The Bewilderness

Bring Back Britain

There is nothing predictable about the Middle East except for the
anguished cries of commentators who bemoan the latest war crime, the
latest roadmap to some tolerable truce and the latest terrorist outrage
carried out by the Militant Tendency, if you believe BBC understatement.
As the Israeli campaign has ground on and Hezbollah has cowered within
its civilian camouflage, a chorus of "What is to be done?" has permeated
our newspapers and television screens.

Such cries of help are usually the stimulus for Tony Blair to add his
ha'penny voice to the international great and the good that gather at
emergency conferences, writing resolutions that will solve wars,
insurgencies and genocides. But if, like the Darfur genocide, these
problems prove too intractable for their talking shops, the diplomatic
caravanserai will migrate towards a more welcoming watering hole. Her
Majesty's Government made noises on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict
some three years ago, when Blair organised a conference, hoping that his
Belfast triumph might magically transpose to the Middle East through the
wand of British diplomacy. Alas, like all such endeavours, this
conference was sucked into the sands and never heard of again.

Postwar British governments have never had much luck in the Middle East.
The fiftieth anniversary of Suez has proved an opportune moment for many
to reminisce on our most disastrous intervention of all. We were allied
with the Israelis and the French in a clever plan to seize back the Suez
Canal, a strategic waterway run by a privately owned company based in
Paris that was sequestered by Nasser, the dictator of Egypt, so that he
could dam the Nile and posture as an Arab champion. The United States of
America, under President Eisenhower, broke Great Britain and France in
what has possibly proved to be the superpower's most foolish foreign
policy decision since 1945. This spelt an end to most independent
military action on our part and left France as an estranged onlooker,
increasingly embittered and striving to undermine US dominance in favour
of a multipolar world.

Yet, even when this was combined with the ratchet effect of relative
decline, British foreign policy has appeared distinctive through
delusions of influence over the United States. Harold Macmillan
described a comfort blanket of Athenian guidance to Kennedy's Rome.
Margaret Thatcher waved her handbag at Ronald Reagan and talked Hayek
and bombs. Such interventions always had a certain effect, but
Atlanticists have exaggerated history, knowing full well that we are
regarded as a second rate ally, a useful tool, but no more so than
Germany, Japan or Israel. Great Britain needs a dose of realism in our
special relationship with America now that Blair has proved a disastrous
pilot.

Realism is one thing that you also will not find in reports on wars or
diplomacy. Truthfully, we just do not know what is going on in Beirut or
in Number Ten. Tony Blair was gravely damaged by his inept conversation
with President Bush, where his old instincts for diplomatic intervention
came to the fore. His silence, and the silence of other Ministers, on
the issue of a ceasefire and a peacekeeping force, could be genuine
disdain for a war that has already exacted political costs. Or he may
have nothing to contribute to an international peacekeeping force as the
military pot is empty. Our troops, overstretched in Iraq and
Afghanistan, could not be redeployed to Lebanon. Blair, without the boys
to back him up, kept mum until the Cabinet pressure cooker required a UN
release. He was watching his performance in 2003, since the Iraqi rerun
on Friday was a conference with Bush to draft a UN resolution.

We should be grateful that Blair is unable to commit us a third theatre
of war. The Israelis have proved very careless with the lives of
Lebanese civilians because they are unwilling to re-enter one of their
military nightmares: the occupation of Lebanon. Nor will the United States
entertain the idea of their troops participating in a peacekeeping
force. On October 23rd, 1983, 220 US Marines were killed in their
barracks at Beirut Airport by a suicide bomber whilst keeping the peace.
The Marines were joined in death by 58 French paratroopers through a
second suicide bomber.

If such a peacekeeping force is toothless, then Hezbollah will ignore it
and concentrate upon its immediate goals: terrorist incursions, rocket
attacks and insurgency within northern Israel. If the peacekeeping force
is strong enough to enforce the ceasefire, then Hezbollah may well turn
on them, using proxies to strike and kill the soldiers of whatever
country was foolish enough to commit them to the maelstrom. Then they
can take up their favourite pastime of firing rockets from someone's
backyard, hiding in the civilian population.

