Rogering the News

Fishing is a cruel activity.

Fish DO feel pain.

Proven fact.

That is why the utter hypocrisy over the condemnation of fox hunting by the NuLab government and their banning of it was and remains so wrong. If there really was an animal welfare issue then long before fox hunting was even considered sport angling should have been banned.

It serves no purpose, it inflicts great pain on fish and often results in horrible mutilation to their mouths, and what ends up on the bank or in the keep net is inedible unless your taste runs to a mouthful of muddy tasteless flesh and bones.

But did NuLabour go on a mission to condemn let alone ban sport angling? Nah. Too many votes to be lost compared to so many votes to be won by going after what is thought to be a cruel and pointless activity, an activity that is widely misunderstood, almost universally misrepresented, and oh such a cause celebre, fox hunting. No matter that Peter Bradley (ten) MP, the parliamentary private secretary to Alun Michael, who was the rural affairs minister, has let slip that the real reason that Labour MPs feel so strongly about the ban is because it is aimed at killing ‘the old order’.

He continued that is the first time in history that a Labour government has taken on ‘the gentry’.

In short, a matter of the class war on a new battlefield with the victims the innocent bystanders, this time the foxes.

So on those grounds who are responsible for the greatest cruelty in culling a pest?

Those who arrange for the numbers to be kept in check by the culling of the old and the weak in a way that ensures a very rapid death?

Or those who in pursuit of their politics have created a situation where thousands of foxes are now culled by nature in the form of disease and starvation?

Or by being left to slow and agonizing deaths from poisons that will then be released into the environment continuing to kill by being ingested by the eaters of carrion in the foodchain?

Or die agonizing deaths from wounds received from being shot. Keep in mind that to kill a fox outright with a shotgun would requires the fox to be within twenty-five yards and there’s damm few foxes that would allow themselves within fifty yards of anyone.

Much more probable the poor things are wounded and take days to succumb to the wounds from septicemia and or gangrene.

But instead of allowing facts and reality to rule, NuLab instead chose to play to the public imagination of what Fox Hunts are all about. An imagination that in most cases, is about as far from reality as could be.

Rather than go on a crusade against an activity that really IS cruel and pointless they condemned thousands, by now probably hundreds of thousands of highly sentient mammals to lives of starvation, disease, and death from singularly inappropriate means of culling of any population of pests.

And yet, an activity that results in the purchase of specialist clothing, expensive equipment, is oftentimes a social activity with the hunters forming in clubs that compete within the clubs and between clubs to see how many animals can be trapped in a terribly cruel manner simply to see who can catch most, is left untouched.

Because there’s no votes to be won by banning it, in fact just the opposite.

One of the first bit of animal welfare legislation that the incoming government should enact is to get rid of the ban of hunting of foxes with dogs and crack down big time on so called sports angling.

Now that WOULD be a step forward for animal protection and welfare.

For fish, for fowl, — and for fox.

Rog

A Merchant Banker and a salmon

It’s wrong to pile the blame for what’s gone down on the Bankers. – They were just doing their job which was to make money for the shareholders in the banks.

It’s also wrong to keep banging on about ‘bonuses’ – The money paid to front office staff and to middle management may well have been performance related pay, or even bonuses in the real meaning of the word, but the really big bucks paid out wasn’t bonus payments, it was commission.

Even to complain about that is wrong because it is wrong to sl*g off the banks for paying what they do, or to the people who get paid what they do, because a very great deal of what takes place in making money is down to networking between individuals.

It’s often said that ‘it’s not what you know, it’s who you know’ and in high finance it is far closer to reality than in just about any other sector and what the banks are paying is not only commission as a percentage of profit made but also to keep in-house a vital link to the world of banking. A bank pays for that vital link just as it pays for other data links essential for it to do business.

So if it’s not the bankers, and it’s not unreasonable ‘bonuses’ and the huge amounts are justified, who IS to blame?

In the case of the UK it’s Gordon Brown first and foremost because he was single handedly responsible for breaking the banking structure within the UK when he ‘liberated’ the Bank of England.

