have arrested two people after an operation to clampdown on rouge door staff operating in Norfolk's main nightclub district. The force carried out Operation Clyno during the Lord Mayor's Procession in Norwich on Saturday. They visited 11 venues, mainly pubs, to check door staff had proper licences. "Reputable" security firms today welcomed the checks.

I'll bet they do. So instead of being able to hire people you know and trust, you now have to get your door staff from expensive agencies who are just as likely to be clueless, knuckle dragging thugs. But licenced knuckle dragging thugs of course.

So much for localism...

Following on from our earlier piece, the people of East Anglia have this to look forward to.

FAULTY wind turbines in a Northumberland beauty spot could be taken down after they stopped working. The three giant structures at Kirkheaton, North of Hexham, were put up almost 10 years ago by EDF Energy but technical issues have meant that two of the turbines have had to have their blades removed, and haven’t been operational since last autumn. Planning conditions state that any individual turbine not working for more than six months should be removed and that part of the site restored.

...

Mr Worlock’s group is opposing Catamount Energy’s bid for six turbines at Barmoor.

The two other schemes being heard at the inquiry are Your Energy’s proposal for seven engines at Moorsyde and npower renewable’s scheme for seven at Toft Hill.

Elizabeth Dunn, for Your Energy, hit back at Mr Worlock’s claims, urging Mrs McKenzie to take a similar view to the inspector who approved a scheme at nearby Wandylaw. That inspector said there was no prospect of Northumberland meeting its 2010 target and that this increased the need for Wandylaw. Mrs Dunn said: "Northumberland is still a long way from meeting its targets and they are not caps or ceilings." Paul Tucker, for Northumberland County Council, told the session it would be better if the authority carried out an appraisal of the county and identified the best sites for wind farms. "Whatever those best sites are, they are not at Toft Hill, at Moorsyde or at Barmoor."

Mrs McKenzie told the inquiry that she would prepare a report on each of the three schemes to the secretary of state for communities and local government by the end of September or beginning of October.

The secretary of state will then consider the reports before making the final decision, probably in the new year.

Would this be "an inconvenient democracy"?

Which planet is he on?

The mayor of London, Boris Johnson, today faced calls to apologise for his "out of touch" comment that his £250,000 earnings for writing a weekly Telegraph column were "chicken feed". Begging the question... How big are his chickens?

Democracy? What democracy?

Controversial windfarms could be forced on East Anglian communities under new government plans which would ride roughshod over local objections.

Energy minister Ed Miliband, speaking ahead of the launch of tomorrow's Renewable Energy Strategy, said wind turbines had to go somewhere and it was the government's job to “persuade” opponents to accept them.

His comments come in the same week that the government is announcing a package of green initiatives including the long-awaited decision on eco-towns on Thursday, of which Rackheath, near Norwich, looks likely to be among those given the go-ahead.

Mr Miliband, who was at the launch of the biggest onshore windfarm in the south of England yesterday , at Romney Marsh, said Britain needs to diversify its energy sources in order to be less dependent on imported gas.

Except that we fill be forced to use gas and coal generation when the wind isn't blowing 75% of the time. According to Dr. Golby, Chairman of E.ON.

IanPJ speech to Parliamentary Conference on Global Economic meltdown

As Leader of the Libertarian Party UK, I had the pleasure yesterday (Monday 13th July) to spend the day at Westminster, attending as a speaker the Parliamentary Conference on Global Financial and Economic Meltdown.

This lively event, hosted by Lord Tarsem King of West Bromwich was held in Committee rooms 3 and 4a in the House of Lords, and was organised jointly by Global Vision 2000 and the Universal Peace Federation UK.

There were a variety of speakers at this conference, including:

Dr.Nafeez Ahmed : Director, Institute for Policy Research and Development
Anne Belsey: Monetary Reform Party
Canon Peter Challen:Chairman, Christian Council for Monetary Justice Justice
Kelvin Hopkins MP - Labour, Luton North
Ian Parker-Joseph Leader, Libertarian Party
Daud Pidcock: Global Vision 2000
David Triggs: Coalition for Economic Justice & Executive Chair, Henry George Foundation
Dr.Adrian Wrigley Systemic Fiscal Reform Group

The full text of the 10 minute speech given by myself is below, although much of the presentation was interspersed with ad hoc examples and comments,the Monetary Reform solution was presented in the Q&A session due to time constraints.

At no time in history has any individual had such a wealth of information at their fingertips. With this in mind, you would think it would be easy to take the pulse of the global economy but at no time in history has the global economy been so rich, varied, and rapid.

Business systems of increasing complexity govern our lives in ways the classic economists could never have envisaged. Entire industries collapse without anything tangible ever disrupting supply chains and nations fall bankrupt on the “market confidence” of Wall Street traders. We live in a world of inconceivable numbers and we live in blissful ignorance of business and financial practices we never knew existed… until they go spectacularly wrong.

No government can ever control an economy. All those who have sought to do so have destroyed it. One can only manage ones’ responses to events in it. While we may like to gear our economy in a certain way, our economies do not run in isolation of each other. Thanks to globalisation and the internet we are inextricably linked and we cannot pretend otherwise. Which is why the proposals that I will put forward later will cover both domestic and international economics.

As world leaders try to move us ever closer towards international regulations and international bodies of control, there is only one constant.

Systems,

Systems of whatever type, inevitably fail… be they computer systems, regulatory systems or currency systems. This presents the immediate reality that if we use only one system then when it fails, we all fail. And we all fail at the same time.

Undeterred by this reality it has not prevented our leaders from seeking to standardise, make uniform and equalise our systems. But each society has its own unique perspectives and interests, any such common systems require either a democracy bypass or compromise which fundamentally weakens the basis of the system. In global banking we have seen both.

We have also witnessed institutional schizophrenia whereby one regulator does not know what the other is doing or even what it is for, and our politicians do not know the extent of their powers or to whom the real power belongs.

What we saw last year was the culmination of national, regional and global government intervening in things they do not understand and cannot control.

The oft quoted cause of this crisis is “irresponsible lending” and “excessive risk” by “greedy bankers”. But that is only half way to the truth.

The credit crunch is a failure of global regulation as a tool, leading to the construction of castles on a foundation of jelly, such international regulation is now wholly discredited.

Risk is its own regulator when governments do not seek to meddle, and had we retained control of our own regulation, the crisis here need not have hit us as hard as it did.

We are all aware of the disposal of the assets that US banks were legally obliged to create under the Community Reinvestment Act, creating loans worth more than their balance sheets. This put a direct freeze on interbank lending. This subsequent freeze in capital flow sent shockwaves through the markets resulting in instant paralysis.

Subsequently we were forced by circumstance to take a leap of faith that bailouts would restore market confidence and jumpstart interbank lending. Whether or not this has worked is, frankly, anyone's guess.

There are conflicting signal signs and while there may be room for optimism we have been warned by the IMF this week that Britain cannot afford another bailout, which may yet be necessary. Among all the talk of "green shoots of recovery" the fear is that we will enter a double dip recession. The contraction of the job market further could lead to bigger credit defaults, not least on credit card debt which is now outstripping our GDP.

Our present administration has taken it upon itself to bailout everything that so much as squeaks. This is a path to economic suicide.

Even if such measures worked, this is all a sticking plaster at best. Present policy is predicated on the idea that a debt based economy is sustainable and desirable. It is not. UK Plc needs to be producing and exporting, earning money from overseas.

The Domestic Economy needs to be stimulated from the bottom up not the top down. Economies are sustained by the ability of the purchasing public to earn, save and spend, consuming the products that the factories produce.

There is little point in bailing out a failing car manufacturer to see them make cars that they cannot sell.

Put simply it is not capitalism that has failed, it is creditism. Capitalism was designed to work on capital, but it has been distorted and altered to rely on credit, spend now pay later.

It is that this debt based economic model that has now found its way into every layer of society from consumer, retailer, producer to government, all totally reliant upon credit, is the primary reason why a single system failure, in this case interbank lending, stopped everything dead in its tracks.

Having sold off our gold reserves, raided our pension funds and squandered the money, there was nothing to fall back on, and we have allowed the backbone of the country, the wealth creators, the small to medium enterprise to be drowned in a sea of compliance, regulation and taxes which are crippling our ability to compete, and consequently we have a shrinking productive sector in a country that is spending ever more.

Nations, markets and individuals are stronger through diversity than homogenised cultures, regulatory systems and governments.With this in mind we must reform to ensure our money is real and that our future is built on more than just an I.O.U note to the world bank.

Real Money, not borrowings, is the core of the economy. It belongs to those to earn and spend it, the wealth creators, not merely to those who currently create money or manage it.

But that is only a beginning.

Total Reform of the monetary system, I propose Three planks – Sterling, Sovereign and Free Banking

Firstly, we will return the sovereignty of our national currency—pounds Sterling—to the Crown, removing the privilege of creating money from the private banking industry, with new Sterling being created, debt-free, by the government, and thence spent into the broader economy. The amount of Sterling in circulation will be prevented from being expanded through FRB, stopping bank generated inflationary spirals developing, and keeping the value of your savings safe.

Secondly, we will create a new currency, pounds Sovereign, to be 100% backed by gold. Still vital for international trade, a gold-backed currency will be immensely strong, and help protect the UK from the storms and squalls that sometimes rip through international markets. This kind of currency will also attract investment from overseas into the UK.

Thirdly, allow for the creation of free banks. Free Banks would be completely free of any government interference or regulation. If these prove popular with the market—the citizens of our nation—they will grow and prosper, choosing to embrace FRB if it wished with their own currencies (HSBC peso or Natwest dollars) possibly supplanting Sterling as the primary means of exchange on a day-to-day basis. However, and should they fail, such failure will not impact on anyone who chooses to keep their banking facilities purely denominated in pounds Sterling. In this way a genuine free market in banking will be able to be tried, without the risks being spread over the general population, or the nation as a whole.

I believe that the proposals outlined above are sound and necessary. Our existing banking system has been creaking from one crisis to the next over many years, and has only remained unchallenged because of the enormous influence that those who most benefit from it—the private bankers—wield over our elected politicians.

I am happy that some of the Libertarian Party policies outlined in our manifesto (http://lpuk.org/pages/manifesto.php) are beginning to find traction in Westminster, and that my contribution reaffirmed the consensus view with those voices who shared this platform with me yesterday.

When celebrities and government collide...

First it was Jamie Oliver and school meals. Now it's Kevin Mcloud and home insultation, working with the Energy Saving Trust which is, like the Carbon Trust, governmentspeak for DEFRA.

"If the Government is serious about tackling climate change, help must be given to homeowners on every street in Britain to green their homes.”

The Great British Refurb Campaign is supported by the Energy Saving Trust, Grand Designs magazine, UK Green Building Council, and WWF-UK. Thousands of homeowners have already added their name to a petition calling upon the Prime Minister to make it easier, more affordable, and more attractive to go green at home.

Affordable and attractive to whom? I'm sure non-homeowners are delighted to pay more tax.

This petition will be delivered to No 10 Downing Street later this week and is well timed to coincide with the Government’s latest announcement on reducing the UK’s energy demands.

Yes, that would be the Greener Living Fund and such...

Defra has launched a new fund to promote greener living. Over £6 million is being made available to support both projects and programmes by national delivery partners between November 2008 and March 2011. The fund will offer 2 year funding to a small number of national delivery partners. Starting with a bidding phase in 2008, its main delivery phase will run between April 2009 to March 2011 and it will complement other initiatives under the `Act on CO2' banner.

Eligibility criteria:

To secure funding, applicants will need to draw up and have the ability and reach to implement programmes that influence pro-environmental behaviours in the wider population. The assessment criteria will include evidence of a clear understanding of the target audience, the potential to change behaviour and the approaches which may be adopted to engage them and enable more sustainable living. In their proposals, applicants will need to demonstrate that they have the ability and reach to influence behavioural change at a grass roots level. Additionally, we hope that our funding will enable them to leverage support from elsewhere, to further greener living ideas.

Celebrities. Where would we be without them? And again, why is the government lobbying itself?

Bizarre headline of the week.

"Soldiers' deaths will not guarantee Helmand success" says Verity Murphy of the Beeb.

Errrr... Who ever said they would?

The most chilling words in British politics

Andy Burnham , this weeks Health Secretary (I've never heard of him either), says 'cruel lottery' of elderly care must end.

"Mr Burnham said care of the elderly should be a "priority issue" and there should be a "fair and universal" system in place."

Be afraid. Be VERY afraid. "Fair" means those who are are getting something useful should have it revoked and "universal" means that everyone must suffer the same levels of mediocrity. That is apparently a "priority issue". Who could tell it wasn't?

Gulliver's Air Travels

July 23rd sees the Norwich North by-election. It also sees the Lowestoft Seafront Air Festival.

Hopes are high that an iconic cold war bomber will grace the skies at this month's Lowestoft Air Festival despite an anxious wait for paperwork before it can be cleared to fly.

The Avro Vulcan, which wowed crowds when it appeared in Lowestoft last summer after a 15-year restoration project, is currently grounded because its annual permit to fly has not yet been renewed.

The jet's owners and restorers, the Vulcan to the Sky Trust, are waiting for the Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) to rubber stamp the plane's permit, which has fallen behind schedule because of delayed inspections of the aircraft.

My advice, when you have been out and voted for LPUK and assuming the CAA pulls its finger out, is to go and see this giant of the sky and marvel of British engineering. The only thing that keeps this beast in the sky is force of will by the public over our officials. Every time it takes to the sky it is a victory. How long that remains the case is up to you. Don't let this giant be pinned to the ground by hundreds of little men.

Too cynical?

"Norfolk couple turning back the clock for war-time wedding"

The bride and groom arrived in the back of a 1942 troop carrier, with anti-aircraft guns behind them. They made their promises in front of a congregation dressed in 1940s clothing, in the chapel where 65 years ago many American airmen would have said their prayers and took communion before departing on their last missions.

Shortly after authorities were alerted, bomb disposal units were dispatched from nearby RAF Marham and the couple were arrested under the Dangerous Firearms Act 2007. Social services were also dispatched immediately with a court order to take all children present into care.

"We are shocked and appalled by this disgusting display of militarism" said Kaley Toynbee of Sustainable Child Protection Services. "We find it wholly inappropriate that children should be exposed to these horrors by these dangerous extremists and appropriate measures have been taken to ensure the parents are never allowed contact with children again. They will go on a permanent register of potential child abusers, their DNA has been recorded and have been fitted with RFID monitors." Their employers have been notified.

Roger Chapman, a council spokesman for Norwich, was grilled last night as to how such an event was given the go ahead. "We didn't see any harm in it. The psychometric profiling of the couple was approved, albeit narrowly, by the Central Civic Partnership Approvals & Licencing Authority, well within the 36 weeks notice period, and we thought it would be a fun and educational day out for the kids and an excellent way to remember those who gave our lives to defend our freedom." he said. Roger Chapman has been suspended without pay pending a full enquiry. Should his guilty verdict fail to be overturned at the initial trial he will be sent to a re-education facility at HMP Rampton where few are ever seen again.

The classic military vehicles in attendance have been confiscated and are due to be crushed pending a road tax evasion enquiry and their owners will be jailed. The couple in question will be released to a local psychiatric hospital where they will be treated with the latest experimental ECT therapy.

Well no. That didn't happen. But the satire of today is the headlines of tomorrow. We extend our congratulations to the happy couple.

Thanks a bunch!

A victory for Norfolks' bureaucrats...

A charity motorcycle cavalcade which attracts thousands of spectators each year has come to an end after becoming embroiled in a red-tape battle.

Last week the people in charge of this year's Eastern Lights Motorcycle Cavalcade, from Norwich to Lowestoft via Yarmouth, warned the event would have to be cancelled.

It came after organisers were given a licence deadline they said was impossible to meet. Police had said they would withdraw their cover if a temporary road closure licence was not obtained, and gave them just three weeks notice.

But there was hope over the weekend when police pledged to work with organisers to keep the event running. Today however, Eastern Lights confirmed it was too late for this year's cavalcade and that in future years the cost of obtaining a licence would rule out any more events.

Paul Howard, organising committee chairman for Eastern Lights, said: “We won't be having any more future events; it's the end of Eastern Lights.

