±«Óãtv

Hello Shaminder

While it's nice to think that the plucky Irish voter might thwart the mighty EU juggernaut, and pass decision-making back to the people of Europe, doesn't everything we know about politics today tell us that, whatever the result of Thursday's Irish vote, the outcome will be the same, and the power-elite will keep their Lisbon Treaty / Constitution plus the European Army now being proposed? In just the same way, don't we really expect that the British Govt will prevail against the court case now being brought to enforce the promised UK referendum, by one means or another?

Grumpy-Jon. Agreed. I'm mildy anti-EU so in principal should want a referendum but being a pragmatist I say 'whats the point of spending millions on a vote that will simply be sidestepped'. Last I heard the EU was trying to force an anti-sedition law making it a crime to debate leaving the EU!

I wouldn't worry about 'the european army'. If its as reluctant to fight as the individual French, German and Belgian armies then its not going to be much of a force.... it'll just be the British army with a blue and yellow flag in any actual battle.

EU EVER GREATER DILUTION (Yo Grumpy)

I am still puzzled that a succession of governments has bought-in to the EU project, thereby demoting their wannabe officers from powerful fish in small pool to emasculated tiddlers in ever-greater-dilution. This would be the ultimate altruism; turkeys voting for Christmas. But the last thing we ever see in our politicians is altruism. So what is going on?
Is there a down-stream Euro-payoff, after leaving office; like the defence procurement minister getting a highly paid job in the arms (oops, make that defence) industry?
When I blog, I can only type, courtesy of a stack of vitamins and minerals that fend off 'diseases of old age'. The 'Codex Alimentaris' wrapped in the ethos of 'Harmonisation' but riddled with who-knows-what Machiavellian Pharma-power, is keen to impinge on my borrowed time, so I write from personal angst - and the usual Euroimpotence.

Re #2.
How beaten down and cynical we're all becoming?
Your first point about the anti-sedition law is truely terrifying, and I've completely missed this. Could you put up the source Peter? NewsN surely must look at this soon.

Labour Party funding. How about an update from Michael Crick on the general secretary search (so far as I know the post is still vacant and the worries about personal liability are still valid).

The Abrahams police investigation. Do we have any dates for the conclusion of this?

Could stuff like this be popped onto the website if you don't feel its strong enough for a story.

Are politicians alive to the possibility of the 2010 Scottish referendum being won by the SNP and are we prepared for the consequences? I think not and witter on about it continuously.

Is it worth while investigating what will happen in a post-Bush post-Labour world where new governments look at the contracts situation (as Panorama on Iraq last night, and Leithead and Colebourn above)? Are we likely to see prosecutions?


It seems the key to winning in Afghanistan is Pakistan - as with yesterdays border strikes etc. Is alliance patience running out with Musharraf (if the judges and some politicians don't see him off first)? Are we going to see coordination with the Pakistan military?

thegangofone (5)

Thanks for your suggestions. I'm not sure when the Abrahams investigation is due to finish, but it's a good question - will try and find out.

On Labour Party funding, we're looking into this. A decision on the General Secretary is expected to be taken tomorrow. Ray Collins of the union Unite is on a shortlist of one apparently - so you wouldn't bet against him!

That said, David Pitt-Watson of course decided to turn down the job after being advised that he personally might be liable for the Labour Party's debts. Debts which are quite considerable. Big question coming up, will the Labour lenders extend their loans or ask for the money back?

Neil.

Neil_Breakwell - Thanks very much indeed!

Its good to know you are on the ball. I didn't think you people read these posts much - we do bang on!

Given all the exitement over a 42 day detention period, I think it would be interesting to put all this into an historical context under the heading of "The Politics of Fear" covering how governments have spun the whole subject of terrorism and invasion since the Norman Conquest.

There have been a good number of examples!

Union cuts Labour funding
No mention of this anywhere ?

The union is cutting ties with MPs who do not share its values Feedback
The GMB union will cut funding to up to 35 of the Labour MPs it sponsors, blaming them for betraying Labour values.

At the union's conference in Plymouth, members agreed to maintain funding to the party's central office, but chose to pick out those Labour MPs who did not reflect the union's values.

The vote reflects a further thawing of relations between trade unions and the government, despite Labour's desperate need for financial support.

A motion calling on the union to disaffiliate from Labour was ruled out of order, however.

General secretary Paul Kenny said delegates were angry over taxation, public sector pay, executive bonuses and other issues.

Among those MPs who lost funding from yesterday's vote were Meg Munn, Stephen Ladyman and Adrian Bailey, a backbench MP.

This comment was removed because the moderators found it broke the house rules. Explain.

#4 I don't think I can post weblinks but if you google some of this you should able to find all the info you need: Very scary indeed.

THE European Court of Justice ruled yesterday that the European Union can lawfully suppress political criticism of its institutions and of leading figures, sweeping aside English Common Law and 50 years of European precedents on civil liberties. The EU's top court found that the European Commission was entitled to sack Bernard Connolly, a British economist dismissed in 1995 for writing a critique of European monetary integration entitled The Rotten Heart of Europe. The ruling stated that the commission could restrict dissent in order to "protect the rights of others" and punish individuals who "damaged the institution's image and reputation". The case has wider implications for free speech that could extend to EU citizens who do not work for the Brussels bureaucracy. (Daily Telegraph 7/3/01) Bernard Connolly writes: Point 58 of the judgment, case C-274/99P (website removed) establishes in EU law the Star Chamber crime of "seditious libel".