In so doing he broke the system of bank regulation and the means to deploy sanctions on those who didn’t adhere to the rules and so created open season on chasing shareholder value.

And with shareholders who didn’t give a four x for anything other than short term return what happened was inevitable as soon as Carpetbaggers came in with their worthless scrip and fractional reserve banking strategies.

Worthless scrip worth only trading with but never opening up.

So IS there a Merchant Banker responsible for the mess I the UK?

Oh yes, there certainly is.

It reminds me of an old joke:

Moshe was walking down the street when he was met by Rubin.

‘Moshe’, says Ruben, ‘Here I have some wonderful smoked salmon! Yours for five pounds!’

Soon Moshe was walking down the street when he met Danny.

‘Danny,’ says Moshe, ‘Here I have some wonderful smoked salmon, yours for six pounds!’.

Soon Danny was walking down the street when he met Joe.

‘Joe,’ says Danny, ‘Here I have some wonderful smoked salmon, yours for ten pounds!’.

Danny took the side of salmon home.

Soon Joe was walking down the street when he met Danny.

‘Danny,’ says Joe, ‘That salmon was dreadful! We threw most of it away!’

‘You ate it?’ asked Danny, astounded at what he had heard —‘ Joe, that salmon wasn’t for eating, it was for selling!’

Rog

The announced closure of the Teeside steelworks is of course a tragedy for the people who will now be out of work, for their families, for those who depended on their wages buying goods from local businesses, and for the suppliers of goods and services to the steelworks with all the knock on effects that will create.

But it’s unavoidable. It’s also the right thing to happen.

Where is the justification in pouring money into somewhere making something no one wants? And when even those who do want to buy steel can buy at lower price and closer to where it will be used.

Corus is a victim of a changing world. It’s also a victim to decades of blackmail by unions that eventually saw the costs overtake the price that what it produced could be sold in order to be competitive. The unions that have crippled this British industry are victims of their own success.

Unsurprisingly the whines start “What about the bankers”?

No consideration that it is generally commission not bonus that is being paid to people working in the banking sector, a commission based on a percentage of the profits that the people had made for their employers.

The question of the manner in which banking was and is being conducted being right and proper, well that’s a different matter, and one that lays directly with the government who have chosen not to address it as it’s been too much to their advantage not to do so.

No thought that what Corus made was too expensive and in the wrong place. Just “What about the bankers”. Never “What about the government and the mess that they’ve got the whole country in”.

But there is more to the failure of Corus than the obvious.

One legitimate question is not why has it failed now, but why was it not allowed to fail when it became clear that market forces had now moved the demand for steel along with the production of steel half a world away.

Another is how come the renege on the agreement to buy slab from Corus Teeside was well known and well understood early this year, yet the closure of the works has only just been announced citing the failure in the four party framework agreement as the cause.

A failure that was well known early this year.

Another VERY pertinent question is what UK government grants and other arrangements have been made thus far to Tata, the owner of Corus, not least the 2,3 billion pound ‘loan’ fund to provide for the development of an all electric car, the first factory for which would be built —– in Norway.

There is something that smells a damm sight worse than a steel works involved here, and it’s originating not from Teeside but from Westminster.

It IS right that Corus Teeside closes, it should have closed long since, the question is why did it not, and what have the costs been to the UK Tax payer of it not having done so.

Rog

It is an accepted adage that “He who pays the piper, calls the tune”.

Generally, one would listen to a piper’s repertoire and playing ability prior to employing him and would then feel free to choose from that repertoire during his period of employment.

Politics isn’t like that – you choose the whole band on the basis that they tell you what they intend to play – regardless of what they actually can or do play – and they choose the piper, regardless of his playing ability.  You as the employer have no say in the matter until they, the band, decide to leave.  (or until their five year contract  is up).

Well, for the British government, that five years is almost up.  Their music hasn’t been particularly good, they have lied and cheated  and few people are likely ever to employ this particular piper again – not even his own band…

So, we might reasonably expect that the present band – complete with their flawed piper – will be given their marching orders by the electorate.