Nanny knows best.

Working families in Norfolk are put off by the cost of "healthy school dinners". "The gap may be narrowed this year, with Norfolk County Council coming up with a £100,000 subsidy to freeze meals at the 2008/9 price."

Presumably with money confiscated from those same working families. How does that help?

A retreat from community policing.

Norwich Evening News reports that two Norwich police beat bases could be closed and replaced with a “state-of-the-art” station on a chunk of a city high school's playing field.

Police want to close the Mile Cross base at Woodcock Road and the Thorpe Hamlet station on Thorpe Road - both of which are not open to the public.

They are proposing to make the two into one by buying a piece of the playing field on the east site of Sewell Park College, on Sprowston Road, to build a new station to cover both patches.

A police spokesman said today: “Norfolk Constabulary is currently in negotiations with Norfolk County Council to purchase a piece of land in the corner of the recreation site of Sewell Park College.

“The aim is to replace Thorpe Hamlet and Mile Cross police stations by 2011. Mile Cross is currently too small and Thorpe Hamlet is no longer fit for purpose.

“It is hoped the creation of a state-of-the-art North Norwich police station will increase the quality of service to the local community. The plans are still at a very early stage.”

While we are all for state efficiencies, this is nothing of the kind. One would venture that the old smaller stations are no "longer fit for purpose" because the police no longer engage in community policing. Instead they need more centralisation and "state-of-the-art facilities" to perform their role as administrators, like the good little bureaucrats they are.

Institutional myopia.

"Following today's announcement of the UK government's new "green policy" towards renewable energy, which is set to cost UK taxpayers a 20% levy on energy bills, the government has also rushed out a statement regarding less well-off families. In what is being called a "social tariff" the energy companies will be forced to charge those less well-off families significantly less than more affluent families with regards to the energy bill tariff."

LPUK Website and Forum

As you may have noticed the website is currently down. This should be nothing to worry about as it seems to be a problem with our host rather than our websites.

Hopefully it will be resolved shortly.

CIVIL SERVICE SPOOKED

+++ UPDATE 19:00 - Why has our website just gone down and taken the donations widget with it? Mandelsooooon! +++

Last Thursday/Friday we learned that our semi-elected dictatorship is instructing EU diplomats to be distinctly undiplomatic with the BNP. But our "Inner-Kremlin" at LPUK have also been keeping an eye on the proceedings at "Civil Service Live", their second annual conference / opportunity-to-conspire-against-their-paymasters. Here's a wee excerpt from their blog (my emphasis below):

Civil servants are not noted for their tempestuous characters or tendency to fly off the handle, but there is a real streak of anger at this year’s Civil Service Live. Expressed in diplomatic terms in many instances – and in surprisingly intemperate language in others – delegates and speakers alike have been voicing their irritation with the frequent changes in machinery of government that have attended ministerial reshuffles in recent years. [...] my ear has been bent on the topic of machinery of government changes several times each day[...] I get quite irritated by the idea that you can solve the problem by moving things around and changing the labels on things,” said Guardian journalist David Hencke (pictured) in a session on Tuesday. It is no exaggeration to say that he was speaking for the vast majority of the civil service.

"changing the labels on things", we can all empathise here I think: compulsory is the new voluntary, debt-spending is now investment, fascism is freedom etc; but I jest...

The Civil Service of course - apart from the very visible chaps and chapesses running your local Job Centre (who incidentally have recently been forced to merge with the Samaritans) - includes a number of rather more influential bigwigs, such as Gus O'Donnell:

We are politically impartial and our actions are governed by the Civil Service Code. Political impartiality means we must serve the Government, whatever its political persuasion, to the best of our ability, no matter what are own political beliefs. To quote from the Code, this means acting “in a way which deserves and retains the confidence of Ministers, while at the same time ensuring that you will be able to establish the same relationship with those whom you may be required to serve in some future government.”
[...]
Adherence to these values has served the Civil Service well, ever since they were proposed by Northcote and Trevelyan over 150 years ago. I believe they are crucial to the ability of the Civil Service to serve effectively whatever government is elected by the British people.

This goes some way to explaining why the government likes to create quangos and fake charities to do its entirely partisan dirty work. But they can't have a quango for everything; they'd just never get away with it; so, when, say - our psychotic unelected Prime Minister - needs to crack down on a Labour Party splinter group, he still has to bend arms.

There is an upside to Labour's total lack of scruples, however... It's now perfectly legal for us at LPUK to wire-tap the private conversations of the attendees at Civil Service Live... We're new to this, but we've just-about managed to discern these tidbits for you:

...I mean how many more data disks are there to deli------ly lose... well you said l---ing their expense data would start an outright revolt, all we got was a couple of angry episodes of Question Time... no, the Queen won't authorise that until Br--n is actually sectioned, and he'll never volunteer for an assessment... no - you're kidding - if anything he's more... look, if you leak that it'll be CO19 they call this time... YES! M-----son would happily order them into PMQs, he hates Green... he would, you know what he's like...

If anyone out there can decipher any meaning from the above at all, please contact us at LPUK: 0845 299 7650. Thank you.

A Question for the Tories on the Norwich North Hustings

Are you already going back on Dave's promise to slash inheritance Tax ?


Seriously what is the difference between Lab/Con/Social Democrats/Greens ?

they are all

A lack of energy.

John Webley makes a reasoned argument on Conservative Home that "The lights would indeed go out under Labour" But the question remains, will David Cameron withdraw his support for Carbon Capture Storage? Will he renounce the EU targets on renewable energy? Will he deregulate the nuclear sector? Will he abolish the Renewables Obligation Certificate or the EU's Emissions Trading Scheme?

As the lady once said... "No, No, No!"

Eco-Clowns

Do these people know nothing? Or as is said correctly in Yorkshire, "Dote yer know owt?". Were they asleep in what is now key stage three geography? Hell, I was, and even I know this is a dumb idea.

In fact, if "epic fail" was a GCSE grade then that is what I would have been awarded for geography but, as any fule kno, if you're going to have a town there must be sufficient economic activity with which to employ the residents, otherwise they're going to drive to places where there is "economic activity", which rather defeats the point of an eco-town.

The chances of that economic activity just appearing, simply because the government wills it, are, well... how can put this without saying what I want to say? Not very much, to be polite about it. Unless of course there's that magical cure all known as "taxpayers money" of which there is simply an inexhaustible supply.

But away with such cynicism. With the excellent green transport links in mind, I'm sure the future people of the St Austell Eco-Town can easily get to such rip-roaring economic powerhouses like er... Plymouth and errr... Torbay perhaps? Assuming electric cars will even have that range, or if indeed, we will still have electricity when this lot have finished vandalising the landscape with windmills.

And it seems lucky old Norfolk is getting an eco-town too. Not wishing to downplay the economic significance of Norwich and Great Yarmouth, one has to ask.... What are they smoking? The point being that IF St. Austell and where was it now? Rackheath, wherever that is, were of such economic dynamism, they would already be naturally expanding without government intervention. We have seen this before with the Scottish "government" voting to build power plants where there is zero demand for energy, but behold as they invent new energy demand in the region, just like that.

All this serves is a decaying governments' unconvincing attempts at greenwash, to build houses in places people don't want to live and if they're government designed houses, nobody will want them either. So all this for a couple of years worth of job creation which wouldn't be necessary otherwise, largely at the expense of other, more worthwhile, economic opportunities.

Economics aside, admittedly not Gordons' strongest suit, there is also that little consulted doctrine of "democracy". Yes, we need to blow the cobwebs of that one don't we Gordon? It's right there, in those damp old boxes in the garage, right next to "Justice" and "Economic Prudence". Y'see Gordon, we don't want them, not least the people who actually live there. We don't want your stupid eco-towns or your sodding windmills. Which part of "No", do you not understand?

Anyway, I think my sarcasm processor just melted and my will to live, like the ship illustration, is about to capsize. Suffice to say the LPUK candidate for Norwich North, Thomas Burridge, is said to be "very disappointed with this decision, which has overridden the very real concerns and wishes of the local people."

I wouldn't have been that polite. Since when did that bother them?

You pays your money...

...you takes your choice.

The Indpendent: Revealed: Brown's secret plan to cut Afghanistan force by 1,500.

Teh Grauniad: Gordon Brown plans troops surge in Afghanistan - 2,000 more soldiers for Helmand.

Meh?

Morally, legally and financially bankrupt.

Magistrates are angry that they are being made to carry the brunt of cuts because their workload is being diverted away from the courts, reports the Times. "They say that increasing numbers offenders are being dealt with by “on-the-spot” fines and cautions — almost half of all offences are now dealt with in this way."

Ian Parker Joseph, LPUK's leader, had this to say:

"This is the corporatisation of government gone mad. It flies in the face of our constitution, which guarantees that all grants and promises of fines and forfeitures of particular persons before conviction are illegal and void.

"This proves beyond doubt that our Government is bankrupt of all moral and legal authority, and to couple that with the Bank of England's announcement today that it will print a further £25bn, bringing the total of 'created out of thin air' money to £150bn show that they are bankrupt in the literal sense as well."

"Considering that the majority of fines are not for crimes, not for criminal activity, but for simple transgressions and misdemeanours, this is clearly nothing more than a revenue raising exercise."

The police have been disarmed against making individual assessments, based on their own experience and judgement whether to bring in an offender, so much so that we end up with a paper trail a mile long, so expensive and time consuming that justice barely gets a look in. Were we to have respectable, informed and quick witted officers, dressed like police officers and not paramilitary thugs, many situations could be resolved without pencil hitting notebook.

But in accordance with the government, all must be scanned, numbered, cataloged, sanctioned, assessed, DNA swabbed and detained, no matter how small the transgression, regardless of more sensible options, often taking a beat officer off the streets for a minimum of four hours, and that is on the very rare occasion where detainees actually co-operate. Please do not ask me why I know this. It has to do with an estate agent, a lot of my money, a nervous breakdown, and a flat screen monitor. Not my finest hour.

But what is clear is that the restraints on common sense actually create the police officers the regulations were designed to protect against. In the same way that bureaucracy has driven the best teachers away from the profession and soon, the very people who should be MP's won't touch the job with a barge pole, police officers are becoming automatons who govern, and are governed, by the checkbox and the database. The police are now in danger of becoming a corrupt, self-financing authority, not least now that we have cops for hire.

Again we are drawn to consult the 9th Peelian Principle; "The test of police efficiency is the absence of crime and disorder, not the visible evidence of police action in dealing with it." And the other eight principles for that matter. We are drifting into the arena of legal absolutism where basic rights take second place to bureaucratic expediency. That is how respect for the law, and subsequently civil society, dies a slow death.

No Sh*t Sherlock!

EU Commissioner admits 95% of states would have voted No to Lisbon Treaty.

EU Internal Markets Commissioner Charlie McCreevy has admitted that 95% of EU states would have voted No if they held a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty. He said: "When Irish people rejected the Lisbon Treaty a year ago, the initial reaction ranged from shock to horror to temper to vexation. That would be the view of a lot of the people who live in the Brussels beltway. On the other hand, all of the leaders know quite well that if the similar question was put to their electorate by a referendum the answer in 95 per cent of the countries would probably have been No as well."

He also appeared to suggest that he still has not read the Lisbon Treaty. Asked if he had read it since admitting during the last campaign that he had not, he replied, "I am going to stay up every night during every day of the summer reading chapters. I will put questions to every journalist I meet asking them what different subsections mean. A lot of that is political nonsense."

Ya don't say, Chuck!

Well I'll be a monkeys' uncle...

This week has seen many strange happenings and dark omens. Not least the birth of a tiger without stripes, I might actually have a job that pays money and a goose has been fitted with a bionic leg. But jaw dropper of the week is this, in which Iain Dale produces a post that isn't about himself or some other non-entity tory and it's actually worth reading. Satan will be ice skating to work on the morrow.

Give us your money...

Hey, elections don't just fight themselves you know! Give us some more money! We aren't the government so we can't just steal it.

As ye know by now, LPUK has a policy of accepting only individual donations. We don't get whacking great policy bribes donations from Unite, or City PLC's and we don't get government bailouts. We are not serving the interests of any special interest group, just the people of this country.

This means fighting an election is a huge financial effort and we have no Westminster expense accounts to dip into. This blog would be so much more interesting if we did.

You can of course click on the donate button, or pay directly to our election fund:

40-28-20 92635313

If you are a member put your surname and membership number so it can be accounted for properly.

Alternatively you can leave a brown envelope at the usual drop off point. Miss Foxxy will attend to your needs.

How the media works...

New vehicles purchased to protect British troops in Afghanistan have already been rejected as unsafe by the US military. The vehicles failed basic 'survivability' tests, which showed soldiers would be left vulnerable to roadside bombs, The Mail on Sunday can reveal.

Yes they can "reveal" it. Because it's been sitting on the blogosphere since the beginning of April. Isn't it awfully nice to be a journalist?

Another one bites the dust

McDonald's, the fast food giant, will join the ranks of companies quitting the UK when it moves its European headquarters to Geneva later this year.

Home-grown UK companies have also upped sticks in recent years, in search of more favourable tax regimes. The list includes Regus, the temporary office supplier, which has moved to Luxembourg, advertising giant WPP and pharmaceuticals company Shire which are both relocating their headquarters to Ireland, and Brit Insurance, which plans to move to the Netherlands. Investment company Henderson set up a new parent company in Ireland to pay less tax.

What was it the Lib-Dums were saying about taxes? What, if anything, do you suppose Mr Cameron will do?

You would think this would be news.

UK can't afford another fiscal rescue, warns IMF.

Britain is the world's only leading economy unable to budget for any kind of economic rescue package next year, the International Monetary Fund has warned. In calculations that will spark further criticism over the state of the public finances, an IMF paper presented to world's leaders has laid bare how the UK's indebtedness has left it unable to provide the vital stimulus the economy could need over the next 18 months.

Every other G20 country apart from the UK and Argentina has been able to budget for temporary spending increases or tax cuts next year to help drag their economies out of recession, according to the paper, presented to a recent G20 meeting in Basel. Even Germany, whose finance minister Peer Steinbruck has accused the UK of "crass Keynesianism", plans to spend a full 2pc of its economic output on such measures next year.

Looks like we may get free markets after all. Though not the ones we were thinking of.

It's your money folks...

London's key buildings 'at risk' in catastrophic flood!

Parliament, Downing Street and MI5's headquarters could all be hit by floods within 30 minutes of a "catastrophic breach" of London's river defences, Westminster City Council warned today.

The council commissioned a study to map the likely course of flood waters in the capital for the "extremely small" chance that the Thames' defences failed.

...

The council said the chances of floodwater inundating riverside landmarks with up to two metres of water in a matter of minutes was very small. It would require a one in 200 year tidal flood event, the Thames Barrier failing and multiple breaches of the Embankment's defences.

Central London has not severely flooded since 1928, when floods hit the capital killing 14 people. But councillors said they had to plan for the worst and if river defences failed, the impact could be substantial as it would be sudden and unpredictable.

They neglect to mention how much the study cost. However...

"The Environment Agency is also working with local authorities to help them to manage the risk of flooding from overflowing surface water drains, caused when large amounts of rain fall in a short period of time."

But Norfolk can fend for itself.

Mixed messages.

Barack Obama tells Africa to stop blaming the West for its woes on historic Ghana visit! Iran can blame the West according to Obama, but Africa... nah!!!

Barack Obama has delivered the most challenging speech by a US leader in Africa for decades by castigating the continent's leadership for creating a culture of "brutality and bribery".

Perhaps if "the West" wasn't flooding Africa with aid it wouldn't be a problem.

But isn't pulling the plug on development aid a recipe for mass mortality?

"Only the elite will feel the pain. The poor won't even notice the difference. It's not like they ever saw any of that money anyway."

Quite.

Just out of interest...

Change you can't believe in.

Our eagle-eyed blogger Gandhi has brought to my attention that while we may mock, as well we should, the significance of the Tory logo change was understated by my earlier post.

The Tories have finally worked out that Grauniad reading tree-huggers ain't gonna win them an election.