Blair moves in time to the American drum, and is accused of poodleism.
If he did have a foreign policy of his own, then he would prove more
vocal in his attacks of the Israelis, pandering to a domestic audience
by burnishing his internationalist credentials. Then, he would do
nothing except hold a conference and talk about a truce. The outcome is
the same whether countries are allies of Israel or internationalist
critics. They can do nothing without a ceasefire, and that lies within
the gift of two actors: Israel and Hezbollah.

Britain was an aggressive supporter of liberal internationalism under
Blair. Now, that distinctive strand of his politics is diminished, we are left
with the "special relationship", and a humiliating perception of
submission. From Trident to Iraq to the Natwest Three, Blair's
government has undermined our sense of worth and demeaned the alliance
that they consider the lynchpin of our security. Britain still lives in
a world of nation states. Britain still has strong armed forces and many
interests throughout the world: emigrants, daughter nations and
commerce.

(Cross posted to Airstrip One)

Another Reason for Education Vouchers

Time to abolish the Qualifications and Curriculum Authority. A nationalised central body setting examination and curricula was established to preserve, nay improve, standards. Captured by the educational Left, it has become a vehicle for championing their own version of education:

SCHOOLS would no longer be required to teach children the difference between right and wrong under plans to revise the core aims of the National Curriculum.

Instead, under a new wording that reflects a world of relative rather than absolute values, teachers would be asked to encourage pupils to develop “secure values and beliefs”.

The draft also purges references to promoting leadership skills and deletes the requirement to teach children about Britain’s cultural heritage.

Children will be taught to believe in the European Union, sustainability and why it is insecure to beat old ladies to death for their money.Your pisspoor relativist tax money at work.

One Way Bet

The Bank of England may have to raise interest rates as the official inflation rate is above target. Even the doves on the Monetary Policy Committee will have to start defending their remit of policing the inflation rate for monks. Due to the tinkering with statistics for inflation, there is now a Soviet style chasm between the official index and the personal inflation rates experienced by the rest of the population.

You can tell what your personal inflation rate is. In a rough and ready calculation, take last year's expenses, match with this year's, and see at what rate they rose or fell. Most of the population's has risen as service prices, utility bills and fuel have soared. Moreover, these services are used on a disproportionate basis by pensioners, who have already been penalised as savers by Brown.

To offset this rise, individuals have bet on the wealth effect of their houses, matching rising expenditure with debt, whilst their disposable income declines. That is a one way bet.

Prescott picks up the PACE

Once upon a time there was a rich empire governed by good chaps, who knew the cut of a gentleman's pinstripe, and looked the other way if one did wrong, to preserve the magic, you know. Even with these conventions, they occasionally had to pass laws for wrongdoing, as dashed bounders like David Lloyd George got past the filters or seduced the illectorate.

Luckily for us, those laws remain on the statute book and come in useful when current accusations against senior politicians need to be investigated.

John Prescott is at the centre of a police investigation into claims that he broke anti-corruption laws by staying on an American billionaire's ranch, it emerged yesterday.....

But Scotland Yard confirmed yesterday that it was examining an allegation that Mr Prescott might have breached anti-corruption laws by accepting the hospitality while Mr Anschutz was bidding to turn the Dome into a super-casino.

Ministers should not accept "hospitality or consideration received from a person or organisation which has obtained or is trying to obtain an official contract", according to the relevant legislation.

Those would be the Prevention of Corruption Acts 1906 and 1916. How Blairite that the country should be left in the charge of a Deputy Prime Minister under police investigation.

Angloslavia

Angloslavia was originally a term coined by Ken MacLeod in his science fictions series about The Fall Revolution. If you have not picked these four books up, you should do so, now! The term is utilised here as a playful reference to the current flow of immigration from East Central Europe into the United Kingdom. This flow has serious consequences due to the interplay between immigration and public services. East European workers naturally respond to the market incentives provided by New Labour's decision to open up Britain's employment market. This improving migration is combined with an inflexible public sector which is not geared towards dealing with such a large increase in local populations. This inflexibility is due to the incompetence of New Labour's administration, since they appear to have undermined, indeed destroyed, the Northcote-Trevelyan ethos of the mid-Victorian civil service.