That said, you might expect that the only other big band available for this particular gig – the Conservative Party – would be a shoe-in.

Is that actually likely?

For the Conservatives to win an overall majority at the next general election will require one of the biggest swings in UK electoral history  – certainly in the last 100 years.  Not impossible but a massive task given that the electoral system is heavily biased against them.

Why so?  Simply because the electoral boundary system favours urban areas far more so than rural areas where the Conservatives have traditionally drawn their support.  There have been some changes in these boundaries since the last general election which will marginally help the Conservatives, but they still require an overal swing of around 9% – 10% to win a very small majority. Fact is, it still requires many more Conservative voters to elect an MP than it does Labour voters.

The expenses scandal has resulted in many MP’s deciding not to present themselves for re-election – perhaps wisely so – which means there will be many new faces at the hustings. How this will play out is one of the big questions.  The other of course is how many people believe the system is now so tainted that they will not bother to vote.

Of course, some people will always vote for ‘their’ party.  This favours Labour because many in the old industrial regions would walk on hot coals before they would vote Conservative whereas natural Conservative voters will often vote for a candidate rather than a party.  Likewise, many who have grown up on a culture of benefit and sickness payments may feel too threatened by the possibility of change to consider a Conservative step into the unknown.

What about the Lib Dems and the fringe parties?  Probably the Lib Dems will hold their core vote but there is no sign that they are building on it, while parties like UKIP and the BNP are in a much stronger position to attract traditional Labour voters who want to make a protest, but one without rocking the boat too much.

Do those fringe votes matter?  If the election is close then they may well hold the balance of power. Is that what the voters want?

The other factor which may effect the result is the voting power of the ‘new’ immigrant (bearing in mind that some are now third generation citizens).  Despite the perceptions of some on the far Left and Right, they are just as concerned about uncontroled immigration, poor education and social policing as any ‘White’ Briton.  The way they vote may have a very profound effect on the composition of the next government.

So, an election too close to call?  Perhaps not, but if results are close then the UK will end up with a weak government which will fall apart within the first six months.  Does anyone want an ‘Italian’ or ‘Israeli’ style of back room deals and a concensus which suits the powerful?

If a “week is a long time in politics” then the next five months may seem like a lifetime.

Swan song for the lonely piper?

The deaths of five British soldiers today, killed by one of the people whom the West were training to run their own country better, poses more questions than answers.

Why are we there?

Do the Afghans want us there?

What is the ‘end game’?

Who wins……?

We are there because after 9/11 George Bush wanted revenge.  Understandable but his legitimate target wasn’t politically acceptable so he chose the Taliban in Afghanistan instead.  We will never know how much pressure or how much he promised in order to get Tony Blair to jump into line and organise his European friends to join the cause.

We will probably never know if George Bush ever read history or believed in it – not always the same thing – because the Afghanistans have never been beaten in their own country.  Now there is a recent historical parallel for this because America allowed itself to be drawn into an un-winable war in Viet Nam because they ignored the experience of the French fighting in Indo China – perhaps they thought those were two separate places – and they rated the “Cheese eating surender monkeys” rather less highly than they should have done.  The simple fact is that modern French fighting forces are highly skilled and fought a long and bitter war there, which again, they were never going to win.

But, we lined up with the rest of Europe to fight alongside Bush’s troops.  America provided the bulk of the troops and America has suffered the most casualties.  In fact, casualties have been pretty evenly shared amongst the allies,  on a percentage basis, a fact which isn’t always appreciated.

Do the Afghans want us there?  Would you welcome foreign troops taking over your country and killing as many civilians as their suposed or actual enemy in the name of an alien concept like ‘Democracy?  Of course, some Afghans want us there.  President Kazi wouldn’t be claiming his office without our support yet he – our friendly President – has no respect for womens rights and is happy to use bribery, corruption and blatant vote rigging to achieve his ends.  Is this what our forces are dying to support?

What ‘End Game’?  The reasons for our being there are confused and the idea of a victory is just so much nonsense.