It has since passed into folklore that Labour won it in 97 by appealing to the aspirational "white van man". Shifting from the scribble tree logo to Union Flag and tabloid font, also endorsing the vapid "change" mantra employed by Princess Obama, may be just such an attempt to do likewise. What this does tell us is that the BNP has them worried in marginal seats. Why else would they be nicking BNP marketing tactics?

While Labour were pounded harder than a dockside hooker in the Euro elections, the Tories barely managed to grab 10 percent of the electorate. So while they may win, they will not have a popular mandate. And why should they? We are not seeing any corresponding change in policy. That might be perhaps because they still don't have any. One more reason not to trust the Tories.

Not wishing to be left behind I now propose that we change our logo to appeal to the same cross section. Because that's all it takes hey? May I humbly suggest a picture of David Cameron being molested by a polar bear?

In for a penny...

As it is Saturday and everyone else has a life, I can say with reasonable confidence that nobody will read this so I can say pretty much what I like. I must stress the following is entirely my own view and not endorsed by any persons now living or dead and isn't likely to be either.

I have been more or less silent in public at the decision to select young Thomas as our Norwich North Candidate. I didn't want to dampen anyones' enthusiasm. Like most people I was naturally skeptical about the selection of an eighteen year old. But then as libertarians we should let him stand purely on the basis that he wants to.

But as a young UKIP candidate back in 2001, I was largely reading from the script with a head full of received opinions without the experience to confirm my worldview. If a 21 year old kid knows nothing then what can an eighteen year old know?

But cynicism aside, and there is room for it, as a new party we are not tainted by the corruption we have seen from our Westminster politicians and as such, we are in the best position to attract a whole generation of young people who have now seen Westminster for what it is, and at no time in living memory has an alternative party looked more attractive to them. They will be guided by their parents who will have seen that Brand A, followed by Brand B, followed by Brand A again, is nothing but a countdown to extinction. They know that if you vote the same you get the same. Thomas could well be the right guy to tap into that.

We all want something new but the alternatives are pushing negative agendas. UKIP is anti-EU but we don't really know what it is for. The crisis in Georgia last year left Nigel Farage floundering for a policy because they have no philosophical grounding. UKIP suffers from a musty old colonial smell where despite their protestations, it was and still is, a party of old Ruperts longing for the days of empire and moonbat Bilderberger conspiracy theorists. The media dubbed them "brown-shirts in blazers" and it wasn't entirely unjustified. I think even at the age of 23 I was still the youngest member.

The only other choice has been the BNP and they are anti-absolutely everything, including liberty. While they have tapped into a rich vein of public outrage, racism or no, they are still, economically speaking, a bunch of blood and soil fascists. One being a Labour splinter group, the other Conservative. That's a road to nowhere, so just for once in my life I have allowed myself a shred of untainted optimism, enough to say what the hell! I'm not voting against something anymore. I'm going to vote for a completely new and untried idea. No vote is a wasted vote.

I do keep hearing scoffs that LPUK isn't a serious party and isn't going anywhere either. But did they not say that about UKIP? It is true that UKIP has yet to break into Westminster but now it is not entirely outside the realms of possibility, and UKIP, to be fair, has blown more chances than Tim Henman on a winning streak.

And I would remind those who scoff, that ten years or so ago, UKIP was nothing. I was there at those public meetings in 1997 at the Wirral South by election, in which only the candidate, the local branch organiser, myself, Alan Sked and two sleeping pensioners were in attendance. We walked for miles, spent a small fortune on petrol driving back and forth between Yorkshire and Cheshire, delivering leaflets and pressing the flesh, being ejected from supermarkets for canvassing and oh boy was it soul destroying to lose our deposit with only 410 votes. It accomplished nothing. But with perseverance and blundering on in its own defiant way, it is now a semi-credible threat to the European Establishment. Or it would be were there a shred of democracy in the EU.

It would be delusional to say that LPUK holds any serious chances of election to Westminster any time in the next ten years but we have seen that the minnows can swing elections if the main parties do not do as they are told. We can be one of those voices. A voice detached from the racism of the BNP, the sleaze of UKIP and the elitist preaching of the Greens.

We hear talk of "big tents" and libertarianism is the biggest tent there is. A party for those who hold liberty to be the greatest prize there is, a party for those who want to keep their own money and live life the way they choose and a party for those who would rather our government didn't drop bombs on people in our name. Me, I'm just in it for the money and the freedom. I don't mind too much if our government drops bombs on bad people, but would prefer a government which couldn't afford to drop bombs if it wanted to, because if the last seven years have taught us anything, it is that we are simply not up to the job.

So Thomas, if you are reading this, young as you are, sod it! The oldies haven't got anything right with their supposed wealth of knowledge and experience because they are still under the impression that government is a solution and not THE problem. So you go for it and damn the naysayers. There is yet to be a statue built down Whitehall of an ageing armchair cynic.

A nation of pen pushers

Courtesy of the Faily Telegraph we learn from Hays the top ten sectors to be in if you want a job.

1. Health and social care

Doctors, healthcare workers and social workers all have good job security because of "continued high demand and pressure on social services and healthcare," recruitment company Hays says. The sector grew for the twelfth month running in June, according to Labour Market Report.

2. Education

A "severe" shortage of maths, science and head teachers makes the sector a secure employer. Construction companies involved in the Building Schools for the Future programme are also getting a boost.

3. Social housing

A range of skills are in demand in the sector, from accountants to builders, as well as housing officers, as the Government's improvements to social housing continue.

4. Risk and compliance

"The days of deregulation are over," says Hays, with increased scrutiny of financial institutions at the top of the agenda.

5. Internal audit

Although some jobs have gone, internal auditors are still in demand as companies keep a close eye on how money is spent. The sector will also "top the list of desirables" when companies start hiring again, says Hays.

6. Insurance

Demand remains strong for senior staff, and for employees of all levels in underwriting, claims and business development.

7. Credit control

Qualified candidates are in demand as companies increasingly focus on late payments and non-payment of bills, to maintain strong cash flow.

8. Purchasing

Purchasing and procurement staff are in demand in the private and public sector, as the recession forces companies to try to improve their supply chain to protect margins.

9. Energy

The world still depends on oil and gas, and there is an increasing amount of work in the nuclear sector as Britain begins the process of building the next generation of power stations. The sector may also provide opportunities for people who have lost their job in the construction industry.

10. IT

There is demand for IT architecture experts, developers, business analysts and project managers. Companies are trying to save money by speeding up access to data, sharing information and finding cheaper systems.

I'm not going to insult your intelligence by spelling this out, but it does say quite a lot about modern Britain doesn't it?

Grown up debates...

Hardened cynic though I may be, when Dr. Paul Golby speaks, I listen. He is one of the very few in the energy sector to engage the public with honesty. Too often we are expected to swallow corporate greenwash about "climate change" as to why we should blow vasts sums of our money on unproven technology they assure us is the bees knees. Today we get a more honest appraisal in the Independent. Dr Golby of E.ON calls for "a grown up conversation on energy". We could not agree more.

I am particularly taken with his honesty on Carbon Capture Storage:

Notwithstanding repeated protests over Kingsnorth, concerns about security of supply have put coal firmly back on the agenda. But all new plants will need carbon capture and storage (CCS) technology, and so far CCS is largely theoretical and hugely expensive. Unless Kingsnorth wins the government-run competition to fund trials of CCS, the new power station will have to wait.

"The biggest demonstration of CCS so far would probably fit in this room, but to equip Kingsnorth it would have to be on the scale of Wembley stadium," Dr Golby says, indicating his fairly modest office. "We can't fit CCS unless we get some money from government.

Refreshing honesty, unlike Scottish and Southern Energy who continue to maintain that Wind is not subsidised. But then we get to the slightly dishonest part...

So if we don't win the competition, there will be a gap between the current power station closing and our being able to build new one." He does not make an explicit link with the looming energy gap, but he doesn't need to.

Give us your money or else. But that is a consequence of regulatory intervention. If government makes impossible and unreasonable demands on the industry, what else are they to do?

But the deepest pockets in the world are nothing without clarity from government. "At the moment the Government puts sticking plasters over individual problems as they arise, rather than standing back and putting together a master plan," Dr says. It is a matter of deciding on what is needed to deliver the 2050 targets and working backwards.

"We aren't looking for a detailed, Moscow-style plan," Dr Golby says. "The Government has always intervened in energy markets to try to force outcomes, in this case for much lower carbon. Let's have grown-up conversation and work out how."

On the other hand, why doesn't government butt out and let the energy industry get on with producing energy? Just a thought. Though if we are to have government driven policy he is right to point out that there is not a coherent one. But then this is no longer something our provincial government is trusted with. We await instruction from our masters.

Either way this limbo cannot continue. Either we dictate policy or we take our hands off altogether. LPUK wherever possible will let the industry decide. We do not support government funding of CCS not least because it could absorb 40 percent of the power output of a power station, nor are we especially taken in by the corrupted government science behind climate change measures. The government does not have the monopoly on science, the science is not settled, the argument is not over, and it is something else that we are long overdue "a grown up debate" on.

The lights are on but nobody's home...

Hmm. Giles Wilkes "thinks" that "property and consumption taxes need to rise to fix the fiscal mess."

Except that those who run businesses are not doing so well because individuals and businesses are not spending money. How does he think taking more off them will help?

"Don’t believe the small state conservatives who claim that Britain is over-taxed – in fact, public sector receipts will soon be as low as they’ve been since the 1970s." says he. But public sector receipts are shrinking because productivity is shrinking, not least because of taxes. We still pay well North of 40% of our ill gotton gains to HM government. But what do we know?

"Giles Wilkes is Chief Economist of CentreForum, the liberal think tank."

Liberal think tank eh? Is that like "Military Intelligence"?

Big Numbers...

David Miliband has insisted that it was the Government's "highest priority" to ensure that British troops had the protection they needed and that the Government had spent £10 billion in the past three years on new equipment. He did however, neglect to mention that the money has been completely and totally wasted.

But so long as politicians (in all areas of government) can be seen to be throwing money at a situation, it really does not matter to them what it is spent on. Naturally the bigger the budget, the bigger the blunder. But it's only your money. Who cares about that?

An Apology

We at LPUK sincerely apologise for our negligence. We have let you down badly. While we were wittering about unimportant things last night we neglected to cover the main story of the day. We therefore defer to the Conservatives on this one who have their finger on the pulse. Good to know somebody is on the ball.

Thomas Burridge in Norwich City centre

My apologies for the lack of blogging this week. There has been an election campaign going on in Norwich North which I am sure everyone has noticed as it has received the most extensive press coverage that I can remember (not), which means that I have added to the list of my duties the task of Campaign Organiser.

We are now starting to ramp up the Libertarian Party campaign, having completed all the legal hurdles, getting brochures and leaflets printed, finalised deliveries to the post office and the campaign headquarters, set and running the campaign telephone line (01603 850573), gathering together the volunteers who want to help and join in the campaigning.and all the other organisational stuff that goes with running an election campaign.





The people of Norwich North have begun to experience the Libertarian candidate Thomas Burridge, who has been out and about, meeting the voters and getting a widely enthusiastic response to the Libertarian message that he puts out.

Today, Saturday 11th July, Thomas and his team of volunteers (who have travelled in from all over the country), will be in Norwich City centre, handing out leaflets and explaining Libertarian policy to the good people of Norwich.

So if you want to meet the youngest ever candidate to stand for parliament, head on into Norwich City centre and shake his hand, if not for his politics, for his guts and determination. Who knows, he may even be able to persuade you to vote Libertarian on election day.

A Free Country?

Readers may be wondering how it is that I have time to be posting at all times of day and night. Well, I am an IT contractor who does bugger all at the best of times. But, I am supposed to be working for a company who makes things for army things. But I'm not. Y'see there's a form I have to fill in. A 22 page form which takes at least three weeks for the government (probably Crapita Group PLC) to clear.

But there's another delay. As I am a contractor they wouldn't process it as the place I presently live is not the place I will actually live when I start working for them. Having been released (fired) after two days with the MOD, for links with a certain defence blog, you can understand why I'm reluctant to move somewhere just to apply for security clearance I might not get. After a little wrangling over a week they have been able to submit my form on the proviso that I fill it in again when I move. That's progress I suppose.

Soooo, the company I theoretically work for has lost three weeks of productivity and it will probably take another two after that. This isn't the first time either. I once sat (paid) for three weeks in Social Services doing nothing as I was not allowed to touch any of their systems until I had been checked. Not only did they want to know about me but also my last two girlfriends, neither of whom I presently speak with. Crazy. Though one of them might be a terrorist. Or clinically insane at any rate.

Then, two years ago, at a major consultancy, I was supposed to be working on a project for the Metropolitan Police. The contract was just a short one, billed to the Met, and in the two months of the contract, thanks to the form taking its time, I never actually touched the system I was hired to work on. That is with the exception of the last week in which the work I did was meaningless since, "for security reasons", the "greater than" symbol had been disabled from the SQL command processor. SQL nerds will realise how utterly insane this is.

In fact, in the last five years of contracting I think I can probably clock up at least six months where I have been paid for doing absolutely nothing. Some former bosses may hold that figure to be something around er... five years, but those six months were waiting for various government departments to check and recheck that I am not a terrorist.

And for what? My teacher friend remarks that she has similar issues when she moves schools. All the checks actually tell you is that you haven't previously mauled a child to death. So a tiger would probably qualify purely on the basis that it has no prior history of mauling children. But so long as the database says it's ok, then it's ok. I'm not alone in this. I've seen entire departments put on hold for similar reasons. This is pure insanity and it costs industry billions in lost productivity.

And so what is the governments solution to this? Well, as yet, there isn't one yet but it is coming. The Scottish "Government" has now given licence to the private sector for these checks to be done on the open market at a mere cost of £20. That way you get a licence to work for the public sector or any company working for the public sector. Suffice to say most government embedded corporates will now not even consider you unless you have been vetted by this system in England or Scotland. That might not be such a problem except that from now that pretty much includes every corporate in the country.

So while there is no legal compulsion to submit your personal data to the government and their corporate stooges, you're going to have to if you want to work. And conveniently this licence to work now has an expiry date so workers at their own expense must be recleared every now and then. Those who have ever committed a crime against the state (and that includes tax evasion and driving bans) need not apply.

And so we risk creating a two tier society. Those who are eligible to work and those who are not. And they would prefer those who are not to stay on the dole where they are supposed to be. Too paranoid? Just you wait! While some politicians have been foaming at the mouth about ID cards, they have completely ignored the gradual noose tightening elsewhere and in many cases supported it in the name of road safety, and to protect us from the armies of terrorists who aren't attacking us. What this amounts to is a new electronic class system. Those who dare to be different can forget about working (and probably driving) ever again.

ID cards were the red herring. We will sleepwalk into the society we are most afraid of.

An Indifference to Democracy.

This is not a post to discuss our role in Afghanistan. I will leave that to our leader. Though I cannot let this go entirely without comment.

The extent of my comment shall be that if our soldiers are at war, then they should have the appropriate equipment for the type of war they are fighting. Nothing original there. But that is an empty sentiment that politicians use to clear their throats and they do not know what they are talking about. They do not care either, so long as a political point is scored. The details will be left to the bureaucrats and that is why soldiers continue to die. That is a topic for another time. The rest of this post will be on a slightly different tack.

Readers of Defence of the Realm will know by now that this ambush is fairly typical of tactics employed by Iraqi insurgents and we yet again are blundering into the same situations, suffering the same casualties, for the same reasons. This occurs because the MOD has sought to stifle debate and censor politcally damaging information under the guise of "Operational Security" and our lazy and indifferent media have been happy to be spoonfed MOD propaganda without once engaging their critical faculties.

This is a pretty standard tactic from our government. They who sought to deny the public the details and rationale for their wholesale slaughter of the national beef herd during the BSE and FMD crisis. It is the same mechanics that will leave the countryside bristling with useless wind turbines while the media brainlessly quotes their installed capacity ratings. For the same reasons we will eventually end up with £5000 energy bills as we attempt to save the not-very-endangered polar bear.

The government inures itself to criticism, distorts the truth and feeds us straw man arguments based on weak science in the certain knowledge that neither the media nor the public will be any the wiser. And half the time, they're right. The system is designed that way.