A massive rise in immigration next year could trigger a devastating crisis in Britain's schools, housing and welfare services, according to a secret Government report leaked to The Mail on Sunday.

The document reveals that every Government department has been ordered to draw up multi-million-pound emergency plans after being told public services face catastrophe as a result of the hundreds of thousands of Eastern Europeans pouring into Britain.

The government faces disaster if the courts, applying European law, conclude that all East European immigrants are eligible for the same benefits as United Kingdom subjects. A large influx will either force up taxes to pay for the extra services and benefits required, rewrite the rules to ensure that public services remain remain viable through radical reform,  or do nothing.

One of her [Home Office Minister Joan Ryan] biggest fears is that the courts may force the Government to scrap its restrictions on East European immigrants applying for council houses or benefits. At present, they receive some benefits only if they register for work - which one in three don't do - and earn full benefit rights after they have worked for a year.

Ms Ryan says: "The legal basis for this is precarious and there is a strong risk of a successful challenge. This is a concern."

Benefits will provide an additional incentive for immigration from Eastern Europe. The pressures that this will place on the welfare state may provide a force for accelerated reform, since teh free market will provide services cheaply and more efficiently, if given free rein. 

So far, the addition of cheap flights to Eastern Europe, the added mix of Slavic tongues to polyglot London and the chance to taste more beers from exotic climes, has proved an exciting experience. Let us give the same chance to Sofia and Bucharest.

EDF Cover-up?

Everyone has heard about the London power cuts last Thursday, right?

Poor old Oxford Street/Soho doing the blitz spirit thing, wonderful, wasn't it?

Iain Dale complains about a national embarassment.  And good old plucky EDF (that's "Electricite de France" for those who like their acronyms raw) keeps us updated at their website.  And the MainStream Media regurgitate the press releases keep us informed of developments.

The only story is about energy policy and the greenhouse, isn't it?  Rather boring...

Well no.  There were other power cuts on Thursday evening within the EDF area.  The computer I type this on went down twice, and we had one minutes power over the course of roughly 2 and a half hours.  For reference, I live in the E11 postcode, which I believe is part of the EDF network area.

And there is no mention of this anywhere on the web that I can find.  I've run google searches across blogs and news, and found no mention.  It seems that EDF has either forgotten about this power cut, or covered it up.  The MSM has failed to notice.

Stem Cells and Liberty

One can agree with some of the moral claims of The Liberty Papers in supporting President Bush's veto.

First and foremost, there is no constitutional justification under Article 1, Section 8 of the US Constitution for Federal funding of stem cell research of any kind. There is no serious arguement that can be made for funding this on national security grounds that can be made, for example, for space exploration. Stem cell research, as presently being speculated, cannot be used for contagious, deadly diseases, which would justify Federal funding under national security grounds....

Third, there is a moral reason to opposing stem cell research funding. However, Bush has does not comprehend the following reasoning when he talks about morality. The government has no right to take the money of taxpayers and spend it on things they view as immoral and that have no common value. The vast majority of Americans will not benefit from stem cell research because, fortunately, they will not suffer from the conditions that stem cell research will treat. If President Bush truly believed that embryonic stem cell research was immoral, he would push for a ban, instead of the compromise position he came up with in 2001.

I support the  strong potential  that are indicated by research programmes into embryonic stem cells. The argument that these programmes may not provide a medical benefit can be refuted, since it reduces science to a narrow, utilitarian structure. My dilemma arises from the use of government money to fund such research. Given that  Big Science from the research councils has 'crowded out' other  sources of funding, stem cell research would halt without this input. Any reduction of the state should allow a slower decline in science funding, to set upalternative sources.

I can only sigh when my hopes for science clash with my dislike of the state. And every year, the stakes in resaerch get higher.

