Posts Tagged ‘tories’

Did you know that the EU runs our elections now? You probably didn’t. The politicians know we hate the EU and so they hide their influence. The Observer reports today that our next GE will be illegal under EU law unless we give the right to vote to prisoners. They have decided that blanket bans on prisoners voting are a breach of human rights.

What are the government to do? If they change the law, the Tories won’t let them forget it. Both the party and the right wing press will hound them with the charge they are selling out to Europe. If they don’t do anything, how long before a prisoner takes a case to the European Court of Federalism (or European Court of Human Rights, as it likes to be known)?

It will be very interesting to see what happens if the government tries to change the law. What will the Tories do? And what about the eurosceptic Labour back-benchers? It’s possible such legislation could be rejected by the house. In which case we would see real evidence that the Tories are going to redraw our relationship with Europe. Cameron could whip his MPs to reject any such legislation. He would thus leave his party – if they win the next election – facing a court case in the EU, and the obligation to renegotiate our membership of that organisation.


Read Full Post »

It is fun to follow the coverage of Cameron’s speech when you remind yourself of what happened before Blair won in ’97. The right-wing pundits lost it; it became obvious he was going to win, and they didn’t really know how to cope. This reached a pinnacle of absurdity with the Tory MPs proposing to Blair that he cross the house and join the Conservatives.No-one had any idea how to attack Blair.

Woy Hattersley’s animated performance on the BBC’s coverage of the speech yesterday showed the same sense of panic. In contrast to IDS, who, as ever, came across as a thoroughly decent and fair-minded man, Hattersley was manic in his denunciation of Cameron as all style and no substance. Heard it before, Woy, heard it before. I remember the same being said of Blair when he was racking up huge majorities and 50% approval for the Labour Party. Alice Miles has totally lost it in the Times today, again trying to claim that Cameron is all style. The thing is, just like Blair’s detractors, they can’t see the substance because they don’t agree with it. For them it has no significance. When Cameron promises to fire officials who give marks in exams to students who write ‘fuck off’, that is real substance for the right. When he promises to end political correctness in schools, that is substance. When he promises to stop the demands that parents get CRB checks before taking part in exchange programmes, that is substance. Corporation tax is only for the rich? Look at Ireland.

It’s over for Brown and the Labour Party. Their supporters no longer sound like they’re responding to Cameron. They don’t get his appeal, and the appeal of the Tories right now, which is why they have no idea how they would need to change to get elected again. The problem is that people have become sick of socialist policies, and all they have to offer is more of the same. I almost feel relief! We’re almost rid of these idiots.

Read Full Post »

Both the Guardian and the Telegraph report that Cherie Blair was heckled at a fringe meeting of the Tory Party conference. The discussion was about the Human Rights Act of 1998, which signed the European Convention on Human Rights into UK law.

Here is how the Guardian reported the events:

As she tried to say that the HRA was there to protect fundamental rights such as the right to life, some activists heckled her but she went on to defend the act. “We should be proud that in our country we do not have an elected dictatorship, and that the courts are there to protect individual rights. And, yes, that does apply to the most unpopular people, whether they are criminals, whether they are Gypsies, whether they are illegal asylum seekers, because in the end we are a decent society and we believe that everybody is entitled to respect and that has to be policed on our behalf.”

Now, what is the impression you get from this bit of reporting? It sounds like Blair is defending the rights of Gypsies and asylum seekers, doesn’t it? It sounds like Tory activists were objecting to this, as they always do in leftist mythology.

Here is the Telegraph:

Paul Bowman, whose teenage daughter Sally Anne was raped before being stabbed and her body defiled, challenged Mrs Blair to explain why “inhuman” murderers should be protected by the law.

She angered delegates at a fringe meeting at Conservative Party conference by suggesting that those who wished to change the Human Rights Act were advocating the return of slavery or disagreed with the sanctity of life.

There were hisses and angry shouts from the crowd, which included a number of victims’ relatives, as Mrs Blair, a leading human rights lawyer, was drowned out and forced to abandon her argument.

Well, that’s rather different isn’t it? She was heckled by victims’ relatives who were complaining about the protection afforded to their tormentors.

Read Full Post »

Why I joined UKIP

It’s difficult to be a eurosceptic. The EU is an institution without the legitimacy that a vote on it would have given it. We have never assented to become a part of the EU, we were never told what it would do, and we have not been consulted over the changes to its structure. Every time a new EU initiative emerges into the sunlight – the EU-wide armed riot police, the post-office closures, the idiotic ethanol schemes – the first instinct is to attack the policy, but then that is implicitly giving the stage of the debate legitimacy. One often ends up shuttling between railing against the policy and against its source, an unconvincing mixture which dilutes both arguments. Eurosceptics end up arguing about the legitimacy of the EU which leaves questions about the idiocy of the policy unanswered, or arguing about the idiocy of the policy which ignores the dubious nature of the source of the policy.  What to do?