But this tells us something of the mindset of our government. All government in fact. That we are too stupid to handle the truth, that we must be sheltered from the details and that really, the running of the country is none of our business. They really would prefer that we didn't participate. This democracy thing is slow and inconvenient and really, why should they involve us? They get everything right don't they?

Tory in "making sense" shocker.

Today we have a rare instance of Boris Johnson almost making sense. "Boris Johnson, the Mayor of London, said yesterday that European plans to regulate the financial services sector threatened to drive hedge funds out of London and Europe, even though they were "blameless" for the crisis."

Too bad he's a buffoon and tories can't be trusted.

The Mayor called on Lord Mandelson, the Business Secretary, and the Government to help him to resist. However, Lord Mandelson, who spoke immediately after Mr Johnson, said that it was in Britain's best interests to co-operate with Europe.

Because that's worked so well so far.

"We've got to be involved in the regulation. We won't influence EU policy by cutting ourselves out of Europe.

We won't influence EU policy by engaging in "Europe" either.

I hope that's a message Boris takes to his colleagues," he said, adding that London must stay alert to competition in the rest of the world and stay ahead of the curve. He added: "Cultural change in the boardrooms and back offices will need to take place. Old-fashioned banking needs to return to the City."

What? like before the EU inspired FSA?

We have ways of making you safe.

We have found the source of yesterdays somewhat enigmatic poll in the Norwich Evening News. As it happens, killer penguins are not the problem, nor do pensioners need bolt on armour. But they are "at risk".

While we would share their concern for our elderly, Norwich isn't exactly LA South Central, nor is there justification for busy-body snooping by councils and charities. But that doesn't stop them. Dan Grimmer explains:

Members of Norfolk County Council's fire and community protection overview and scrutiny panel are next week set to agree to investigate community safety issues and their relevance to elderly people in the county.

They plan to examine the susceptibility of elderly people to a string of crimes, ranging from violent crimes such as assaults and robberies to anti-social behaviour such as intimidating trick and treaters at Halloween.

Guess who's paying for that! It is our view, as libertarians, that this kind of work is not the responsibility of government. It is the duty of the community and families to organise themselves, not least because government sucks at it, but because these working groups usually do nothing more than highlight inventive new ways of wasting your money, with nothing much beyond glossy brochures to show for it.

If there is a problem in this regard it is because government has created it. As social housing has gradually ghettoised the elderly, for the convenience of social services administration, we have stripped away the normal structures of a working community and the gradual encroachment of the state in the affairs of the family has done more to demolish the concept of individual responsibilty than any other force.

As we have allowed the state to assume much of the responsibility for the care of our elderly it has gradually worsened and as a result we have the very worst reputation for the care of our elderly than any other Western civilized nation. But if communities organised themselves, these people would quickly find they were out of work and so need to find ways of keeping busy at our expense...

The working group which will be set up will also explore crimes such as distraction burglaries and rogue traders, where criminals particularly target the elderly and frail.

Capitalising on the "terrible thing" syndrome, they will no doubt amplify the problems to convince you to part with more of your money. Not that they need to convince you. They just steal it anyway.

But it is not just crime which the study aims to investigate. Fire-related safety, covering the risk to elderly people from unsafe electrical products, carbon monoxide and lack of smoke detectors will also be explored. The group also intends to investigate the overarching issue of confidence and reassurance, establishing the extent to which elderly people are happy that the police and other local public services are dealing successfully with anti-social behaviour and crime where they live.

It doesn't matter if the police and public services are any good, just so long as elderly folk have "confidence" and if they do not we will "reassure" them.

“With elderly people we need to make closer links with social services. For example if someone is making an assessment for home care for an elderly person and realises they don't have a smoke detector, they make a note of that and inform the fire service.”

You will be protected whether you want protecting or not and we will report you if you do not! Now I don't know about anyone else, but I think I'm more at risk of heart failure and stress related illnesses from smoke detectors than I am from burning to death, since they go off when I happen to so much as cough or pop the toaster. I don't think I've ever lived in a single property where the smoke detector hasn't met with an abrupt end due to sudden impact with a heavy object because it won't shut up, even when the battery is removed.

I'm afraid that house fires and such are just one of those things we can file under "sh*t happens". But the Health & Safety Taliban can not allow you to make grown up decisions for yourself and you defacto become vulnerable the moment you get your bus pass.

“We are working up an idea of developing a risk assessment questionnaire so we can figure out who could be responding to their needs.”

Your behavior will be monitored and assessed and we must help you whether you ask to be helped or not. We are forced to ask, where does this stop? As Ian Parker Joseph, leader of LPUK, remarked to me earlier, "Do they suggest guards on every old persons door? Or herding them all off to 'secure' housing on ex RAF bases? This is just more of the politics of fear, let's scare everyone with a minor problem and pretend it a HUGE problem." And as ever, if the people live in fear, they will hand more power and more money to the government...

Barbara Norrice, 87, was one pensioner who did fall prey to a rogue trader who convinced her to pay for shoddy work at her home in the south-east of Norwich. She was preyed on by Michael Rourke, a conman who charmed the elderly woman and convinced her to believe he could help with jobs. After bodging the building of a brick wall and convincing Miss Norrice he had done a good job he then said he could transform her crumbling driveway for £4,000. Rourke marched her down to the nearest cash machine in October last year where she handed over £1,000 believing him to be trustworthy.

He then asked for another £500 which she gave him a cheque for but all he did for the cash was put patio sand along the cracks on the driveway. Fortunately, Rourke's callous scam was found out and in May the 42-year-old, of Mansfield Lane in Norwich, was sent to jail for 12 months after he appeared at Norwich Crown Court and admitted four counts of fraud by false representation.

Miss Norrice said: “I would willingly support anything that can be done to stop what happened to me from happening to other people.”

And therein lies your problem. This is not an every day occurrence. But if people think it is...

It's your money folks...

Small and medium businesses in the East of England are being advised by the British Chambers of Commerce to take advantage of improved access to more than £100million in interest-free and unsecured loans from the Carbon Trust. For Carbon Trust read DEFRA. That's £100m of your money the government is playing bank with.

David Frost, director general of British Chambers of Commerce, said: “In the current downturn cash is king and one of the first places struggling businesses should look to redeem cash is in their business premises where it's possible to eliminate energy wastage.

(With your money that is).

Authoritarian Tories Start As They Mean To Go On

Iain 'Nice Tie' Dale

Anyway, later this morning I am driving up to Norwich to do some by election campaigning today and tomorrow. I gather that all Tory candidates are supposed to clock in and out like schoolchildren and get forms signed. That won't be happening. What a shame my printer doesn't work.

Iain Dale

You are a rebel Iain, trouble is this is how destiny Dave wants to run the country.

Labour Suppresses Own Splinter Group AGAIN

That's right folks, the BNP (the racist wing of the Labour Party) are being actively discriminated against by the non-political civil service. Non-political my ample beige hide. This government controls the banks, it controls the media, it sets up and runs fake charities*, and it has and will use any-and-every tool at its disposal to get what it wants, regardless of the basic principles of our constitution. If it could force the Queen to give party political broadcasts for Labour at Christmas then it would.

UK diplomats shun BNP officials in Europe

Why is Labour going to such lengths to obstruct the BNP? It's really very simple. Labour abandoned Clause 4, its commitment to nationalisation; the BNP did not. The Labour Party are rapidly losing its working class base to the BNP, legitimately, on the basis of policy. It's fair to assume that many who vote BNP are not racist. What to do...

"British jobs for British workers" eh Gordon? Seemed crazy at the time; but then you were desperate, you'd seen the polls, you knew what was happening. The core Labour vote is either leaving in a huff, or switching to one of the newer authoritarian parties, the BNP, the Greens, or in the Euro's, even No2EU. At the next election it's not going to be an issue of protest votes, their votes will be very real, the polls will hold.

I recommend you vote for the Libertarian Party instead. We have principles, such as free speech. If you live in Norwich North, you have the opportunity to vote for Thomas Burridge on Thursday the 23rd.

Thanks to Patrick and Mark Wadsworth for flagging this one.

*Some of which then throw eggs at Griffin and deny his free speech. UAF Supporters (includes David Cameron).



EDIT: Why not join the REAL Unite Against Fascism, pro-free speech Facebook Group?

Donate

We need to keep the funds rolling in and thank you for all your donations to date.

As you know the LPUK has a policy of accepting only individual donations, we don't get whacking great donations from Unite, or City PLC's. That way we are not serving the interests of any special interest group - just the people of this country.

This means fighting an election is a huge financial effort.

You can click on the donate button, or direct to our election fund:

40-28-20 92635313

If you are a member put your surname and membership number so it can be accounted for properly.

Optimism

Make a sentence out of the following words: planet, which, on?, he, is.

Britain is ready to cut its number of nuclear warheads as part of global deal to persuade Iran and North Korea to give up the arms race, Gordon Brown has said.

Good luck with that.

Just ignore me.

I've been looking at the Norwich Evening News for blogworthy stories, what with there being a by-election and such. On their site there is an online poll asking "Should more be done to protect Norfolk’s elderly population?"

My question is; protect them from what? Climate change? Roadside bombs? Killer penguins? What kind of protection? Are they suggesting they should have bolt on armour? Or Thompsons Weather Seal perhaps??

The mind boggles. I really should go to bed.

Never trust a Tory...

Over in Hyde Park in Leeds there is a piece of graffiti which reads "Never trust a junkie". On more than a few occasions I have been tempted to amend it to "Never trust a Tory" since they are one and the same. They tell you want you want to hear but the moment your back is turned they have their hands in your wallet.

As someone of a natural (libertarian) conservative disposition I have come to learn over the years that Conservatives only ever say things if there is a vote to be had. Hence why I find myself in the company of libertarians with whom I do not always agree.

While I have remarked that ideology must be our guide and not our ruler I am more favourably disposed to those who stand by principle because even when they are willing to compromise there are lines they will not cross. That cannot be said for the Tories. There is no line they will not cross if the wind is blowing that particular way.

We have seen two decades of prevarication and procrastinating over Europe and the referendum question is beginning to look like the Ross and Rachel "will they, won't they" saga on the US sitcom "Friends". And so it comes as no surprise that on a local level there are mixed messages.

We have seen three years worth of Camoron making substanceless pronouncements on his commitment to "fighting the effects of climate change", but today we learn from Norfolk Blogger that this only extends as far as window dressing tools such as windmills. While there is evidently squillions in the kitty for Carbon Capture Storage, in terms of real pragmatic preparations for the possible effects of climate change, the people of Norfolk are expected to fend for themselves.

Whether or not you accept that man made climate change is real, the effects of coastal erosion and flooding in Norfolk are very real. While we as libertarians are somewhat laissez faire, we do draw the line at allowing our kinfolk to drown. But this is pretty typical of policy making in Norfolk. Donning my tinfoil hat for a moment, I must question if there is a connection between this and the plan announced in March last year to allow a sizable portion of Norfolk to be ceded to the sea. I think we should be told.

100%

There is quite a bit of noise on the blogosphere about the return of 100%+ mortgages. This is no bad thing.

The free market position is that such deals are between the provider and the individual. The provider judges risk against ability to pay. If one has been in a stable job for some time and the repayments are less than 50% of income then it's a pretty safe bet regardless of the lending threshold. LPUK does not support government intervention dictating what banks may lend and to whom, nor does it support government pressurising banks to offer mortgage products which counter banks own risk models. Banks lend on these grounds at their own risk and should not be bailed out on an individual basis as a result of bad investments.

However, at this point, I must reiterate some of the things I said yesterday. What we saw last year was exceptional circumstances due to the adoption of international rules on accounting standards. The credit crunch is a consequence of government mitigating risk from the equation. In the United States, under the Community Reinvestment Act, there was a direct compulsion to provide disproportionately risky mortgages which spawned a market for disposal of bad assets.

Many UK banks were owners of these bad assets which made up some of their balance sheets. In the UK the rules regarding capital adequacy and Mark to Market (EU rules) lead banks to believe that their asset worth was higher than the reality and made loans up to that value. Subsequently they loaned out more than they were worth. When it was discovered that CDO bundles were phony they were prevented by law from lending leading to a freeze in inter-bank lending, from which all subsequent economic problems flowed. The bailout was an emergency measure to restore capital adequacy to prevent a total collapse of the banking system on which so much depends.

While Austrian School economics does apply, the perversion of the banking system via various transnational regulatory mechanisms is unprecedented and at no time in history have banking systems been so intimately intertwined with other business systems. Not least ATM's, PAYE, BACS payroll etc. The consequences of a cascade failure are too dreadful to comprehend and the crisis was not necessarily the result of malinvestments since many of the C rated assets were still performing. This was a failure of regulation. Whether or not a collapse would have been a consequence was simply not a debate any Western economy had the luxury of affording itself at the time. It was a gamble and one of the few instances where doing something was preferable to doing nothing.

It is a reasonable assumption that LPUK does not support this bailout, not least because there is zero transparency as to who gets the money and why and because it gives government licence to dictate lending policy or at least gives government undue leverage. This is not an unreasonable objection. I have deep reservations myself in that government is incapable of managing a crisis without affording itself more control and the long term effects of further intervention could well be more problematic to say the least. Extracting government from private affairs once it is involved is never easy.

As those who questioned the Iraq war demanded an exit strategy we also demand an exit strategy from the Banks. It is not the business of government to intervene in banks or run them since it is singularly incapable of running a the proverbial brewery piss-up.

I can therefore say with certainty that LPUK would demand that the FSA be abolished and all control of fiscal regulation be returned to the UK under a single regulatory authority. My own view is that Mark to Model be instigated at the first opportunity, after which all direct government intervention in banks should cease and a a timetable for withdrawal be presented to parliament, followed by an enquiry which the government has so far denied us.

Keep it dirty

On the subject of silly pledges, I feel it necessary to offer my own counter pledge. If my MP were to sign this I would work for him.

We the undersigned pledge that:

1. If I feel the dishonourable gentlemen opposite is being a prize twit, I call him thus.
2. I will maximize my expenses because I have to swan up and down the country listening to you lot moaning when you haven't the first idea of what an MP is actually for, and thanks to the piss-poor management of rail policy I have to mortgage my second home just to afford the train fares.
3. I will accept bribes from local businesses to affect policy because, frankly, if they want the government to stop doing something then it's probably in all our best interests (and it means I can have a new Beamer).
4. I will do whatever I can to evade taxes but if I come up with any winning ideas I promise to share them with my constituents.
5. I will not publish any of my accounts because what I do with my money is none of your business.
6. I will use expenses to furnish my second home with top notch gear because if I have to do my job out of Aldgate Travelodge I will suck at it.
7. I will throw paper aeroplanes whenever Tony Benn is speaking and make loud jeering noises.
8. All that being said, I will turn up to select committee meetings however dull, I will miss the last tube to stay at an important debate, I will challenge waste, incompetence and bad policy wherever I find it, I will read bills before I vote for them, I will point out whenever my colleagues come up with "eye-catching initiatives" who exactly is paying for it, why it will inevitably fail and the fact that the EU probably won't let us do it anyway.

The serious point in there is that we are more than used to institutional larceny from our MP's. It is par for the course. What we're bitter about is the fact they're a bunch of lame brain, bone idle twerps who've sold us down the river simply because they have failed to do their jobs.

Just one MP putting the kybosh on a quango budget of several million pounds by doing their research makes a few extra grand on the side worth every penny. It's the fact that they are all crooks but don't do their jobs that stings.

And so signing up to this tokenistic drivel of yours serves nothing. You can be as clean cut as you like but a brain-dead careerist is a brain-dead careerist.

Blog Standard

Earlier today I had a read of two-or-a-few articles here on the LPUK Members' Blog from our new blogroach Mr North. Bollocks I thought; this is all corporate spin; it doesn't get to the crux of the Crunch; it doesn't explain why the economy is battered, it's just an analysis of some of the stuff that happened, some of the momentary causes, not the significant underlying laws of motion; its conclusions won't stave off a future doomsday. In short it was all orthodox economics. Well written, attractively presented, and well adapted for a quick read over one's regulatory imposition of a lunch break.

The further thought occurred, that since these - as usual - were well written, and well represented the orthodox corporatist narrative, they'd be very welcome on either the LabourList or ConservativeHome blogs.