Don't Cry For Me, Rhodri Morgan

The Government of Wales Act has received royal assent. The government's devolution agenda has reached a further landmark with the Senedd shifting from administrative oversight to legislative powers, within the bounds set by Westminster. If I recall, this was a direct call for the left-liberal school of constitutional change, as set out in the  publications of Charter 88.  Do any of them hark back to the old days and wonder if devolution was a worthwhile goal? Few supported an English Parliament, fearful of the consequences if such a body erupted in the  body politic.  Now, devolution is a sop to the Left, as New Labour squat in Westminster and apply unionist make-up. When do we hear the chartists wonder if they made a mistake, tuned into a regional agenda whilst New Labour stole their liberties. Perhaps they whisper...

Mr Hain said, "The Government of Wales Act provides Wales with a new constitutional settlement that will endure for a generation or more. By granting enhanced legislative powers for Wales, it will enable the Assembly to deliver tailor-made policies for the people of Wales.

"And for the first time ever, the Act puts primary powers for Wales on the statute book, ready and waiting to be activated once the people of Wales support such a change in a referendum. There won't be another Bill like it.

"This will settle the distracting constitutional debate in Wales and will enable the Assembly to focus instead on delivering the right policies for Wales."

Full parliamentary powers will only arrive after the hurdle of a referendum. The Good Hain and the Bad Hain taketh away. But then, this expansion was never about adhering to the popular demands of the Welsh. Rhodri Morgan's outburst of a few days left onlookers in no doubt that he wishes to assure Labour power beyond a possible defeat at Westminster. The First Minister values his position so much that  he is willing to share it with a progressive coalition against the bogeyman of the Tories.

'The people of Wales could wake up on the Friday after the election, when it's too late to undo the votes cast, however much they may be horrified by the unintended consequence of what they've done,' he said.

'There will, I know, be many committed supporters of both the Lib-Dems and Plaid Cymru who will be absolutely horrified that their leaders down at Cardiff Bay are in such close contact with the Conservatives in Wales - colluding with them, voting with them, taking their instructions from them. But that is what has been going on.'

The Tories, Lib-Dems and Plaid Cymru have worked together to defeat Mr Morgan - who has no majority - on several occasions. Mr Morgan called any anti-Labour coalition an 'anti-democratic Blind Date'.

David Bourne must hope that such a grand coalition succeeds in an alliance since it will most certainly fail on policies. A Tory opposition in Wales could only increase in size and popularity, though this party does have the knack of seeing an opportunity and marching away. As for Morgan, his emotional rhetoric explains why he left Parliament: too red for the Thames Valley.

Loans, Peerages, Form, Enter

Angus Macneil, the original source of the "cash for peerages" scandal, has called for a Speakers' Conference to deal with the issues arising from this.

The Speaker's Conference would bring together all parties in the House of Commons to agree a way forward from the current crisis and agree new rules to clean up politics at Westminster.

The House of Lords Appointments Commission has also confirmed that they should have been apprised of all loans and that their expectation was clear:

The independent body which vets nominations by party leaders for membership of the upper house made clear on Monday that is should have been "told about all matters that could reasonably be seen to effect a nomination, and this could include loans of both a commercial and non-commercial nature".

It added that it "believes that this expectation has been obvious"

Europe's UK Borders

The new strategy of this government is to accept failure, endorse a plan and set some date in the long grass, after elections and political careers have ended in failure.

FULL passport checks on the millions of people entering and leaving Britain each year will not be in place for at least eight years, the Government announced yesterday.

The reimposition of passport checks on people leaving Britain is a key part of John Reid’s strategy, announced yesterday, to restore confidence in migration policy.

The checks are key to knowing how many failed asylum-seekers and illegal immigrants are in the country.

Will this sit with new EU powers on immigration? I bet the new border police are European.

The second proposal aims to alleviate some of the pressure on Southern EU countries by creating a joint force of border guards, translators, and first aid helpers that could check travel documents, search vehicles, take part in sea patrols and interview migrants. The guards could carry weapons and would wear blue armbands with the EU insignia.

The objective is to establish a force of 250 to 300 experts that can be readily available within 10 days of a country's request. Member States remain free to choose whether they wish to contribute experts to the force, which would be managed by the EU’s Border Security Agency, FRONTEX.

You need a border guard in order to allow Europe to boss them about.