Furthermore, how are we to approach the question of voting? Every person who voted for the Labour party last time was used by them as a source of legitimacy for their scandalous signing of the Constitution despite the promise they made not to sign it. Conservative voters this time will, presumably, have to leave Cameron to steady his bike alone after giving him a firm push in the voting booth. How can we be confident that he will fulfil his promise to withdraw from the social chapter and his implicit promise to retract the powers lost through the Lisbon Constitution?

The EU has got where it has due to the fact that political parties have been able to make the calculation that they can garner our votes with different issues, so there is no need to respect the majority opinion, no need to campaign for our independence.

How can we steer a course through this minefield?

We must reward Cameron for his promises on Europe by campaigning for a Tory victory next time. But we must also accept that he and his party will be dealing with a whole raft of issues and events, and the temptation will be to duck the problems that can be ducked and make a calculation about which issues it is necessary or sufficient to win the public’s approval on to win the next election. Consequently, the pressure must be kept up. There are MEPs in the Tory party who believe in the federalist project – they must not be given an ounce of support. The EU elections must confirm the British people’s judgement of the EU – it stinks.

As a result, I have finally joined UKIP, after agonising over the various inadequacies and peculiarities of the organisation. The most glaring was the idiotic decision to accept Spinks as an MP after his ‘send them home’ comments, which played straight into the hands of those who caricature us as xenophobes. Nonetheless, I see the shift to our side of the Tory party in recent years as a substantial victory which is due in some part to UKIP’s stealing of votes from the Tories in vital seats and to its advocacy of a popular point of view that could have slipped out of the political mainstream a few years ago without them. Our success in moving the Tories towards euroscepticism must be the first of many successes. Let the weight of the Tory party fall behind the arguments for the inadequacies and stupidities of EU policy on energy and defence, and let UKIP hover on the fringes of the political scene, reminding everyone of the very real possibilities for ignoring the whole spectrum of lunacy and governing ourselves properly once more. And so I joined UKIP.

Read Full Post »

ministry of justice

I was told by an acquaintance yesterday of his experience visiting a Swedish remand centre (for work purposes, I’m happy to say). He was surprised to find out that the regulations governing remand are extremely harsh – suspects are kept indefinitely, for a period of time that could be over a year, in solitary confinement. They are allowed one hour of exercise a day, which they enjoy on their own, without a soul nearby. These are people who are suspects, awaiting trial, they haven’t been convicted of a crime. But of course, we have, or had, the right of Habeas Corpus. Swedes do not.

This is the reality behind EU diktats that allow any EU country to demand our police force hand over any of us to a foreign power without any requirement for them to determine there’s a case against us. Any Brits the Swedes want will be sent over there to endure conditions which would be absolutely unacceptable here and could never be introduced by any British government.

This is the situation the Lisbon Constitution will create.

It is bad enough that one could be snatched from one’s own country and sent off to solitary confinement in Sweden (Think of the prevalence of identity fraud! When would such a mistake be rectified!), but the EU has just unveiled plans to allow British people to be tried and convicted in absentia in foreign courts. They are gracious enough to offer us a retrial as a way to defend ourselves.

When is enough enough?

This is what a Conservative spokesman (Philip Bradbourn) said:

“This initiative would enable courts to pass judgments in absentia. It goes against one of the most fundamental corner-stones of British justice – that the accused has a right to defend himself at trial. If other EU countries want to go ahead with this proposal that’s their choice, but the British Government should have no part [of it].”

Remember this, and give them hell if they forget it.

Read Full Post »

nudge nudge

Fresh from giving young men advice on masturbation – Zoo and Nuts are out lads, best to concentrate on the products of the imagination, or on the fashion ads in the Sundays like the old days – the Tory party have decided that the best way to defeat a hated, nannying government that has invaded every aspect of our lives, from our smoking and drinking habits to our right to refuse entry to our home, from our right to own guns to our right to have a human being decide whether our driving is dangerous, from our right to use our own money to buy life-saving drugs to our right to fill our bins how we want, is to hector us about being fat.

Using their cunning ‘nudge’ tactic – no, not softly nudging fat people down elevator shafts – the Tory party is going to achieve a reduction in the numbers of the herds of the obese that graze on every high street in the cooler temperatures of the evenings.

Scorn – as I hope is clear – was my first reaction. Then, however, I noticed something more subtle. If the Tories wish to create a society where fat people are encouraged to be thin by the example of their neighbours – then are they really not proposing a return to the pre-PC days when arrogant, testosterone-addled white men like myself didn’t have to spit out euphemisms for any word that might offend the proverbial high-school weakling? Probably not, but if we pretend so, it will become so. Such is the teaching of the high priests of nudge.

Read Full Post »