I did a quick Google, and found this from Labour:
Stop moaning Peter [Tatchell]...
...decrying Tatchell's continued and entirely correct assertion that civil partnerships do not result in equal treatment; to borrow an Americanism "separate but equal" is nonsense...

And this from the Tories:
Vince Cable was wrong...
...explaining how Andrew Lilico was right-that-it-was-right that over 100% mortgages would and should come back soon... Nice. Yes, well it's no secret that these guys would prefer to try re-inflating an already popped bubble than face reality, and they're bullying previously prudent banks into doing that for them: Nationwide offers 125pc mortgage...

So Mr North, maybe some of those posts do belong on the blog of one of the main parties, but if so they'd best the hateful and arse-numbingly stupid gibberish that Tweedledum and Tweedledumberer are currently spewing out de rigueur. Their thesis was ultimately empty, but at least they contained some real information.

As you were.

Tokenism

Rupert Read, the Norwich North Green candidate is pushing a bandwagon.

He evidently thinks we are better served if MP's do not have outside business interests or second jobs. That's just what we need. More careerist politicians even more insulated from the real world with nothing at risk from the policies they make. And Quelle surpise!! Chloe Smith has signed the pledge. Of course she doesn't want a second job. Her whole life has been geared to becoming an MP. In this instance MP stands for Monumental Prat.

Speaking of which, the UKIP candidate is a tad optimistic.

Who is buying this garbage? How gullible do they think we are?

A question of priorities...

Defence Secretary Bob Ainsworth has warned that the British death toll in Afghanistan will rise. Though Shadow Defence Secretary Liam Fox, once again, has got better things to do down the pub with our little Chloe.

Such a waste...

Norwich has a problem with rubbish. Namely its government. Though I would like to extend my congratulations to the people of Norwich for successfully defeating plans to build a multi-million pound waste incinerator billed as "an alternative solution to the city's growing waste problem".

But that "growing waste problem" is not a naturally occurring problem. It is one created by our government in Brussels under the European Waste Framework Directive...

The county council, which was pursuing a waste plant because of the threat of fines triggered by the amount of rubbish going to landfill has said it will avoid penalties by focusing on smaller scale schemes with the council working more closely with district authorities.

Yep, those landfill taxes are the killer. In fact they are the only thing that makes expensive alternatives viable and it seems that even then it's not an attractive prospect in this economic climate.

I suppose this would be a good time to point out that LPUK does not support membership of the EU or market distorting taxes. We also recognise that landfill has an important role to play in our energy mix (see picture). We are not bound by Luddite superstitions.

Call me a cynic...

"Scores of Norwich jobs saved" says the Norwich Evening News

Scores of jobs look to have been saved after the outsourcing firm Capita stepped back from making 210 people in Norwich redundant. Capita warned in April that it expected large-scale job cuts at its office in the city under an "efficiency drive" - with some of the work being transferred to India. But now it has emerged that fewer than 25 jobs may be lost when the firm's 90-day redundancy consultation with staff ends later this month .

Crapita, the very embodiment of corporate fascism is NOT shedding jobs in Norwich just before an election. That's convenient. Meanwhile, as Crapita folks get to keep their jobs pushing government forms around, others in the productive sector are not so lucky.

Donations

We need to keep the funds rolling in and thank you for all your donations to date.

As you know the LPUK has a policy of accepting only individual donations, we don't get whacking great donations from Unite, or City PLC's. That way we are not serving the interests of any special interest group just the people of this country.

This means fighting an election is a huge financial effort

You can click on the donate button, or direct to our election fund

40-28-20 92635313

If you are a member put your surname and membership number so it can be accounted for properly

Conservatives plan new alcohol curbs on sensible drinkers

Yes, you did read that right. 99.9875% of the population do not cause any trouble with their responsible drinking habits, but the Conservative shadow Home Office minister James Brokenshire is planning new curbs and bans on alcohol use, and the Conservative spin machine is working overtime.

Data obtained by shadow home office minister James Brokenshire shows that the number of deaths related to alcohol rose 40 per cent to 7,341 between 1999 and 2008.

That is 7,341 out of a population of 80,000,000, or a Conservative led national panic inducing level of 0.0125%.

The reason all these Terrible-Thing-related deaths increase so fast is that the definition of what constitutes a related death is cast wider and wider. James Brokenshire is well aware of this. He's anticipating the reins of power and the yoke of control and getting ready to take over where his predecessors leave off. Interfering in every little detail of our lives until we can be arrested for wearing the wrong kind of hat.

Mr Brokenshire said: "I am increasingly worried that the Government's decision to introduce 24-hour drinking is having a real impact on antisocial behaviour in our town centres and not nearly enough is being done to tackle it.

Where did binge drinking come into the figures? He's added that in for effect. The figures make no distinction whether the deaths were due to a binge or a glass of wine. He sounds just like the hysterical harpies we have running the country now, and he has no more idea of what to do about it than do they. The 'enormity' of the problem affects less than 0.0125% of the population.

But because he can, he will make sure that the other 99.9875% of the population will be regulated and will pay for it. Further curbs and bans on Alcohol will be devestating for the already hard pressed pub trade.

Tories really are the new Blue Labour. Normal service will continue, Nanny state with a new coloured coat. The truth is that alcohol abuse is such a small problem in the wider context, but this is about spin and control. We have had enough of this kind of spin from Labour, we will not tolerate it from the Conservatives.


If you continue to vote the same, you will continue to get the same. Simples.

 

 

Fantasy Politics

It's always comfortable and easy to rely on dogmatic ideology. With Afghanistan it's easy and requires no thought whatsoever to say "bring the boys home". In banking it's also easy to say "don't bail anything out". In energy we can say "leave it to the free market". It requires no thought, no action, no understanding and it's appealing too.

To take such a line ignores the consequences of inaction. To simply pull out of Afghanistan would leave a war ravaged country without any of the benefits we promised, leading to an eventual return of the Taliban, possibly leading to a civil war with potentially terrifying knock on effects to Pakistan. Now if somebody did that to the UK, I'd be a tad pissed off and would be ordering flying lessons to stage another 911.

Similarly with banking. It is uncertain what effect the bailouts have had. However we can say with reasonable confidence that had we not bailed out the banks, a great many of them would have folded (even if only temporarily) resulting in masses of job losses and suspended accounts leaving an untold number of ordinary people out of pocket and, to be frank, knee deep in shit creek. While that may yet still happen, had it all happened at once it would have been nothing short of a catastrophe.

In energy policy it is equally easy and convenient to say "leave it to the free market". But after years of energy policy being used as "a tool in the fight against climate change" there is a lot of money invested in systems that would not otherwise be viable were it not for regulatory incentives. A libertarian withdrawal from such policies is necessary but to simply yank the plug sends out signals that the investment environment is unstable and subsequently there may be no volunteers to build the generation plant we need and would be forced into building it ourselves.

You could say "let them go bankrupt, they've been riding this bonanza for long enough, they've had enough of our money and it's time to let in a new market entrant". It's tempting isn't it? I would certainly not lose any sleep were Scottish and Southern Energy to fold. The last thing we need is ossified corporates draining yet more money from our wallets. But anyone who has an inclination of how complex the gas supply administration system is, knows that this is something which simply cannot fail without hugely damaging consequences.

A more nuanced approach is required. As we have seen with the Obama administration, turning promises into reality is not always easy. Wasn't Gitmo supposed to be closed by now?

While libertarians wouldn't have got us into these messes, ideology alone does not get us out of these messes quite so easily. Ideology can only get you so far. Very often the realities clash with what we would prefer to do and taking a hard line ideological stance on anything shows rigidity, inflexibility and an unwillingness to take on board complexities. It fails also to acknowledge that the transition from perpetual governmental ineptitude to a functioning free society is no easy feat and that change must be managed.

The same can be said of UKIP with their magic bullet of leaving the EU. The "hows" and the "what thens?" remain unanswered. And that is why libertarianism, especially in the Conservatives is losing (not that we care about them).

Too often the response to any dilemma boils down to "do nothing" and it doesn't stand up to the first "what if". Where governments are concerned it is generally best that governments do nothing rather than something, but pretending libertarianism is a magic bullet is equally as flawed as the belief that governments are here to help us. Unless we can offer pragmatic solutions guided by our ideology, not ruled by it, we may as well be playing fantasy politics.

Food for thought.

The Economy Part 3: Bailouts

Moved to East Anglian Blog

The Economy Part 2: Bubbles, Regulations and Safety Nets

Moved To East Anglian LPUK Blog

The Economy Part 1: It was the EU, in the library, with the candle stick.

Right now we are all feeling the pinch of the recession, not least the good people of Norwich North for whom negative equity is a reality. In this series of posts we will attempt to shed some light on how we got here and what we would do differently.

It doesn't take a genius to work out that if you lend out more money that you actually have, you're going to get into trouble. Generally, we're fine with people doing this. Actions have consequences. If bad businesses fail, good ones emerge in their place.

However the banking system is the lead domino in a chain and last year there was a justifiable fear that the collapse of one could have resulted in a cascade failure taking out the whole system on which our families and businesses depend. Generally speaking Libertarians do not approve of bailouts but in this instance the consequences of a wholesale overnight collapse were far too grave to consider or comprehend. Had the banking system collapsed it would have been a spectacular failure of government with unfathomable consequences. We were therefore in the uncomfortable position of using public money to prop up a failed system.

Some libertarians, particularly American, would flat out argue that the banks should have been allowed to fail. To me this is an absurd proposition. We were always in for a major crash and when so much depends on banking, any response would have had to be geared toward deflating the bubble at a manageable pace. A revaluation and downscaling of economic activity was inevitable but had we allowed it to happen overnight it would likely have been beyond our ability to manage. Shock therapy would have ruined many whose only crime was to be in debt.

The decision to intervene, therefore, was not a happy one, but it was the least worst option available. Though we may prefer to hold true to our principles, pragmatism dictates that we play the hand we are dealt. That being said, it is the breaking with free market principles that has brought us to this place to begin with.

Libertarians recognise the necessity for debt. It is an essential function of business. We also appreciate the necessity to take risks. However what we have seen in recent years is a gradual manipulation of the banking system to achieve political ends. This is not only a UK problem. It is global. What we have seen is not a failure of capitalism but a failure of regulation and the culmination of a series of politically motivated, populist interventions with socialist intent.

In the United States this began with the Community Reinvestment Act which essentially placed a government guarantee on all sub-prime mortgages so as to ensure minorities were given an the opportunity of home ownership. In other words, the natural equilibrium had been removed by government whereby risk was mitigated and the banks were given a licence to print money.

The second major component in our downfall was the CDO problem. This link explains it far better than I ever could. This then created a global contagion whereby banks and investment brokers had no idea what they were buying and subsequently banks asset portfolios became significantly overvalued. This is where much of the blame has been placed for our current predicament because it allows governments to blame the banks, but to my mind this demonstrates the ability of the private sector to innovate in designing rapid systems to dispose of "assets" they would not have had were it not for government intervention. But governments can't let that get in the way of a handy scapegoat.

In the classic tradition of government creating a problem and then attempting to resolve it with yet more intervention, rules were placed upon the banking system dictating the amounts they were allowed to lend. Rules at the time, implemented by the EU based on the Basel2 banking conventions (used also by the US), dictated that banks could only lend up to their actual asset value. But the rules stipulated their asset valuation could only be calculated based on their market value at the time. The infamous Mark to Market rules. Subsequently the banks found in the wake of the CDO induced panic that their assets were all of a sudden worthless and were unable to lend to each other, creating what we now know as the credit crunch. Subsequently house prices had to adjust to meet the amounts of money house buyers were able to obtain.

The the problem with Mark to Market is that it assumes that because the markets value asset bundles as worthless that they are without intrinsic worth. This is wrong. If an asset bundle is worth £50,000 on the market and there's 50,000 mortgages in it, it does not stand to reason that the valuation is accurate. There is no way anyone would value a house at £1. A simple rule change to Mark to Model whereby a more accurate system of valuation is used would have meant the asset value was more realistic and the bailouts would have been a fraction of what they were.

So why not just change to rules? Well, why not just abolish the Common Agricultural Policy? Because we have to get the agreement of 27 other countries. Successive attempts to reform it have failed for this reason. Banking is the same, for the FSA is not wholly a British institution. As ever it bears all the hallmarks of EU "subsidiarity" whereby we can create all the legislative bodies we like so long as they enact EU directives.

So why is the UK biting the turd sandwich harder than the United States? Well if you recall the first bailout bill was defeated by congress and passed the second time only on the proviso that the rules were reformed. Our parliament had no such luxury. In fact our own parliament was not even consulted. Mr Brown went off to Europe to get his marching orders.

But that is not to say this is all the EU's fault. Like the US, we implemented our own policies to encourage bad lending, not least to give the illusion of economic growth when in fact we were creating a debt bubble. We will examine this more in part two.

There are also wider agendas at work. Today we learn from The Daily Telegraph that "The Government has unveiled plans to give new powers to regulators to curb bankers' pay and clamp down on risky lending in the wake of the worst financial crisis in decades." And in so doing they show their true colours. It has used a crisis it created to award itself more control and more power to set wages and prices. Last month we had the announcement from the FSA that it was banning commission on the sale of retail financial products. This in itself will wipe out a whole industry to serve a populist agenda.

To conclude part one, it is our view that government creates more problems than it solves and the bigger the government, the less capable it is of responding to problems. So we would withdraw from the EU and ensure any regulatory body would be a single authority answerable to our own government and our government alone. We would resist the urge to meddle in affairs of markets and allow the natural elements of risk and loss to be the main regulator.

It is also our view that we are fatally weakened by a debt based society. We would therefore remove the various safety nets in our society which allow people to think that saving, fiscal prudence and personal responsibility are secondary to their own instant gratification. We will examine these issues in part two.

You Can Talk To Us - We Don't Bite

London, United Kingdom
British Broadcasting Corporation (132.185.240.120) [Label IP Address]
lpuk.blogspot.com/2009/07/greens-seek-pact-withe.html
lpuk.blogspot.com/2009/07/greens-seek-pact-withe.html
No referring link

One in Ten Mortgage holders in Norwich Are in Negative Equity

Thats what it says here

After twelve years of Labour financial incompetence, and thirty years of its an investment not a home, we have got to the point young people cannot afford to buy a home of their own, people are paying mortgages that are far in excess of the value of the house and there is no money to build social housing.

Food and shelter ate the two most basic requirements of human beings, our food supply is in the hands of monopolistic supermarkets who are killing off farming (thats another story) and our housing is likewise supplied by the large monopoly house builders.

It is as true today as it ever was that if you restrict the supply of something its value goes up. Same with Housing the State has imposed artificial restrictions were you can and cannot build. Net result the large disconnect between agricultual and land with the Golden Planning permission. The Net Net Result is that houses are hugely unaffordable in relation to salaries.

The LPUK advocates sweeping away these artificial controls, this will allow houses to become affordable, and stop vast swathes of the population becoming mortgage slaves to frightened to stand up for their rights and freedoms, in case they lose their job, and their houses.

In the Middle Ages they called this bonded serfdom, well done Labour, you have managed to reintroduce serfdom and create a new class of 'nobility' like Mandelson.

The Housing boom and bust (sorry Gordon I know you had abolished this) is directly the result of interfering with the market.
.

Greens Seek A Pact With the Cons/LibDems/Labour

The Greens in Norwich North would like to join the club and have a 'clean' election.

The Libertarians have no objection to that, but then again we have not been asked to join the club, unfortunately its a bit late for that when fellow candidate Craig Murray is already being denied the use of facilities by the local authority.

Only candidates who have a chance of winning are going to be allowed to use facilities apparently, join the club of the Righteous. Every candidate has a chance, either a big chance or a slight chance, but every candidate has an equal right to be heard on a level playing field. It is not up to the Governors of schools or local newspaper/editors to weed out the parties. That is the job of the electors.

What I am more concerned about is clean politics after the election.

Conservatives- Big State, central control (Dave) High Taxes

Labour - Big State, central control (who knows) High Taxes

Lib Dems - Big State, central control (Cleggy) High Taxes

Greens - Big State, central control (who knows) Big Green Taxes

Libertarian - Tiny State,devolved government, The Individual, Tiny Taxes

No wonder we are not on the invitation list to join the club, what is clean about robbing the taxpayer blind, then asking for a mandate for more of the same !

