Cookie Notice

However, this blog is a US service and this site uses cookies from Google to deliver its services and analyze traffic. Your IP address and user-agent are shared with Google along with performance and security metrics to ensure quality of service, generate usage statistics, and to detect and address abuse.

Friday, 2 October 2009

What's your vote worth?(2)

There's a huge unanswered question over any future referendum on the EU here in the UK; who can vote?

Current arrangements are that all EU citizens registered to vote in the UK can vote in local and European elections. Only UK and Commonwealth citizens can vote in general elections or by-elections. There are two massive problems with this in practice; the first is that the standard of accuracy of our electoral registers is of third-world standard, the second is that even illegals and overstayers can vote.

Firstly, the Commonwealth. I believe the Commonwealth has the potential to be as important as Europe in terms of our trade and prosperity; the scope for defence and reciprocal arrangements is also huge and beneficial, and the global Anglophone alliance a source of strength. I fully support the tradition of young single people from the Commonwealth spending a year or two in the UK, whether working behind bars or as management accountants for one of the temp agencies or in the NHS. However, I've never understood the need for Commonwealth citizens to have the vote here, or for UK resident citizens to have the vote in Nigeria or Tonga. Since Labour abolished exit controls, and as there's no link between the electoral registers and the immigration database, it's quite possible for illegal overstayers or those with fraudulent identities to infect the probity of our voter base. So we must end the right of Commonwealth citizens to vote in the UK.

Secondly, the extent of fraud and error on the registers is massive. In 2001 the Labour government introduced postal and proxy voting on demand. In 2003 and 2004 the Electoral Commission called on the government to tighten checks on postal and proxy voting - and was ignored. The results have been clear to see;
  • On 4/4/05 a judge declared void two local election results in Birmingham because of Labour postal vote fraud and said the evidence of fraud "would disgrace a banana republic"
  • On 8/4/05 a Labour councillor in Blackburn was jailed for stealing 233 postal votes
  • On 14/4/05 the Head of Birmingham's electoral team was suspended following the discovery of 1,000 uncounted postal votes
  • In May 2005 police were investigating 25 cases of electoral fraud in 19 constituencies
  • In April 2006 police were investigating postal vote fraud in Tower Hamlets, six other London boroughs and Birmingham
  • In May and June 2006 police were called to investigate intimidation and vote rigging in Surrey, Coventry, London and Birmingham.
In 2006 Michael Pinto-Duschinsky gave evidence to a Commons Select Committee that there were 3.5m people registered on the electoral register who shouldn't be. In 2007 the Electoral Commission used NOP to estimate the extent of false registrations; in some voting districts, it was estimated that electoral registers were only 60% accurate.

So a great clear-out of the registers is also urgently needed. I suggest this takes place very quickly, alongside the 2011 census, with a once-only requirement for UK citizens to provide evidence (passport or birth certificate) of citizenship.

And as to who can vote in any referendum on the EU - whether before or after the Lisbon Constitution Treaty is signed - clearly, this should be UK citizens only. It's still our country.

What's your vote worth? (1)

As Vernon Bogdanor points out in this morning's Telegraph, "In 2005, (the Conservatives) won more votes than Labour in England but 92 fewer seats. In 2010, for the Conservatives to gain the same number of seats as Labour, they need to win around two million more votes."

For anyone who wonders at this third-world bias in our electoral system, look to the glacial pace at which our mummified Boundary Commission moves in re-drawing constituency boundaries to take account of population shifts. The answer isn't to throw out our well tried and tested First Past the Post system, but to put some ginger in the rectums of the gerontocrats on the Boundary Commission.

Below are the worst five most unrepresented and overrepresented seats;

Isle of Wight - 108,000
Daventry - 89,000

SW Norfolk - 89,000
Banbury - 88,000
S Norfolk - 87,000
Montgomeryshire - 45,000
Cynon Valley - 44,000
Meirionnydd Nant Conwy - 34,000
Orkney and Shetland - 32,000
Na h-Eileanan an Iar - 22,000

The Electoral Quota, the number of electors per constituency that should define the boundaries of each seat, is currently around 69,000. In Australia, this is not allowed to vary by more than +/- 3.5%, and in New Zealand it's 5%. If 5% were applied to the UK, all seats with fewer than 65,550 electors or more than 72,450 would be re-drawn. As Michael Pinto-Duschinsky pointed out to the Graham Committee, we're off the radar as far as international standards of fairness go.