Our other allies are a mixed bunch.  The Germans – thanks to their Constitution – are not allowed on the front line.  Nobody can have been too surprised when the Italians were found to be paying the Taliban Danegeld in order to have a peaceful life.  The French found that out when ten of their troops were killed, just because they failed to keep up the  ‘peace payments’ .  Of the others, a mixed bunch who have done their best under foreign commanders with sometimes very different cultural aims.

Who blinks first?  Just as in Viet Nam, no American President wants to be the one to withdraw, to be seen as ‘weak’, when strength of character would say ‘Enough’ and  really  show great strength.  President Obama has not rushed to pour yet more young American lives into this death trap, despite the wishes of the generals who have a very different agenda.  He may yet make the decision which will save many lives and mark him as one of the Great Presidents.

If America withdraws the rest of the coalition will pull out at the same time and the Afghans will go back to fighting one another.  Not a satisfactory conclusion, but there never was going to be one of those.

If other nations just pull out, one by one, like rats deserting the sinking ship, then it is inconceivable that America would continue on alone – her hand would be called.  Many more will die before that happens, and nobody will be able to claim the moral victory – the only one left – but those are the only two choices left.

All down to who blinks first.

This week, Kemble and Company closed and manufacture moved overseas. Many people will never have heard of them but they had been in business for 100 years and were the last piano manufacturing company in England.

A total of 90 jobs were lost. In the great scheme of things, a tragedy for those involved but no big shakes when UK unemployment is heading towards 3,000,000.

In the same week, Donnington Park announced that they had been unable to raise the funds required and would not be able to fulfil the terms of their contract to host the UK’s Formula One championship motor race next year. The only other UK circuit capable of hosting the race, Silverstone, is also unable to afford the licence fee required which may mean no round of the race being held in the UK next year.

What’s the connection and is it important? Most people probably don’t have a piano at home and have no interest in buying one. Likewise, the majority of the population have little or no interest in motor racing (perhaps they could name this year’s World Champion – a British driver – or last years, also a Brit. There again, perhaps not) so they will probably shrug it off as ‘tough’ and move on to the next item. But in both cases, manufacturing capability and export revenue will be lost. And the UK., which is unable to even feed itself without imports, will be the poorer.

Silverstone? Exports? At the end of WW2., a group of motor sport fans – they would probably be called ‘Petrolheads’ now – used to gather at windswept and often rainy derelict airfields to race mostly home built cars. Even the race engine of the day, the Coventry Climax, could be picked up for peanuts because it was the basic power unit in the thousands of ex Ministry fire pumps then being auctioned off. Safety was not an issue, a few straw bales to mark out the corners and when there was an accident it was sometimes fatal. But, to a generation who had just survived a bloody war, either overseas or being bombed and attacked by German rockets in their home towns, death was no stranger.

Silverstone airfield was one of the popular venues and small companies started up, on and around the airfield to service the sport. The names read like a motoring Who’s Who? - Lotus, Cooper, Vanwall , Lola , Williams – etc. The cars developed, there were different classes, more money was involved , cars were sold abroad and that small area of England became the centre of the motor racing world.

Sounds over the top? Not a bit of it. Today, every major motor racing team is based in the area or has a development factory there, including such unlikely names as Ferrari and the US CART and Can-Am racing series. That plus all the development work done in secret for just about every global road car manufacturer.

The numbers are huge. Probably nobody knows the full value of the industry but at least 50,000 top line engineers and support staff are directly involved with many times that number of associated suppliers and services.  These are space age technologies and cutting edge engineering, the essentials which the UK needs if it is to export its way out of bankruptcy.

Again, what’s the connection? If there is no British Formula One GP then how long will it be before those factories and the highly skilled work force leave the UK, move to where the luxury new circuits and the emerging markets are? We live in an age when entire factories can be dismantled and set up again on the other side of the world. The engineering wizards, the designers and inventors are even easier to relocate so who could blame them for following the money?

And the result of course, we end up buying from abroad instead of selling to it.