Hypocrisy, Thy Name is Fox

Liam Fox: "There's a war on - someone tell Labour"

Errrr. Look who's talking.

Tory boys of both sexes

Chloe's website, (the Norwich North clone), boasts that... "It's clear that, when the by-election is called, no candidate will have a stronger record of working for people in and around Norwich than Chloe." Apparently she has "put pressure on the city council to help people waiting for double glazing to be fitted in their council properties."

It may come as a surprise to little Chloe but not all of us proles live in council houses. There are a great many people whose chief ambition is to one day obtain a stable home in the form of a council house. Many of those people presently live days at a time without heating or hot water because the gas runs off a token meter thanks to the moronic policies of Brown and soon to be Camoron. Those days will soon turn into weeks.

It is therefore somewhat of a slap in the face to those people living in privately rented accommodation, to learn that their exorbitant council tax bills go toward double glazing for those in stable homes afforded to them by everyone else. It comes from a somewhat patronising mindset which assumes those with the good fortune to have a council house represent the lowest incomes. They do not, far from it. In fact, those most in need are likely never be even considered for a council house. But then what are we to expect from a sheltered little "tory boy" (they come in both sexes). We are not amused.

She also claims to have "pushed the council to address road problems across the Crome area - such as by testing out a 20 m.p.h. speed limit on Borrowdale Drive, and getting Heartsease Lane, Woodside Road and Plumstead Road East added to the Speed Awareness Monitor project" (another pointless quango?). Now the funny thing about people who ignore speed limits is that they will ignore them however low they are. And that is chiefly because they do not expect to be caught. And they're probably right. Thanks to our target culture the local speed Gestapo tend to go for the "Target Rich Environment". Does anyone think for a moment the Tories will reverse the very system they implemented?

And then we get to her support for "Save Our Post Offices". Does she know that this is an EU directive at work? Does she even get why Post Offices are closing? There is this little thing called "teh inter-web" which makes them non-viable. There is nothing a rural post office can do that a private post truck cannot. But we are expected to prop up post offices on some spurious argument that they are integral to the community. Has she considered the alternatives? Or is she just on the populist bandwagon?

I guess we'll never find out. She doesn't do substance. She's a real Tory.

Green Gestapo

This is what they mean by "creating jobs".

The boys in green are coming as the Environment Agency sets up a squad to police companies generating excessive CO2 emissions.

The agency is creating a unit of about 50 auditors and inspectors, complete with warrant cards and the power to search company premises to enforce the Carbon Reduction Commitment (CRC), which comes into effect next year.

Decked out in green jackets, the enforcers will be able to demand access to company property, view power meters, call up electricity and gas bills and examine carbon-trading records for an estimated 6,000 British businesses.

From brown shirts to green jackets.

The Secret Diary of Adrian Mole Chloe Smith aged 27¾

Yawn. Our distinctly beige, Tory-lite clone-didate for Norwich North is at it again with her enthralling clog blog. "It’s been a busy few days so sorry I haven’t had chance to update my blog." she reports. Well dear, thank God that you did because we over at LPUK could not have possibly waited another second without a new post.

Let's take a look shall we?

On Friday, Shadow Defence Secretary Liam Fox was in Norwich and we went to see the Soldiers, Sailors, Airmen and Families Association (SSAFA), based at the Territorial Army HQ on Aylsham Road – which does some fantastic work looking after the heroes who have given so much fighting for this country. I look forward to working closely with SSAFA if I am elected as the MP here in Norwich North.

We also went to pay our tributes at the city war memorial; it’s disgraceful that the city council continues to leave it in such a state. Liam and I discussed launching a competition to find the £2.6m cash need to complete the works on it – why not email me with ideas for what you would cut from the city council's current expenditure to allow our veterans to be properly remembered?

Well we would ask who the hell is quoting £2.6m? and, Why is it the council's job? More importantly; Hasn't Liam Fox got something slightly more important to do? There is a war on you know! You know, the one where senior commanders are being blown to bits in clapped out, useless vehicles? The one in which the UK government purchases vehicles the US rejected due to failing basic mine blast resistance tests? The one where we're building theme parks for the locals?

To our minds, there is enough to do without Liam swanning off round Norwich for a photo-op, propping up the career of a non-entity. This amounts to a serious dereliction of duty and perhaps the SSAFA wouldn't be so busy right now if people like him were doing their *expletive deleted* jobs. And again little Chloe, you're the one who's supposed to have the brilliant ideas about what to "cut from the city council's current expenditure to allow our veterans to be properly remembered".

She continues...

My weekend was then dedicated to canvassing and local summer fêtes. I was quite jealous that while I was getting sunburnt pounding the streets, others were happily soaking up the rays in their back gardens. I knocked on doors in one road for the fourth time this year and have now been down it in sun, snow, sleet and rain. Despite the sunburn, I really enjoyed getting the chance to talk to so many people over the weekend – one lady even got out of the bath to come and chat with me! At the Taverham Fayre I was told I was particularly handy at getting marbles into a flower pot – I’m sure they were just being kind. I was also followed around at the Mile Cross Festival by a rather large Labour supporter trying to take photos of me. It wasn't very subtle because he had a bright red rosette on.

That's nice dear. Got a policy yet?

Some bad news this morning when we learnt that one of the team helping me in the campaign had been taken ill with swine 'flu over the weekend, following a recent trip abroad. We had to alter our schedule slightly today to avoid going to see particularly vulnerable groups – such as a care home residents – but fortunately no one else on the team is showing any symptoms and I certainly feel fit as a fiddle. I'm sure my team member will be back and raring to go very soon.

Well if you're not passing Swine Flu around you're still in serious danger of boring
someone to death. Not least us. Is that how you intend to win?

Stay tuned for another exciting installment of Chloe Smith, The Wonder Years. Will Chloe form an opinion? Will Chloe have an idea of her own? Will her team be stricken with deadly Swine Flu? Will anyone care? Find out next week!!! Or not.

Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz.

Hello Boys And Girls Of The Conservative Party

London, United Kingdom
Conservative Central Office (194.203.158.97) [Label IP Address]
lpuk.blogspot.com/2009/07/thats-nice-dear.html
lpuk.blogspot.com/2009/07/money-well-spent.html
No referring link

Press Release 7th July 2009

NEWS RELEASE


Libertarian Party fields
youngest ever parliamentary candidate
at Norwich North


Thomas Burridge, aged 18, is the Libertarian Party candidate for the upcoming Norwich North by-election, and is set to make history as the youngest person ever to contest a Westminster seat. Thomas was accepted offically by the Returning Officer today.

Thomas is aware that his age may raise a few eyebrows. “People may ask what can I possibly know about anything at my age? Well, one thing I do know is that Labour excesses have left my generation with a massive debt that will take generations to pay off.” “It’s all the more painful because we were not given any say in the decisions that have forced us to spend the rest of our lives in debt.”

“Currently, the Tories and Labour are squabbling about cutting state spending by a pathetic 5 per cent. Whereas, the Libertarian Party want to scrap the whole rotten system. A system that has given us high personal taxes, squalid services and a corrupt parliament.” “I may not win this time, but I will be back in five years, and in another five years, if necessary. By which time, the guilty ones will be wallowing in their generous pensions – while my generation – The Debt Generation – will still be paying back the money that was squandered.”

The Libertarian Party believes in individual liberty, personal responsibility and freedom from government. Its most prominent policy is to scrap income tax, and transfer taxes to non-essential goods, leaving items such as food, heating and rent tax-free.

ENDS

For more information, or to arrange an interview, contact the Libertarian Party Norwich North Campaign Office on 01603 850573 or the media enquiries mobile on 07505 228618.

Further details are available on our campaign website: http://www.thomasburridge.com
Alternatively, visit the Libertarian Party website: http://www.lpuk.org

Money well spent.

North Senior is furious.

Cameron to give your most personal secrets to Microsoft

The Conservative spin machine is winding up its motors, issuing instructions on how Nudge should be implemented and is now in full swing as it tries to influence the population on its cost cutting measures.

There are a range of stories in the Torygraph this morning, but my interest piqued after looking at my site stats this morning and noticed that there had been an unhealthy interest in one particular posting, Quangos: The Unseen Government of the UK, which I had published in May last year.

The aggressive slashing of the ever growing numbers of quangos and their spiralling costs has been Libertarian Party published policy from the time of our launch 18 months ago.

Suddenly Libertarian Party policy is becoming all the rage, as The Telegraph has told us:

So just before Mr Cameron was due to outline his quango-cutting plans today, which involve "reviewing every independent public body", Liam Byrne, the Chief Secretary to the Treasury, announced that he had ordered a detailed breakdown of the bodies to "make sure every penny of public money goes to front-line services".

The Telegraph journalist Ed West goes on to say:

I wonder if, after Mr Byrne dictated that to his secretary, the whole room burst out laughing. Is the Milk Development Council a front-line service? Is Culture West Midlands a front-line service? How about the Zoo Forum?

Quite! However, the plans which are likely to come from Cameron and his Conservative policy makers are likely to make little difference to the quality of democracy, as the imperative on the Conservatives part to ensure the continuance of corporatist interests by deftly moving those quangos to corporate bodies are ably highlighted in a second Telegraph story with regards to NHS patient records.

The Conservatives, who have close links with Google, argue that developing a database would be unnecessarily expensive, and it would be more beneficial to hold the information on secure systems which already exist, such as Microsoft Healthvault or Google Health. Patients would be given the choice of storing their records with private companies, although it is not yet clear what would happen to the notes of patients who do not consent.

And this is where the Conservative and Libertarian Party most definitely part company. It is clear from Cameron's plans that he still believes in big state ownership of everyone's personal records. By giving such a contract to corporatist partners such as Google or Microsoft he is saying that he believes that these records are his to sell on as he sees fit to commercial organisations. Nor would there be massive cost savings as he claims, it would merely be redirecting the costs from uncountable quangos to an even more unaccountable commercial body. But then, that would be easier to keep off the books, so perhaps they have learned something from Brown.

The Libertarian Party firmly believe that those medical records belong to the individuals to whom they correspond, not the government, and that if they are to go anywhere, then they are to go to the individuals concerned. This method works well in France, where every X-Ray, every note, every record is the patients' property to take to whichever medical service provider he/she wishes.

It is this very bureaucracy that keeps and maintains those medical records in a centralised fashion which is one of the major cost centres for the NHS.

There has already been major arguments in government over the planned access to be provided to NHS records by medical research companies without recourse to the individuals concerned, and the farming of those records by big pharma companies. To put those records into the hands of commercial organisations en mass, organisations that are not even based in the UK and are therefore out of the jurisdiction of any UK government is in our view criminal on the part of the Conservative planners.

As part of The Libertarian Party's planned reforms of the NHS we will see those records being returned to their rightful owners, the patients. There is also a provision in those LPUK reforms to allow GP's to store those records on behalf of their patients as GP's are given greater autonomy to create revenues for their surguries and clinics locally in a variety of other ways.

The Conservative plans today will demonstrate that Cameron is getting ever deeper into the corporatist world, his Nudging will produce less democracy in the UK not more, but the conservative spin machine will pound away relentlessly pulling the wool over your eyes in the same way that Labour have done for the past 12 years.

So beware Cameron and his plans, they are not in your best interests, but as always in the interests of the commercial organisations that entwine themselves with government. There is a world of difference between privatisation and corporatism, but what Cameron brings you with these proposals is most definitely corporatism, and he will bring this to you with a smile and kind words..

Corporatism
Political scientists use the term corporatism to describe a practice whereby a state, through the process of licensing and regulating officially-incorporated social, religious, economic, or popular organizations, effectively co-opts their leadership or circumscribes their ability to challenge state authority by establishing the state as the source of their legitimacy, as well as sometimes running them, either directly or indirectly through corporations. At a popular level "corporatism" is used to mean the promotion of the interests of private business corporations in government over the interests of the public.

“Fascism should more appropriately be called Corporatism because it is a merger of state and corporate power” said Benito Mussolini. He would have known, wouldn't he.

History should teach us much, and over the past 10 years we have seen so much history repeating itself it is now endemic, but essential to that is one vital truth, that truth is that the last people to realise that a fascist state has been created, are those who live within it..


UPDATE: 6/Jul/09

David Camerons Conservatives really have now lost the plot completely: Almost as if by magic,David Cameron has just held a press conference where he told the assembled press:

“it would be far too simplistic for me to stand here and announce some kind of ‘Bonfire of the Quangos.’ People have heard that kind of talk many times before, and seen little to show for it. Instead, we need a more sophisticated approach. Yes we need to reduce the number, size, scope and influence of quangos…”

Well here are another 17 quangos the Tories have just proposed:

1. Office of Tax Simplification
2. Office of Budget Responsibility
3. Free national financial advice service
4. ‘Sports Commission’ (Australian model)
5. Office for Civil Society
6. Social Investment Bank
7. Skills advisory service for service personnel
8. Service for families of departing armed forces personnel
9. Military inquest family advisory service
10. International Aid Watchdog
11. Innovative Projects Agency
12. National Foundation for STEM
13. HealthWatch
14. Defence Export Services Organisation
15. All Age Careers Service
16. Voluntary Action Lottery Fund
17. A ‘development agency for libraries’

Source : Labour Party press office.

New quangos to interfere in almost every part of your life. An Office for Civil Society? This is a government takeover of everything and bringing it under State control. This is pure Communitarianism, a hybrid centre ground Fascism/Communism.. My political map, and my instincts are rarely wrong.

Communitarianism (Idea and Movement in politics) - "With the demise of true socialism as a viable intellectual force, communitarianism is now the most active philosophical opposition to libertarianism. Communitarianism is usually presented in a vague terms, but it is probably best understood as a mild form of collectivism or "democratic socialism."

That is the reality of Cameron's conservatives. Ed West, the Telegraph journalist who wrote the original article about Cameron's patient record/google plans said this in a Tweet to me earlier today:

Very sinister, this Conservative Party-Google reacharound party.

I now hope that this latest move by Cameron is sinister enough to get journalists everywhere writing about it.

Obama's Obsolete Iran Policy

The audacity of hope gives way to the timidity of realism.

President Obama's Iran policy is incoherent and obsolete. Maybe David Axelrod should take note.

On Sunday, Mr. Obama's consigliere was asked about Iran by ABC's George Stephanopoulos and NBC's David Gregory. Mr. Gregory asked whether there "should be consequences" for the regime's violent suppression of peaceful demonstrations. "The consequences, I think, will unfold over time in Iran," answered Mr. Axelrod.

Mr. Stephanopoulos quoted Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad as saying that "this time, the Iranian nation's reply will be harsh and more decisive to make the West regret its meddlesome stance." Said Mr. Axelrod, "I'm not going to entertain his bloviations that are politically motivated." As for whether the administration wasn't selling short the demonstrators, Mr. Axelrod could only say that "the president's sense of solicitude with those young people has been very, very clear."

Bottom line from Mr. Axelrod, and presumably Mr. Obama, too: "We are going to continue to work through . . . the multilateral group of nations that are engaging Iran, and they have to make a decision, George, whether they want to further isolate themselves in every way from the community of nations, or whether they are going to embrace that."

Translation: People of Iran -- best of luck!

For a president who came into office literally selling the Audacity of Hope -- not just for Americans but for all mankind -- his Iran policy can so far be summed up as the timidity of "realism." That's realism as a theory of international relations that prescribes a foreign policy based on ostensibly rational calculations of the national interest and assumes that other nations act in similarly rational fashion.

On this reasoning, it remains the American interest to reach a negotiated settlement with Tehran over its nuclear program, whether or not Ahmadinejad was fairly elected. Likewise, it is in Tehran's best interests to settle, assuming the benefits for doing so are sufficiently large.

If this view ever had its moment, it was in the months immediately after Mr. Obama's inauguration. The administration came to town thinking that America's problems with Iran were largely self-inflicted -- a combination of "Axis of Evil" and "regime change" rhetoric, an invasion that gave Iran a reasonable motive for wanting to arm itself with nuclear weapons, and an unwillingness to try to settle differences in face-to-face talks.