It's high time we had a single Electoral Quota for England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland - either that, or a system by which a Scots MP's vote is worth only 0.75 of an English MP's vote in the Commons. (That's what we call fair, Gordon.)

It's also high time we reduced the number of MPs to around 550 or so. This would give us a national Electoral Quota of 82,000.

And this must be done by 2015. The nation should not have to endure any more than just the next bent and skewed election. It's a disgrace and it needs urgent action.

Thursday, 1 October 2009

Labour's Nazi past re-emerges under Brown

This blog has long recommended the establishment of Community Settlements to house and care for unsupported single mothers, economic and health migrants with no skills or who arrive here with debilitating illnesses for treatment at our expense, and those of the underclass incapable of productive work. Ours is a Christian nation, and none, whether illegals or the most disruptive underclass scum of the type that hounded Fiona Pilkington to death, should be thrown on the street without food, warmth and shelter.

Our proposals have always assumed voluntary entry into such settlements; when free council housing and levels of benefits that provide a comfortable life for millions of the idle, the stupid, the cheats and the chancers are gradually withdrawn and run down, those genuinely incapable of supporting themselves must be provided with food and shelter, albeit at the most basic level of subsistence.

However, we've never proposed this as a punishment for being a single mum or anything else; women have full control of their own bodies and what they do with them. Including bearing bastards. If they have a supportive family structure that cares for them and their offspring at no cost to the taxpayer, that's fine with me.

Brown, however, wants to force 16 and 17 year old single mums into hostels as a punishment - with no choice or freedom about it.

We should not forget that Oswald Mosley, the last British Nazi to achieve prominence, was a Labour MP and Minister, and that the roots of fascist totalitarianism lie close to Labour; there's not a fag-paper between National Socialism and Fabian Socialism. As Brown continues to triangulate Labour pronouncements with those of the BNP, to which his party is haemorrhaging votes, expect to see more of this sort of stuff over the next seven months.

War Criminal Blair to be EU President 'within weeks'

Paul Waugh reports in tonight's Standard that Blair is set to be named EU President within weeks if the Irish vote 'Yes'.

Fine. That sealed indictment from the International Court in the Hague will that much easier to process, then.

69,456,897 Americans voted for Obama in 2008. That's 69,456,870 votes more than it will take to 'elect' Blair as EU President - for we, the people of Europe, won't get a say. The institution and its offices are as totalitarian and undemocratic as the worst of any South American banana republic.

There are times when I am almost reduced to despair at how low we've fallen. However, I'll pour myself a glass and enjoy William Hague's wonderfully accurate prediction;

Wednesday, 30 September 2009

Cheer up Gordon; the Mail and the Telegraph still like you

Oh dear. Following the Guardian's editorial earlier this year encouraging a Labour coup against Brown, he's lost the Sun. Not even a series of Chequers weekends for the scion of the Murdoch and Sun editors could prevent the inevitable. Murdoch watched Brown's speech, and decided he was a loser. Murdoch didn't make his fortune by backing losers. Brown was sacked.

Still, Paul Dacre manages the odd editorial in support of Brown in the Mail, which, like most papers, has suffered a 9% downturn recently. And the Telegraph, to the fury of its readers, also lends a clothes-prop to the waxed dummy from time to time.

Kinnock is said still to feel deeply hurt at having his head in the Sun's lightbulb on the eve of that disastrous election. Their treatment of Brown today is a little kinder - but he'll still feel it like a kick in the gonads.

Tuesday, 29 September 2009

Gordon's 'fairness'


Fairness, like courage, is a concept with which you are wholly unfamiliar. Yet it won't stop you making the word the centrepiece of your speech today.

