Brexit: The Sekt is on ice .......

With our Article 50 notification now just a hair's breadth away, we can expect today some spectacular last-minute disruptions. Satan's little sex-toy to the North will probably announce a new independence referendum, just as US fracking is making third-stage extraction from the North Sea increasingly uneconomic. Soros and his little helpers will throw money at QCs in an effort to use the law to scupper Parliament. The BBC will no doubt find reasons to announce today some dire economic forecasts amid tones of general gloom. Little Owen Jones may offer free blowies to Brexiteers who recant, Lily Allen will give away copies of her dire new album, currently bombing, and even Lord Geldof may emerge to sneer at, shower with spittle and swear at the common folk before his carers get him back into his bath chair. 

None of which should make the slightest difference to the Brexit Bill. If it clears its stages today unamended, I can think of no greater gift to our Sovereign Lady than to submit the Bill for Royal Assent allowing the Prime Minister to give Brussels our formal notice tomorrow. 

There will be a general screeching from Farringdon as a distraught Polly Toynbee dribbles salty snot over a wailing Suzanne Moore's velvet kitten heels. Some hopeless little bloke called Farron will call all the TV stations ( "there's some bloke called Dim Pharom on the line ... yeah, third time he's called ... OK, we'll bar the number" ) Gina Miller will vow revenge on the British people and devote her remaining fortune to keeping members of the bar in Claret, and in Brussels the pressed duck (four fat Flemish ducks for each Commissioner, reduced to a cube the size of a fag packet by a powerful hydraulic press,  a favourite dish served by Herr Juncker) will regorge and repeat acidly into the night. 

Here, I'll pop the caps on a brace of Sekt bottles cooling in the fridge. If it happens.

Erdogan's hired street thugs intimidate Europe

I posted recently on Austria and Germany's refusals to allow the nascent fascist dictator Erdogan to campaign in their countries for support for the April referendum for his Turkish equivalent to the Nazi Enabling Law. Voters in Turkey are divided, and the Turkish Diaspora living elsewhere in Europe who can still vote may swing it. Of 4m Turkish-origin residents in Germany, some 1.6m can vote on this issue.

The latest to feel the rent-a-mob fury of the psychopathic Erdogan are the Dutch; they refused to allow Erdogan's foreign minister to land in Rotterdam, to headline a street rally in support of the Enabling Law. In retaliation, Erdogan's thugs are besieging the Netherlands Embassy in Ankara.     

Austria banned a further Turkish senior official from a proposed rally in Hörbranz on Friday on the grounds of risk to public order. 

Europe gives refuge to many tens of thousands of opponents of Erdogan's regime, not terrorists but professionals, intellectuals and former public officials, who otherwise face detention and torture in squalid Turkish jails at the hands of the Erdogan regime. To allow the very thugs who command the waterboarding to campaign openly in the countries of refuge of their victims for even greater totalitarian power is utterly unacceptable and European governments are doing exactly the right thing in repudiating these second-tier thugs.  

I expect Erdogan to throw half a million migrants into Greece in a tantrum of furious petulance. Let's hope Hungary's, Austria's and Slovenia's fences hold. 

UN greed and cupidity, EU waste and stupidity piss away $803m in Greek Aid

"One senior aid official estimated that as much as $70 out of every $100 spent had been wasted"

So says a piece in the Guardian today that catalogues the greed, stupidity, empire buiding, tantrums, thefts, frauds, jealousies and malfeasance that has pissed away $803m in aid to Greece to accommodate the migrants there. Who is surprised? 

The gainers from the aid have been UN bureaucrats, apparatchiks and aid workers paid third-world 'hardship pay' bonuses for being posted to this holiday destination, the international aid bandwagon, EU bureaucrats, Greek civil servants and their contractors, and Turkish and German taxpayers. Losers from the aid have been the migrants, who have little improvement in living conditions and the people of Greece, who have gained nothing and lost much. 

The piece is a damning litany of lunatics running the asylum. Few migrants have been returned to Turkey, few have been accepted under Juncker's quota rules but UN managers are fat with gold and puffed with a hubristic flatus of self-importance. Vicious turf-wars between aid agencies have seen donor aid pissed away in campaigns to counter opposing aid agencies rather than in assisting the migrants to go home.   

If any further evidence were needed that the UN and EU are run for the benefit of their officials, Greece provides it in spades. Nasty, self-loving incapable fools, chiselling little crooks, petulant penpushers and leeches, their vile misappropriation of tax and aid money is only now becoming clear.

Monbiot's annual outing on this blog - 2017

I read Monbiot every week in the Guardian and for fifty weeks a year there's really nothing worth commenting on. But as regulars will know, around once a year old Moonbat comes up with a column that presses all the right buttons. This year's hit is a post on Big Data.  

Not so much Big Data as the Big Money that uses it, in the West anyway. Those who have great wealth, from across the political spectrum, inevitably turn their attention to using it to gain greater political leverage than their single vote alone would allow. And they all make me nervous; Gina Miller and Tony Blair as much as Lord Ashcroft and Arron Banks. Whilst we're working towards controls that restrict their funding of political parties - controls that depend on also controlling TU funding - the funding of 'sniper' technology that allows campaigns to be precisely focused rather than shotgunned is not so controlled. And the State can also use it;

" ... deep-learning algorithms enable the state to develop its “citizen score”. This uses people’s online activities to determine how loyal and compliant they are, and whether they should qualify for jobs, loans or entitlement to travel to other countries. Combine this level of monitoring with nudging technologies – tools designed subtly to change people’s opinions and responses – and you develop a system that tends towards complete control."