A  government needs to understand the importance of manufacturing and the fact that there are times when companies – big or small – may need help.  They rushed in with public money when the big banks were threatened yet are strangely silent when industry – an investment in the future of the country – needs far less.

Two industries at the extreme ends of the spectrum but both examples where relatively small sums of money were involved. Too late for Kemble and co now, but perhaps still not too late to save the Grand Prix and with it our last successful technology industry and the UK’s high tech future. .

So Radovan Karadzic has chosen to boycott the start of his trial at The Hague.  Seems he wrote to the Court saying he wasn’t ready!

Directly or indirectly this Butcher of the Balkans was responsible for the deaths of almost 100,000 people (nobody knows the full number) with perhaps the worst – but best known – being the massacre of 7,000 at Strebrenica.  All in the name of ‘ethnic cleansing’.

Well, his victims didn’t have the choice of turning up to be raped, tortured and murdered.  Neither should he have the choice of facing up to his actions.

The mstake was in perhaps assuming that he is some ’special’ defendent.  He isn’t and he should be dragged into court in chains to face the accusations against him.  If he is found to be ‘Not Guilty’ then naturally he should get a full apology before being given to the relatives of his victims to explain what went wrong.

Brits – and I probably mean by that, those who have been brought up in the British educational system. Be it bog standard comprehensive, Faith or Public – have a blind faith in ‘Democracy’.  Mostly, they would be hard pressed to explain exactly what that is,  but it is likely they will think in terms of being in control of their own lives and having the power to elect a government which broadly acts in their best interest.  So far, so good.

Prime Minister of the day Tony Blair,  heralded in a democratisation of  the House of Lords by creating a new class of worthies, the  ‘People’s Peers’ who would be chosen by ‘the people’ to give a wider representaion in the Lords.  Democracy in action, except that, erm. Which people were they?  Were you asked?  Do you know anyone else who was asked?

And if  ‘the people’  (whoever they were) did actually choose the new Peers, what an unfortunate choice they made.

Baroness Scotland for example.  What tartan would she be entitled to wear and would the taxpayers be expected to pay for it, since the Lady in question seems to have a very Cavalier attitude to using ‘the peoples’ money.  And she is not alone since a number of other non elected -  sorry, ‘elevated’  – Peers seem unable to even understand the concept of a family home, with one claiming for a service flat which he has never used (he owns the hotel where said flat is) on the basis that he could always kick the resident out if he ever did need to use it.  Very democratic.

But, success, real democracy when that same Tony Blair became a bit of an embarrassment to ‘his’ government, so they kicked him out.  Now that sounds right and proper except that his ex government then ‘appointed’ the Chancellor to replace him as Prime Minister.  Those Brits who believed they had democracy could perhaps question if it was restricted to their betters, or if perhaps it was thought that they wouldn’t understand all the fine details about free and fair elections.

Fast forward to today when the government has now decided that the Brits will best be served with a European President – with the power to decide what every Brit can say or do – and that Tony Blair is the best man for the job.  This from the very people who conspired to overthrow him on the grounds that he was no longer the person to lead ‘them’

This is the government which promised those democracy loving Brits a referendum on the European Community, but somehow wriggled out of delivering one.  They now intend to try and force the failed and deeply flawed Tony Blair,  the man whom they themselves rejected as their leader, as the new leader of Western democracy.  And that, just months before the Brits get their once in every four or five year chance to express an opinion on anything.

The People’s Choice?  Somehow it doesn’t look like it.

The much heralded BBC political discussion programme Question Time turned out to be something of a damp squib, although it did show just how entrenched most peoples opinions are.

Firstly, no question that the self professed defenders of free speech and democracy  believe that it applies only to themselves and to those who hold similar views.  The demonstrations outside the BBC were both predictable and pointless, while the audience were certainly no fans of the BNP and neither did they intend to listen to anything which clashed with their own preconceptions.