Fairness is not a political value - it is a British virtue. Fairness means taking your turn in the queue, it means (to borrow the Australian phrase) a 'fair go' for everyone, with no barriers to any citizen. Fairness is based on common-sense morality; it means not taking advantage by foul means. Fairness means winners get prizes, and losers are encouraged to do better. Fairness in WWII gave every person in Britain, including the King, the same ration card. When there's hard work to do, it's fair that everyone lays their hand to the capstan. Fairness means the same reward for the same risk for everyone. We know what fairness is.

So how fair is it that an increasingly corrupt political class can steal, cheat, dodge, obfuscate and fill their fists with public cash with no sanction whatsoever? Like a protected criminal species, immune from prosecution, their avarice a stench in the public's nostrils and a gag in our throats. And not only do you not dismiss and disown them, you protect and encourage their foul corruption. What lesson is this to our young people? How fair is this to parents struggling to impart the notions of virtue and Right to their children?

And how fair is it that you are using the whole panoply of State propaganda to hide your regime's culpability for Britain's Bust? You, who told the FSA to apply a 'light touch' and not to ask awkward questions; you, who encouraged the nation to live beyond its means, you who engineered an unsustainable bubble boom for your narrow political ends. Wouldn't it be fair for you to hang your head in shame, even at this stage?

And how fair is it that you use the power of the State to protect and shield the 2003 War Criminals whilst mouthing trite platitudes about upholding the virtues of right and justice? If you had a microgram of right or justice flowing in your frozen veins you would have sanctioned a full and comprehensive independent investigation with the power to recommend criminal charges - but no, you wanted a secret inquiry with 'no blame', a neat lengthy whitewash to hide the lies and crimes. It was only the nausea of the Chairman at the stench of your cover-up that changed the terms. How fair were you to the families of our war dead? To those in Iraq who grieve for their dead?

How fair is it that whilst you piss billions away in lunatic social engineering experiments while our fighting forces are dying for want of adequate vehicles and equipment, men and women whose courage is a quality with which you are wholly unacquainted?

And how fair is it that you continue to deny the country the referendum on Europe that you promised, a referendum that an overwhelming majority of us are hungry to have? How fair is your mendacity, your corruption, your spin and your denial of the will of the British people?

Is it fair that even at this stage you're pouring further billions into an ID card scheme that we don't want, won't co-operate with and which will be abolished just as soon as you and your criminal cabal are dispatched in tumbrels? Or an NHS records scheme that's on its knees? Or further lunatic proposals for yet more Leviathan State IT projects?

How fair to the striving, careful, responsible core of this nation, seeking the best for their families, wanting little from your State, is your profligate, asinine and politically corrupt waste of their carefully earned taxes? People who turn over each penny twice before spending it, people whose supermarket trollies have grown more expensive each week, people who eat beefburgers so that your corrupt placemen, prodnoses and jobsworths can eat steak at their expense?

Vomit will stick in my craw at every mention of the word 'fairness' you will make today, Gordon. As mendacious and insincere as everything you say, you simply don't know the meaning of the word.

Monday, 28 September 2009

Methinks Mandy doth protest too much

If there's one thing more calculated to wound than faint praise, it's overdone denial. As Mandy now tours the news studios and with feigned indignation repeats to millions of viewers who missed the Andrew Marr show that 'Gordon is not mad, not mad at all. Quite sane and getting on with the job.' you just know that the 'Gordon is mad' meme will now embed itself in the public's consciousness.

Nice one, Mandy.

The magistrate, the EU and starving Spanish Vultures

Spanish vultures have bloody good eyesight. They can spot carrion from 10,000ft up, and then glide silently on nine-foot span wings down to feast. For generations they have lived symbiotically with Spanish hill farmers and rural populations; villagers used to take the carcasses of dead animals to Muladares, traditional places at which they were left for the vultures to dispose of, and hill farmers who practiced transhumant grazing were able to leave the carcasses of dead sheep on the high pastures for the vultures to clean up. All changed from 2002 onwards, when the EU passed a series of new laws in the wake of the BSE scare.