In other words, Mr. Obama seems to have thought that a considerable part of America's Iran problem was simply an America problem, to be addressed by various forms of conciliation: Mr. Obama's New Year's greetings to "the Islamic Republic of Iran"; the disavowal of regime change as a U.S. objective; the offer of direct talks without preconditions; withdrawal from Iraq; the insistence, following the election, that the U.S. would neither presume to judge the outcome nor otherwise "meddle" in an internal Iranian affair.

What did all this achieve? Iran's nuclear programs are accelerating. It is testing ballistic missiles of increasing range and sophistication. Its support for terrorist groups such as Hamas and Hezbollah is unabated. Ahmadinejad stole an election in broad daylight. Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei blessed the result. British Embassy staff are under siege. A campaign of mass arrests and intimidation is underway and a young woman named Neda Soltan was shot in the heart simply for choosing none of the above.

Oh, and Iran still accuses the U.S. of "meddling."

Now Mr. Obama is promising more of the same, plus the equivalent of a group hug for the demonstrators. Is this supposed to be "realism"?

A more common sense form of realism would reach different conclusions. One is that the "bloviations" of Ahmadinejad are not just politically motivated, but are also expressions of contempt for Mr. Obama. That contempt springs from a keen nose for weakness, honed by the habits of dictatorship and based on an estimate -- so far unrefuted -- of Mr. Obama's mettle.

Second, as long as Tehran can murder its own people, scoff at a U.S. president and flout U.N. resolutions without consequence, it will continue to do so.

Third is that the Achilles Heel of the Iranian regime isn't its "isolation." (What kind of isolation is it when Ahmadinejad's "election" was instantly ratified by Russian President Dimitry Medvedev?) Nor is it its vulnerability to a gasoline embargo, vulnerable though it is. Its real weakness is its own domestic unpopularity, which has at last found expression in a massive opposition movement.

The fourth is that Iran's nuclear programs have now reached the stage where they can only be stopped through military strikes -- probably Israeli -- or an internal political decision to abandon them. The prospect of another Mideast war can't exactly please the administration. So how about trying to achieve the same result by leveraging point No. 3?

Maybe ordinary Iranians welcome Mr. Obama's solicitude. What they need is Mr. Obama's spine. If that means "democracy promotion" and tough talk about "regime change," well, it wouldn't be the first time this president has made his predecessor's policy his own.

The thing that should not be.

The corporate state is the merging of big business and government. One serves a function, the other does not, but is occaisionally nice to have around when you really need it. But if you put them together you get something that doesn't make sense, scares the bejesus out of you, and it grows into something truly horrific...

Social Services, A Delusional Belief System

Social workers are still too keen to split up families, says Christopher Booker.

Mosley the new Hitler for Britain - Bernie Ecclestone

The rules of political debate have been defined for some time, mainly by the Fabian society who have taken great care in preparing rules and name calling to close down anything that could possibly spoil their argument. One such rule that has been used extensively is the famous Godwins Law.

But when someone of the standing as Bernie Ecclestone begins to openly praise Adolf Hitler and his governing methods, when someone suggests that Max Mosley would be an ideal dictator for the British people then those rules are gone, destroyed.

That Ecclestone epitomises all that is wrong with Corporatist Britain, donations to the Labour Party, the buying of politicians and political policy, the fact that he now openly argues for a dictatorial regime, now that the policies and legislation for such a regime are enacted and are in place, should send the most dire of warning signals right across the land.

Politicians, who for decades have been bought and persuaded by corporate lobbying, will merely suggest that Ecclestone speaks only for himself and at his age is probably losing the plot.

Corporatism
Political scientists use the term corporatism to describe a practice whereby a state, through the process of licensing and regulating officially-incorporated social, religious, economic, or popular organizations, effectively co-opts their leadership or circumscribes their ability to challenge state authority by establishing the state as the source of their legitimacy, as well as sometimes running them, either directly or indirectly through corporations. At a popular level "corporatism" is used to mean the promotion of the interests of private business corporations in government over the interests of the public.

Unfortunately, we now find ourselves in a land that is ridden with such corporate ambition, overseen by an EU whose very existence can be traced back to the dying days of the Third Reich and its plan to have a single Europe in the future. Agendas have been in play for a long time to re-create the early 1930's economic and political environments which allowed for the rise of dictators such as Franco, Mussolini, Hitler and Stalin.

The banking crisis, perceived threats from terrorists, overseas wars, internal threats, divide and rule through diversity training, the Four Horsemen, the melding of political parties into the centre ground that there is little choice between them, using the boiling frog analogy which is so slow that you don't see it happening, the use of political terrorism in the press and media over global warming, global financial meltdown, global diseases, global terror threats, whilst at the same time giving the impression that government is stupid, uncaring, inattentive and inept, so that when the time is right the people will be clamouring for a single strong leader, although I doubt Mosley is the man.

When we look more closely at the legislation that has been imposed upon this once free land, both by our own political class and the EU, we can see the correlation between corporatist objectives and government willingness to impose using more and more authoritarian methods of the kind suggested by Ecclestone.

There has never been a need in the UK for ID Cards or a National Identity Register, all through the IRA years this was never something that was put forward seriously as an option, but now with a perceived threat, an engineered external threat, we are seeing all too clearly the authoritarian corporatist methods employed to impose this upon us.
The need is not to track terrorists, it is to sell the equipment and technology that will support the lie. The corporations who develop, build and maintain this equipment are the only winners, and the proof of that has been laid out in this blog many times before. Lookup Porvoo..

There has never been a need in the UK for overwhelming powers of the police to stop and search the public at random using anti terrorism legislation, but the need to sell into these forces the technology which will allow them to maintain the lie will only serve the corporations to develop and supply this equipment.

There has never been a need in the UK for hundreds of databases, operated by a corporate police force, creating the threat of criminalisation for almost thousands of previously legal daily actions by the public, yet those companies who develop, deliver and maintain this equipment are the winners.

There has never been a need in the UK for turning the issuing of Fixed Penalty Notices, the background checks of people for certain jobs, the sanitisation of everything, the monitoring of our motorways, our telephone systems, our emails and communications into multi billion pound businesses that serve only to make certain corporate bodies very rich including the ACPO.

Above I only mention part of the 50,000 new laws and 3000 new criminal offences as there is neither space nor the time to list them all, but with almost every piece of legislation that has been introduced over the past 20 years or so we can see the corporatist advantage, the advantage of control to the government and the loss of rights, liberties and freedoms to the people. What makes this even harder to swallow is that the very people who are the target of this control are being forced to pay for through ever higher and higher taxes, charges and fines.

What Ecclestone said in his statement should shock us all, because the direct comparison with Hitler's Germany is there, and it is strikingly obvious, but like the good Brits that we are, we will never believe that such an agenda could possibly exist until the proof is laid before us, as it had to be with the expenses scandal, like it had to be with second home abuses, like it had to be with the banking crisis.

Yet it is clear for all to see, even if they don't want to believe that the biggest of household names are in collusion with the government, not for our benefit but for their own. Until of course it is time for them to become the scapegoats as Bankers, traders and MP's were when their period of usefulness to the agenda was over.

That these corporatists are now openly suggesting a regime of dictatorship gives credence to the warnings that have for so long been available to you on the blogs, and occasionally via the main stream press. Warnings that have already been given, albeit more subtly by writers and authors of drama series on radio and TV, using such characters as Judge John Deed and series like Spooks and A Very British Coup.

People have lost the ability to distinguish between fact and fiction as TV is increasingly being used as a government propaganda tool, but very real agencies such as DARPA's dreaded Total Information Awareness (TIA) program, formerly administered by convicted felon and Republican hero John Poindexter of Iran-Contra fame, may have been de-clawed by Congress, but it lives on at the state level in an incarnation called, ominously, the MATRIX (Multistate Anti-Terrorism Information Exchange), now part of the TSA, DHA and in the UK under project Echelon.

Britain is heading for Dictatorship. Under the control of the EU, itself a non elected authoritarian body with a rubber stamp parliament, each national government will be replaced by a single Gauleiter and a puppet parliament to rubber stamp policy handed down by Brussels. That Ecclestone should tell us this now, when the Irish vote is so close and Lisbon is within their grasp is telling, as the arrogance of feeling free to talk about this means that they believe they have won, and won completely.

Personally, I am grateful to Bernie Ecclestone for bringing this to the attention of the public, so that now it can get the proper debate that it deserves.

From the Independent

Deborah Orr: Shrinking the state is the best way to redistribute wealth

"Because, objectionable as it may seem to many social progressives, the task ahead now is to shrink the state wisely and well, in order to save it."

This is where the Libertarian Party comes in.



Please help us secure Norwich North. Your donation of a few pounds or even more is welcomed to help our candidate Thomas Burridge.

Von Stauffenberg rises from the dead

"Today as I was browsing through the papers I came across this piece of potentially very good news which had been buried almost entirely successfully by all the palaver and hoohah over Michael Jackson in the last week. Below is the article by Peter Oborne which caught my eye"

"Sixty-five years ago, heroic Colonel Claus von Stauffenberg made his claim to go down as a glorious name in German history when he led the failed 1944 assassination plot against Hitler.
Today, his third son, Count Franz Ludwig von Stauffenberg, is leading the German resistance against the Lisbon Treaty — and in the past week won a vital victory.
He secured a sensational ruling from the German constitutional court that the powers of the Berlin parliament must be significantly strengthened before Germany signs on the dotted line of the document which will create a centralised EU superpower.
This landmark decision has massive implications not just for Germany, but also for Britain.
This is because there will now be a long delay in the ratification of the Lisbon Treaty which could well string out the process until after the British general election.
This has fascinating ramifications.
David Cameron has bravely pledged a European referendum if the Treaty has not been ratified and he becomes Prime Minister.
It now looks possible that his first major drama as Tory PM would be to lead the ‘No’ camp in a referendum on the Treaty.
Of course, this might embarrass Cameron because the Tories risk a major split, with pro-Europe Ken Clarke taking up an opposing position.
But my guess is that Cameron will win a ‘No’ vote and achieve a massive victory in the war against euro-federalism."

Thankfully, Peter Oborne was not distracted by this week's over-egged outpouring of pseudo grief which dominated every news programme and Sky News in particular. This is the first I have heard of Count von Stauffenberg's court action or that there was even a German resistance to the Lisbon Treaty. Thanks to the Daily Mail - the paper they hate and ridicule at every opportunity - the left wing press and news channels have not been able to completely bury this story. Brown and Mandelson will not be at all happy with this development - good!

Hat tip to Barking Spider at TVOTR

Update:
Actually our party leader mentioned this story in February but I had other things on my mind at the time.

That's nice dear.

Chloe Smith, the Norwich North Conservative clone-didate likes to boast of her work in the community. Today she reports on her spirit-crushing "blog".

(No link, for some reason her blog doesn't allow permalinks. I wonder why?) But here goes :

Today I went with Shadow Health Secretary Andrew Lansley and Shadow Health Minister Mark Simmonds to the visit Hellesdon Hospital. As part of the Norfolk and Waveney Mental Health Trust, it actually serves pretty much the whole county and it’s a great – but often unsung – facility to have in the constituency.

We were shown round their new high-security psychiatric unit and we talked with senior clinicians at the hospital about how mental health is often seen as the 'cinderella service' of the NHS and how it really needs a more central role in our health service.

Later I went back out on the doorstep to talk to people and listen to their concerns. It's important to me to get out and knock on doors every day to talk to people about local and national issues, and to explain how voting Conservative in the by-election on 23 July will help bring about the changes we so desperately need.

Gosh!!! I need a change of underwear! It's all go, non-stop for Chloe! But in case you nodded off, let me concatenate that for you:

I went to a hospital and wasted the time of a senior clinician so I can say I've actually stepped foot in a hospital (and later declare myself an expert) and then I went round the houses bothering people with my blandness to "listen to their concerns" which we tories will disregard the moment we get our mits on the levers of power. The few of them left that is.

Not a hint of an opinion. Not a policy, not an ambition for the service. Nothing that might provoke intrigue, debate or controversy. Nothing that distinguishes her from the tory PR machine. Substance need not apply. But it would be unfair to judge on the strength of one blog post. So here's another. (Stay with me, I know she is tedious, but there is a point)

Today we've been sweltering at the Royal Norfolk Show! The whole county seemed to be there and it’s always an enjoyable event to return to – I remember going there by coach when I was a child at primary school, and many times since. What’s so good about it is to see the variety of organisations there who make up our life here in Norfolk – voluntary, charitable, agricultural, commercial and military. I met Nick Herbert – the Shadow Environment, Food and Rural Affairs Secretary – there and we toured a number of stalls to meet people involved in organisations from all over Norfolk.

Well there goes another pair of shorts.

Away from the show, there was a front-page story on the EDP today, which has become big news locally, about Gordon Brown saying he’s not coming up to Norwich during the by-election. It would be a crying shame if that’s the case – people here have some real concerns to raise with him about the economy and about cleaning up politics, and he shouldn’t run away from them.

And if this airheaded non-entity can remember back to the last big by-election, Mr Brown (I believe) was criticized for breaking the convention that PM's do not bother the local electorate during by-elections. She continues, gawd help us:

Later on I’m heading down to the railway station to chat to commuters about the future of National Express after the Government’s announcement today. The rail service from Norwich has been brought up as a local issue time and time again over the last 18 months and it’s another area where I’m keen to see improvements.

Aren't we all. But here's the thing... you as a prospective politician are supposed to tell us what those improvements are to be and how you will attempt it. That way we can tell if it's worth bothering to vote for you. I don't think I can face the tedium of fisking another post. But her website boasts that:

It's a year and a half since local people picked Chloe Smith to be the Conservative candidate for Norwich North. In that time, she's met hundreds of local people and gained a reputation for being a hardworking, energetic local campaigner.

She's a Norfolk girl through and through - she grew up in Norfolk and is a governor of her old comprehensive school in Swaffham. Chloe now works for a leading international firm which advises private businesses, government departments and public bodies.

Her career so far has given her experience working on Whitehall, in the City, and with not-for-profit organisations.

So in all probability she's another one of those junior corporate wonks who works for a pseudo-private sector consultancy, inextricably attached to public funds, which wouldn't exist otherwise. She has probably never worked in a business that has a profit based on its own competitive merit; only on its' fiscal ability to comply with regulatory and contractual standards. Yes I know thats an assumption but what else are we to infer from such a bland website? They won't allow us to examine the details so assumptions must stand.

Is this SERIOUSLY what we're getting for MP's? I think I preferred a house full of crooks with their hands in the till. At least they had opinions. But instead we will have a house full of vapid, substanceless, careerist clones like our little Chloe who have in fact accomplished nothing. Ones who have never put a foot wrong so as to woo a local Conservative Association made up of old farts with similarly insulated backgrounds, who either adore Cameron or don't have the balls to call him out as the weedy media spiv that he really is. And all because he might bring the Tories to power.

But why bother? They haven't the first clue what they will do when they get it. What was it James Delingpole called them? That's right... "a bunch of neo-Blairite water-treaders who won’t do anything to undo any of the damage wreaked by New Labour". Nuff said really.

Daddy must be proud though.

What to make of this?

Something isn't quite right here. I would like your thoughts on this one.

Flight of the Barking Moonbat

Here in the Hoo Peninsula, Kent we observe a little known species, Liberalis Dementius, or by its household name; the common or garden Barking Moonbat. Often distinguishable by long dreadlocks and a vacant stare from engorging itself on too much horse tranquilizer during their adolescent years.

They can often be seen hijacking coal trains and climbing up power stations. They are especially prone to wearing high visibility worker jackets to attract a mate, ironic in that they will never actually do any work. They also posses a strange and inexplicable affinity for air horns. In their later years (27) they often retire to a trust fund and join the greater clans of NGO's where they can really let their imaginations fly. And we are humbled by their creativity. Such is the magnificence of creation...

Creating a new coal plant in Kent could lead to 100,000 more people in the developing world losing their water supply during dry seasons, it has been claimed.

Anti-poverty campaigners at the World Development Movement (WDM) also said the controversial plan could be responsible for up to 60,000 more people suffering from drought in Africa.

And they said about 30,000 others could lose their homes every year due to coastal flooding if the Government approves the plant at Kingsnorth on the Hoo Peninsula in Kent.

Bless all Gods creatures, for they are sacred.