BNP leader, Nick Griffin is not a natural speaker and got through the entire programme smiling, nodding in agreement whenever someone said anything with which he might – or might not – have agreed with, and generally being inofensive, while denying ever having said the various quotes which were put to him .  It is impossible to argue with someone who agrees with you and Griffin had this down to a fine art.

Against him, Jack Staw, about as effective as a cold breakfast kipper.  Chris Hune – introduced as the failed contender for leadership of the Lib Dems – which rather said it all.  Baroness Sayeeda Warsi who at least had a clarity of diction which was refreshing and Bonny Greer who used the word ‘kook’ so often I wondered if it actually meant anything.

It was not a normal Question Time programme.  I don’t think I have ever seen such a hostile audience and the questions were more about Nick Griffin than the problems facing the country at this time.    If it was out to ‘get’ Nick Griffin, it failed because we never got to hear his thoughts on everyday subjects.  The whole panel failed because they hadn’t done sufficient research so there was little clarity of expression.  Indeed, the only bright spot was Straw refusing to accept that immigration was an issue and Baroness Warsi agreeing that it was.

The only ‘winner’ was the BBC – viewing figures still to be anounced but they will have been substantial.  Griffin failed to make the best of his media breakthrough, but I doubt he will be too dissapointed because his supporters will have had their belief that everyone is against them – a powerful belief and often a useful rallying cry – soundly confirmed (or at least, in their eyes).  For everyone else, I think they will be feeling pleased that they were right – whatever ‘right’ is.

Edited to add that the BBC claim over 8,000,000 people watched.  Almost certainly the highest ever viewing numbers for that programme.  An expression of interest in the subject or a direct result of all the advance hype?

For our overseas readers, the BNP is a small,  far right UK political party, which is generally considered ‘White Supremist’ although it’s primary manifesto is to espouse the rights of the indigent ‘Anglo Saxon’. Anti the European Union and strongly apposed to immigration

What a great week it has been for the BNP. After its recent EU electoral success where it polled over one million votes and gained two seats in the European Parliament, the British Broadcasting Corporation ruled that – under its own Charter – it was legally required to give broadcast time to the party.

So; BNP Chairman Nick Griffin has been invited to join the panel of ‘Question Time’ a once a week flagship political programme where the panel are subjected to questioning from the audience. Despite this being a prestige programme, it only attracts – on a good night – about three million viewers (less than half of the viewing audience some popular entertainment shows draw) and the invitation to Griffin is only on a one off basis.

Screams of protest from a most unlikely alliance from the left and right, led by a perma tanned government minister, one Peter Hain, who claimed the BNP to be an illegal organisation (the Courts having just ruled that the BNP must open its membership to non whites). Hain is himself no stranger to supporting illegal organisations having been a vocal supporter of the ANC and its military wing, but doubtless he sees that as acceptable behaviour – although given the current crime statistics from South Africa, the ANC still has plenty of blood on its hands.

Newspapers, both broadsheet and red top have lined up to condemn the invitation. Nick Griffin played it for all it was worth, managing to upset a few Generals and politicians along the way, and stage managing the sort of publicity he can only have dreamed of.

This piece is being written  ahead of the Question Time programme but I will watch it with interest to see how Griffin performs. From the reluctance of a number of politicians and at least one respected columnist to share the platform with him, I suspect he will do well. I also suspect that viewing figures for Question Time will show a steep jump.

And the point of all this? By protesting against free speech for one small segment of the political spectrum, his opponents have given Griffin the opportunity and the ‘oxygen of publicity’ needed to reach a far wider audience. Shooting themselves in the foot, or what?

The facts are that the BNP attracted over a million votes which surely shows that it is offering something to many people who either wish to protest against the policies of the current government or feel they are disenfranchised by it. This may be unpalatable to those in power, but government only governs with the consent of the people and that does make it look as though there are a lot of people who wish to withhold their consent.

And the anomaly? Only by now generating yet more publicity will we be able to hold the BNP policies up to the light and examine them for what they truly are – a mismash of jumbled thinking and unacceptable practice. Question time may be the first step on that path

Question time – was is a success?  See next post.