HIS WORDS NOT MINE

Shiny-Boy Dave has just referred to his days as a speech writer again. Hence I am, once more, querying the propriety of presenting the words of some backroom sub as ones own.
This is another of those 'accepted by use' iniquities that go hand in hand with politics.
On this blog, I can 'read' the underlying character of other bloggers, just as they can read mine, by absorbing their use of language. Were I to have my contributions written for me, it would be both deceitful and presumptuous. When done by a politician, I suggest stronger language might be in order.

PS I note Gordon's signature is degrading and disappearing up itself. He is not in good shape, psychologically. Can Constitutional Clegg ride to the radical reformation of democracy in time for a 'whole' leader to emerge? Or does he just want just enough reform to be top when the job's done? No prizes.

LAUGH OR CRY. CAN THIS (or anything) BE TRUE IN THE OLD SENSE?

the Advocate General of the EU Court is said to have asserted that criticism of the European Union collective could be
restricted without suppressing freedom of speech, on the grounds that it
is akin to blasphemy.


PLEASE NEWSNIGHT! The assertion that we might be prevented in EU Law from having a go will seriously truncate this blog. Would you check it out?

The 42 day will take the main story so the rest may be just "infills" but many postings above raise matters that are worthy of a more in depth look, especially Labour Party funding on which I "blogged" yesterday (someone raised the point about disaffected Labour voters in Trades Unions.)

Perhaps the time is coming to resurrect the old chestnut of parties being funded from the General purse so no "vested interest" from either end of the voting spectrum could be accused of seeking favours.

Then we will have Tories/Labour/et al saying that they don't want their money going to the other party.
I still can't get my head around delegates in the GMB all out on union expenses thinking that by leaving the Labour party funding, they will gain any more benefits for their members, unless, like I wrote the Tories have had a "Paulinian Conversion".

Perhaps the political climate has changed so much that there is no perceived difference in policies, Education being and example. (The Tories want all Academies and the abolition of National Pay scales which should grab the attention of the teacher voters.) As a Chair of Finance of two schools I will become a very powerful person. Want a rise? No money, come back in 10 years time or perhaps show me 100% GCSE passes, then I might consider one.

That EU Courts remarks sounds like its worth talking about !
Maybe the EU would like to comment on this issue ?

nulabour under bliar was only 45 mins to save the planet. nulabour under brown only 42 days yeah right.
NO mention of the fact that guvomit policys over the last 10 years have created the terror threat we now have. mp's of all colours should be jaied for 42/45 years,(save us a hellava lot of money) 7/7 was in part down to them. Untill Uman Rights/Wrongs law have been addressed we are in the doodoo. It wont happen Parliment's lawyer/liar friends make a very nice living off the taxpayer same as everybody else involved in the criminal justice system, ( check out a judge's wage/expences ) Nice. geezajob

Re #'s 11 and 12.
Thanx peter and barrie. I'll check those out, and hope the programme does too. Could anything be more serious and sinister?

Re #14. Totally agree with your point on the changing political climate. One idiocy seems to succeed another to me bill. Did you happen to hear Nick Robinson on 'Today' this am. cheerfully recounting the deals offered to individual MP's who could see their way to wander into the Govt lobby on 42 days? His words were that 'this was a good time to be a labour rebel with a cause' ie because you were about to have your needs met! So policy can now reflect the PM's immediate political situation, but not a manifesto commitment to a referendum. Do they still do 'Treason?' He mentioned an MP who hadn't had a call from Brown in 15 years, but he got one last night ok

Re-Peter_Sym. Moderators have dubbed out my attempt to answer your points from last Thursday. If you were interested, contact me at [Personal details removed by Moderator] and I'll forward. Guaranteed to help you get off to sleep.

GENERAL MALAISE

How poignant to watch the self-serving ways of our EU masters blend with those of our supposed representatives at Westminster. It is pointed out, above, that the self-dubbed honourable men and women of the British Parliament are clearly open to a deal when power (briefly) comes their way but equally craven when the whip flicks in more normal times. It does seem that right across governance, EU, UK and local, and a rot has set in that feeds on itself. It is, of course, facilitated by 'education for blinkered mentality'. When Blair cried 'education, education and education', he meant 'schooling, schooling and schooling', a very different process, conducive to dodgy government. If we ever achieve awareness, awareness and awareness, in the UK, there will be fireworks; no doubt suppressed by some paramilitary EU force.

YET ANOTHER PUZZLE

At general election we have the Wars Of The Rosettes enacted on our streets, and party divisions continue in Westminster among those whom the voters send there. But where is the logic in the same voter-groups sending another set of bellicose party-faithful to represent Britain in the EU circus?
A constituency sends a party politician to Westminster; by the same token BRITAIN should send one (or more as required) BRITISH non-party representative(s) to the EU parliament. When the day comes that there is a Galactic Council (hypothetical) will three dogma-led groupings be kicking the proverbial out of each other, still referencing everything to this insignificant planet, in some over-ornate, over-budget madhouse 'out there'?

I feel disgusted to bottom of my heart when I see Javier Salzar, or Salami, or whatever the smirking idiot who represents the EU commission is named, standing next to president Bush, whose policies I profoundly detest, and some ex-communist now EU country PM, whose name I can't pronounce, speaking on the behalf of millions of EU citizens.

This unelected prat does not represent me!!!! And he never will. I am in favour of a united Europe but certainly totally against the undemocratic power currently ruling Europe, unfortunately including the UK, whose politicians are in general incompetent (like many democratically elected politicians) and easy victims of the bureaucratic class de facto ruling this huge area.

Hence I urge the Irish Republic's voters to vote against the 'new' EU constitution in their referendum tomorrow.

This constitution will further cement the anti-democratic and totalitarian forces ruling the EU and all remaining democratic forces (and there are very few of those left) should oppose it.

Shaminder

thanks for the daily memo!

I have already commented on these stories....there are not many words left to say about either story....