Norwich North: The Libertarians have come to town – 18-year-old Libertarian candidate Thomas Burridge vows to make Tory Chloe Smith “history”

By Jimmy Lee Shreeve



The battle lines are drawn in the Norwich North by-election fight to nab the seat left empty by Labour’s Ian Gibson, who was forced to resign over the MPs expenses scandal.

The odds-on favourite to win the hotly-contested seat, which will be fought on July 23rd, is 27-year-old Conservative Chloe Smith, who has fierce ambition for a career in politics written all over her (this isn’t a good thing, in case you were wondering).

The hapless Labour candidate, Chris Ostrowski, a member of Labour’s Christian Socialist movement (Christ, not more Christians), isn’t considered to have a hope in hell – even Gordon Brown is tetchily refusing to discuss his chances.

David Cameron, who has visited Norwich North twice to support Chloe Smith, thinks his party has the contest in the bag.

Well, I wouldn’t be so sure, Dave…

The Libertarians have come to town in the form of 18-year-old Thomas Burridge. He vows to make Chloe Smith and her brand of career Conservatism "history."

OK. He might not do it this time round. But the likes of Chloe Smith, who represent the "old guard" of professional politicians, will go the way of the dinosaurs one day (arguably in less than a decade).

Why?

Because no substance, image-only politicians like Chloe Smith (and her puppet master David Cameron) are NOT relevant to Britain’s society today. They are not interested in life experience. All they are after is a career in politics.

In other words, they have their sights on YOUR (tax) money. Yes, they might do a token job of cleaning up MPs expenses. But make no mistake, professional politicians like Chloe Smith and David Cameron will find a way of getting their "squeaky clean" mits on your tax dollars (I’d should have said pounds, but it never sounds as good).

Why are the Libertarians any different?

Because Libertarians do not believe in career politics. Nor do they believe in big, bloated government – local or national. They believe in low taxes and freedom of the individual to live his or her life as they choose, so long as it does not harm others in any way.

What’s more, Libertarians encourage self-reliance and entrepreneurship. Unlike the Tories and Labour, they don’t maintain a welfare system that makes if more lucrative for a million or more people to languish on incapacity benefits, rather than gain the self-respect of earning money through a job or by being self-employed.

But wait, the Norwich North Libertarian candidate is only 18…

You could argue that a kid of 18 hasn’t got any life experience. And you’d have a fair point. But if you bear in mind that 1 million 18-24 year olds in Britain have no training and no jobs, you could argue that Thomas Burridge is a valid spokesperson for his generation – unlike the Tory Cloe Smith who, as I’ve said, is merely looking to feather her nest as a professional politician.

Ian Parker-Joseph, leader of the Libertarian Party UK, puts it this way:

"One of the things that has been made clear, especially by the younger members of our party, is that the so called ’experts’, the ’professional politicians’ and the older generations have seriously let them down, left them with debts that they will probably never be able to repay and they are mightily hacked off about it.

"They now want their say, in the places that matter, in those places where the decisions are made, and Thomas is one such young man, who having now completed his exams in political studies is ready to stand up and be counted.

"It comes down to the old adage, If you keep voting the same, you will continue to get the same. So it is time for new, fresh faces with fresh ideas to come forward to keep these older politicians on their toes, to start putting forward policies that put the people first, that honestly take care of our rights, liberties and freedoms that the older generations of politicians have eroded, and are continuing to undermine and erode."

Lastly, all I can say is: Don’t vote for career politicians like Chloe Smith, they’ll only rip you off for yet more taxes (the Tories aren’t really the party of low taxes, any more than Labour is).

Instead, vote Libertarian. Vote for individual freedom. Be all that you can be.

Visit: http://www.lpuk.org

Our freedom and theirs.

I'm apparently attracting a degree of flack for my views on foreign affairs. I was going to write about this at length but it seems someone has taken the words right out of my brain. I guess I'm just not an original. The author of this identifies himself as a neo-libertarian. Some would suggest that a neo-libertarian is no libertarian at all and just a conservative who likes drugs and war. But if, as I do, you commit not only to personal liberty but to the very idea of liberty, a true libertarian can not be satisfied with a position of armed neutrality. Take a look at this...

It's easiest to describe neolibertarianism in opposition to the other strains of libertarian thought. In contrast to many libertarians, I support a pragmatic solution to achieve idealistic goals. This doesn't mean selling out or endorsing immoral, anti-libertarian actions, merely that certain actions have to be taken to better market and explain our message at election time, and that it would improve the popular support for freedom-based policies if we introduced them on an incremental timeframe rather than all at once. I support generally the same end goals, but I think we can get there faster, or at all, only if we accept that pragmatism has a role in the process.

I also believe that we must commit ourselves to defending the rights of others around the world, unlike many libertarians that only support defending the rights of people in their own country. This extends to use of force in situations where it's the best solution, including situations where dictators refuse to open up their countries or where mass murder, genocide or crimes against humanity are taking place. I also support defending the rights of persons not able to speak for themselves, including the unborn and the physically disabled. Natural rights extend to all persons, regardless of geography, age or ability, and it's incredibly statist and conservative to only care about the rights of some people because we drew arbitrary distinctions like trimesters or countries.

Philosophically, it means a moral belief that every individual ought to live by the same basic rules but otherwise be free to do as he wishes; it means that the initiation of force or fraud is morally illegitimate whether it comes from a government, a business, a bowling club or you alone. This is the essence of libertarianism in general, to remove the extra-human privileges that some people have bestowed on themselves simply because they have a flag and call themselves 'The Government.' States should be bound by the same basic moral rules as individuals.

Neolibertarianism, however, means making a political commitment to combat the initation of force and fraud by the most effective and moral route possible; paleo-libertarians deal in words and thoughts, while neo-libertarians commit themselves to expanding freedom from the rhetorical world to the real world. It's the difference between saying something for freedom and doing something for freedom.

Moreover, it's a commitment to the universality of freedom; just as calling oneself 'The Government' cannot legitimately add to one's natural rights, drawing an invisible line on a map and calling it 'The Border' cannot legitimately subtract from one's natural rights. People in foreign lands have the same natural rights as people in the house next door; neolibertarianism is about finding the most practical ways to stop infringements against the liberty of those around the globe, including the use of force if necessary, just as we would use local police and courts to stop infringements of liberty next door.

To my mind there is only one argument to disarm this philosophy. We suck at it. But just assuming we didn't and we could reshape our army in a more successful fashion, there is much to be said for an active foreign policy. First and foremost out liberty depends on energy and cheap energy at that. If by open trade with illiberal regimes we channel funds to those who would use it to suppress the liberty of others then, defacto, we are oppressors. Nowhere was this more true than in Husseins' Iraq and every violation of basic human dignity that occurs in Saudi Arabia is a consequence of channelling huge amounts of money to people without regard for the people they will inevitably suppress.

And so would removing such a regime qualify as illiberal? Would it be imposing our cultural values? No. We don't have cultural values any more. We thrive because of it. People choose their own tribes, their own look, their own partners and their own way of life. Our cultural values are that we don't have them.

Other nations may have cultural values but cultural values imposed by the few upon the many and not even adhered to by the few. Travel on any aircraft back from Saudi Arabia and the first thing that happens as soon as the undercarriage begins to retract is the mass removal of veils and the application of lipstick. Some of the women partake too. It is the vital exercise of personal choice. Choices denied to the many, but in the palaces, there's gold plated AK-47's, booze, drugs and hookers for all if you know the right people. Dy'a seriously think Hezbollah and Hamas are a bunch of god fearing tee-totallers?

Frankly, if we could realistically remove the Saudi regime, Hezbollah and Hamas without a global Islamist backlash (those who would deny liberty to all) I'd be sending in the troops tomorrow. But a magic wand we do not have. Which is why we help where can and it is why we answered the call of Muslims in the Balkans and it is why we sought to remove the Taliban. Because we can. Would Russia or China?

I find it most comical that the very moonbats who send me anti-war group invites on facebook are the very same people who sent me videos of Taliban oppression of women before 911. I doubt it would have been of consequence were the invasion ordered by Clinton.

So this all begs the question... Do we stand for liberty or just our liberty at the expense of everyone else's without a second thought for the suffering of others?

As to "armed neutrality", the West has kept tyranny at bay specifically because it did not remain neutral. Had we not maintained a presence in Germany there is no telling how far the communists would have gone. It took massive investment just to prevent France from falling to Communism. Their defence was our defence.

A true libertarian to my mind resists all tyranny at home and abroad using whatever tools are appropriate. With China, it is trade but even then, outside of the economic green zone, tyranny still reigns and will forevermore. With others we can use force but with some others we are prevented because we are not the only global players. China is busy raping resources in the Congo which we could stop but like it or not, we need Chinas' co-operation. Russia also. We're burning their gas. (that trade's not doing much for their liberty is it?)

The realities are harsh, the choices are difficult and the consequences often bitter but we only remain free so long as we defend freedom for others. Other European nations enjoy a position of armed neutrality but that is only because of the assumed protection of the United States. It is a lazy and selfish position and it is because we do not share their position that we have a greater voice on the world stage with which to promote liberty. Our gradual disarmament and selfish refusal to commit publicly and intellectually as a free nation to our armed forces has weakened that voice and the world is not a better place for free nations falling deaf to the plight of others.

As we turn inward on ourselves to engage solely in our own selfish desires we abandon others to the encroachment of tyranny and if we turn a blind eye we will not notice it when it is knocking on our door. Right now the dead hand of green fascism is destroying our freedoms at the hands of our masters in Brussels and we do not notice and we do not seem to care. That is the price of abdicating our liberty and governance to others.

We must not confuse libertarianism with appeasement, pacifism, indifference and apathy. Which is better? A world with a liberal interventionist West or one without where Russia and China are not held in check? People cite the death toll in Iraq as an argument against intervention but I'm sorry folks. I'm OK with a lot of people dying if it means more people and their subsequent children can be free. Just because we don't always get it right does not mean we shouldn't try. Trade alone will not save the world.

The game is up!

Gordon McCreath of law firm Pinsent Masons LLP says "Opportunity knocks if firms seize chance on climate change." Y'damn straight it does. It's just one great big regulatory compliance bonanza. Such a shame I've used my green swastika allowance this week. The article itself is the usual guff about what a marvelous opportunity the recession and climate change is to tax everybody into the floor for the sake of jobs and economic growth.

One is forced to ask, how do these people get where they are? I suppose it takes talent to be that dumb. But the game is up! More and more, the comments on such articles display an angry public who are very much on to them...

I don't object to sensible precautions and economising on fossil fuels - that makes sense from the viewpoint of conserving what we have but the "carbon emissions" excuse is largely hot air, taxation and punishment for having the cheek to run a private, profit-making enterprise.

"The Strategist" is unconvinced also...

OK Mr McCreath now tell us where the money is coming from to fund all these opportunities. Raising risk capital in this country is like pulling hens teeth.

Do you think he'll get an answer? And someone calling himself "Unimpressed one" is, well, er, unimpressed...

Still no ball park figure given for costs but we can expect it to be fairly hefty. Taxes will be imposed and handed back to the 'green' industries - a total recipe for disaster if ever there was. As for jobs these will be mostly in councils and quangos to police this lunacy. Meanwhile the US, and most likely much of the EU, certainly China and India, are likely to reject draconian targets suggested in December. (don't count on Obama or the EU, Ed.)

So we in Scotland, having some of the worst health statistics in the developed world, must wear the hair-shirt of reduced growth and a burden on business to demonstrate to the rest of the world our 'green' credentials. Tragic.

It really does seem the the wheels have fallen off this particular bus, but the last people to catch on are the politicians. Sadly, this is when the worst of the damage is done. TJIC sums it up...

"The perfect storm: arrogant preachy leftists throwing money at useless things - and rational but amoral capitalists running around picking up the money. The only loser is the taxpayer who is on the hook for all that money."

And no-one will be held accountable.

Another small LPUK promo presentation

Well that's handy.

"Nothing in international trade law would prevent countries that introduce carbon taxes or cap-and-trade programmes from supplementing them with excise duties, tariffs or other measures on imports from countries that don't." says John Kemp in Teh Grauniad.

Cap and Trade a stealth protectionist bill? Who'dda guessed? Watermelon anyone?

July 4th...

If only.

Navel Gazing

Some readers may be somewhat put out that I am not fixated on the Norwich North by-election. Well this is because I, like just about everyone else out there, am fed up with politicians who talk only about themselves and their own activities. It's boring and it isn't important and I am certain that the good people of Norwich North are not wasting this glorious weather reading blogs as I am. And if by some chance they are, they are not tuning in to find out if Dr Read has raised enough funds for his veg oil powered battle bus or other such frivolities. Though we do reserve the right to take the piss.

But there is a broader point to be made here about the political establishment. Over at Conservative Home this week we have an entire web operation fixated on how the Tories intend to make themselves more appealing to the gay community (stop sniggering at the back). Notice they do not discuss gay issues, but how the party appears to the gay community. The same self-obsessed, media driven pre-occupations about image which have tempted many decent people to hold their noses and vote for the British National Party.

Does anyone know what the Tory line of Iran is this week? Oh it's tucked in round the middle somewhere after the gay stuff. Good to know they have their priorities straight (or not, if you'll excuse the pun). UKIP suffered from the same disease. While the crew of the HMS Cornwall was held captive by Iran and the EU was assuming much of the diplomatic "soft power", the front page of the UKIP website was breathlessly reporting the activities of a councillor regarding mobile telephone masts or some other minor issue of zero relevance. Meanwhile the prestige and competence of what we like to believe is the finest navy on Earth was called into question by the entire free world. And people wonder why the BNP did so well!

It's all about connecting with voters. Talking about the fears and concerns that they share. In this the entire political establishment failed. Were it not for the media talking up UKIP in the face of the expenses scandal and bringing them into the media fold to stave of the BNP threat, recent UKIP successes might well have failed to manifest, and deservedly so.

The critical difference is that those of us who take an interest in politics want to see that politicians are thinking what we're thinking. The Tories sloganised this and the electoral reply was a resounding "no". But the the BNP were thinking what people were thinking. They have successfully encapsulated what people think is wrong, unfair and unjust in our society. They pushed that diagnosis and it turned heads. If quizzed most people would agree that immigration is out of control, spending is too high, welfare is undermining just about everything, the police are a mess, the courts even worse and the army and our hospitals are failing.

But anyone can diagnose a problem. I can spot the Measles but I am not a doctor. I cannot cure it. A diagnosis in itself is not a solution. The BNP had the right diagnosis in part but the wrong medicine in blaming foreigners. And that is why the UK is still in a political limbo. We have some politicians with solutions looking for problems and others with problems looking for solutions. Just for once it would be nice to have one party who sees that which we all see but can offer a real path to salvation. UKLP could well be it. But not if it plays the same parochial, inward looking game.

This morning I had the pleasure of the company of a school teacher friend of mine who reports much of what we have discussed lately on this blog. Political correctness, undisciplined children with critically disarmed teachers, teaching a checkbox regime which does nothing to enhance the life skills of our children. And guess what? She does not give a flying frack about Norwich North or politicians for that matter. And nor do I.

Over the last few weeks we have discussed energy/green policy, state spending, corporate fascism, the Middle East, transport policy, employment and the economy. Not once have we found cause to refer to the Westminster soap opera because they have disengaged from the issues. We are concerned with policy and its effects, not politicians. Not least because the people who make the policies on energy, employment, trade, and now it seems foreign policy, no longer reside in Westminster.

What we seek to do is influence these policies by educating the public and treating them as adults, and where our lame duck politicians are concerned we seek to defeat them, not join them in their game. By highlighting the problems they create we allow voters to come to the natural conclusion that government of either brand is the problem, not the solution. While we wish our candidate well and will support those local efforts, there is a big bad world out there going on without the attention of the political class. I for one am not taking my eye off the ball.

Hard choices

Though I might find this mildly insulting and my first instincts on foreign policy are not (and never will be) wholly libertarian, I'm starting to think the less we react to this, the sillier this looks on the world stage.

Ahmedinejad needs a bogeyman to secure his powerbase. We should not give him one. The regime is starting to look like some spoiled toddler screaming for attention, desperate to be validated by a grown up. Every good parent knows