It was forbidden to feed the carcasses of ruminants, or indeed any animal by-products, to wild birds. The papers gleefully reported that giant flocks of hungry Spanish vultures were flying to Brussels and Germany to look for food. It was too good a story to miss. In vain did EU officials protest that special conditions existed for endangered species and birds of prey; Spanish vultures were not an endangered species - indeed, the population had been growing - and carrion-eaters are not strictly birds of prey. It seems the Spanish vulture is doomed by Euro bureaucracy for failing to comply with a legislative category.

And now for Bystander. The Magistrate blogged lately that he had been throwing meat scraps out in the garden for the Red Kites. Immediately I realised that this activity fell under the 2005 Animal By Products Regulations (SI 2005 No 2347). The meat scraps - trimmings from meat fit for human consumption - are Category 3 material under the regulations; they are classed as catering waste, even from a domestic kitchen, and are therefore subject to the Regs. On the face of it, there is a clear breach of s.9(1) of the Regulations, which prohibits the feeding of catering waste "to any other ruminant animal, pig or bird". The offence is regarded as fairly serious, with a penalty on summary conviction of a fine not exceeding the statutory maximum or to imprisonment for a term not exceeding three months or both(s.48(1)). Penalties on indictment are even worse.

However, all is not lost for Bystander. The derogation that failed to work for the Spanish vulture may work in the Chilterns. S.26(3) of the Regulations allows "The feeding of animal by-products to ..... reptiles and birds of prey other than zoo or circus animals" when authorised by the Secretary of State. Unlike vultures, Red Kites can be classed as birds of prey (they apparently eat worms and mice as well as meat scraps). I have no doubt that Bystander will now apply to the SoS for the appropriate licence, and regularise his kite feeding. And equally no doubt that if he does, he will cause immeasurable consternation and confusion in DEFRA, who I am sure pass these wretched laws without ever reading them.

Remember, the Stasi needed a million rats

As big as the Stasi was, it depended on a myriad of small time informers to rat on their colleagues and neighbours to work. The fear in the German State was never knowing whether that smiling newspaper seller, or that friendly primary school teacher, was watching for a loose word, a small admission of guilt to report. The State encouraged fear and distrust amongst the people.

Like most normal people, I swear at my telly from time to time. At times, in private, my language is neither polite nor politically correct. And now, following the case of Rowan Laxton, I must ensure the windows are closed and that I am inaudible to any other person, or face the risk of a rat reporting me to the police. Rowan has just been fined £350 with £500 costs and a £15 victim surcharge (which will certainly never reach the Palestinians on whose behalf he shouted in the first place) for being overheard.

Sunday, 27 September 2009

Hypocrite Harman fixed hubby's snout in sleaze trough

Again a story from the Times on how Harriet Harman fixed for her hubby to get a safe Labour snout-in-the-sleaze-trough seat in return for a £1m 'bung' from his union's funds. This is the same Harriet Harman beloved of Labour wimmin everywhere for her shrill ranting in favour of all-women candidate lists and against, er, wealthy white middle-class blokes getting all the swill.

Harman's stunning hypocrisy will no doubt not show a trace on her dull ovine features; the Harmans of this world, like Leona Helmsley, all believe that rules are for other, 'little' people like us, and don't apply to them.

Will 'magic passport' mean DNA swabbing for Scotland?

And so it emerges that the Tongan alleges that she never showed a passport at all to Patricia Scotland, and was given the job after a ten minute interview. If Scotland had seen Tapui-Zivancevic's passport - with its out of date visa - she wouldn't have employed her, clearly. But Scotland now claims she was shown a second, magic passport - invisible to everyone but her.

And why does this matter?

The UK Borders Agency's unseemly haste last week in imposing a £5k civil penalty on Scotland was for a very good reason. If they had grounds to suspect that Scotland knowingly employed an illegal, such as the magic passport, they would have had grounds to arrest and question her under caution and to swab her for DNA and take her prints. And of course even if no charge was ever brought, the Attorney General's DNA would be retained.

When Vernon Coaker was a Home Office minister he vigorously defended DNA retention of unconvicted people because of the high risk that they would 'offend again'. In the government's view, then, its own Attorney General would be branded a habitual criminal, despite not having been convicted.

And even Brown's corrupt, sleazy and utterly bankrupt administration couldn't defend that.