However, Monbiot also recognises that Localism, Direct Democracy and other systems that 'take back control' from the overwheening centre can counter these malign effects

"But digital technologies could also be a powerful force for positive change. Political systems, particularly in the Anglophone nations, have scarcely changed since the fastest means of delivering information was the horse. They remain remote, centralised and paternalist. The great potential for participation and deeper democratic engagement is almost untapped. Because the rest of us have not been invited to occupy them, it is easy for billionaires to seize and enclose the political cyber-commons."

To a point, George. So long as we maintain universal adult suffrage and the secret ballot on all matters of importance, this can be supplemented by as many citizens' juries as you wish. But any solutions that disenfranchise any part of the population are unacceptable - and Labour has a shameful history of supporting Eugenics in the party's early days, a fascist tendency that resurfaces from time to time. 

So, Herr Juncker, let me see if I've got this right ...

The fury from across the Channel this week at a reports that finds that the EU have no basis in law for their demand of a €60bn reverse golden handshake reveals rather more than the Berleymont apparatchiks would wish, I think.

It can't be because they didn't know that they have no basis in international law for their demands. They know as well as we do they have no lawful right to ask this of us. The weakness of their case is amply demonstrated by their demand that the matter of the exit bill is decided before any trade terms are discussed. They must also know that there is no way that Mrs May can agree a lump sum before knowing by how much the trade deal will benefit or disbenefit us.

On the other hand, Mrs May has clearly signalled her fall-back position; we leave without a deal on WTO terms, our contributions stop in March 2019, and we use our rights under international law to reclaim our assets; unlike the EU's spurious claims, our reclaiming our investments such as the €40bn we've put into the European Investment Bank will be enforced. And yes, WTO terms will hurt our GDP, but the lump sum we win back plus the €10bn a year buffer of no more Danegeld could compensate for the downturn. Whereas the EU has no such capital cushion, and faces charging its contributing nations far more, and will also suffer its own hit to EU GDP from a Brexit without any buffer at all. 

Have I misunderstood this or are we negotiating from a pretty strong position? Are the comrades so cross because they've worked out how weak they are in all this?

Swedish establishment still the same Nazis

Ask me to name the most continuously Nazi European nation and I have no hesitation in nominating Sweden. Sweden was ahead of Hitler's Germany in inventing crude racial myths of Aryan purity, all that Volk cobblers around runes and race superiority, and had some of Europe's most repressive laws that equalled Franco's Spain in their Fascist reach. Sweden also fell victim to that fashionable Socialist and National-Socialist fake-science, Eugenics. George Bernard Shaw wanted a humane gas to kill the poor, Virginia Woolf wanted her own T-4 programme to kill the mentally subnormal and all believed passionately in controlled breeding to produce a master-race. The UK Labour party quietly dropped Eugenics from its manifesto some time in the 1930s, but Nazi Germany and Sweden never did.

I recall that in addition to being appalled by the Vietnam War in the early 1970s, we were horrified that Sweden still practiced compulsory sterilisation for those failing to reach an IQ minimum. It was pure Nazi T-4. Sweden only halted compulsory sterilisation for dim Swedes in 1975, after the Paris peace accords. Except of course for transexuals. Men and women wanting sex changes in Sweden had, by law, to have their balls lopped-off or their wombs pulled out. They carried on doing this until 2012 - yes, when I was building Olympic facilities in London, Swedish versions of Caitlyn Jenner were being castrated by court order. 

So it comes as absolutely no surprise that with such a poor history of social governance, the Swedes have also screwed up massively on immigration. Maybe to make up for a dip in the population caused by their sterilising tens of thousands of their own people, Sweden decided to import economic Moslem migrants, who, as Katie Hopkins reports, now commit the same crimes over and over again;

'here we go; this is what I've handled from Monday to Friday this week: rape, rape, robbery, aggravated assault, rape-assault and rape....violence against the police, threats to police, drug crime, felony, attempted murder, rape again.

'Suspected perpetrators; Ali Mohammed, Mahmod, Mohammed, Mohammed Ali, Muhammad, again, again, again. Countries representing all the crimes this week; Iraq, Iraq, Syria, Turkey, Syria, Afghanistan, Somalia, Somalia, Syria again, Somalia...

Of course that shouldn't be a surprise. Nor should Sweden's outright denials that anything is wrong. After all, they told the exact same lie for the whole of my youth and adolescence when they were ripping the testicles and ovaries from the poor. 

Note: Postwar Swedish fascism was far more extensive than this; for a researched source see http://jonjayray.tripod.com/sweden.html

A line in the sand for Europe, and another migrant Summer

No, not about the upper house doing a bit of virtue-signalling from the, uhm, somewhat damp red benches. That will be reversed. And if Farron and similar idiots really want to know how their jejune posturing looks to the 1m Brits in Europe I'd be delighted to tell him. No, this is about our old enemy, Turkey.

Erdogan is going through a democratic sham process to grant himself Franco-like powers, following the text-book route to dictatorship with the instruction "Next, pass Enabling Act". There are 1.6m Turkish citizens in Germany and 110k in Austria who can vote - and Erdogan is desperate to downplay his evil dictator persona for a liberal democrat one, so wants to extend his campaign tour to the two nations. The answer likely from both is Nein. 

Austria has simply said no. The total Turkish-origin population here is 360k, and Erdogan's visit would 'disrupt' their integration. Germany is using Turkey's arrest and detention of a Die Welt Journo, Deniz Yucel, to prevent Erdogan reaching out to the 4m Turkish-origin Germans. Both nations are likely to accommodate regime opponents, and Kurds, whom Erdogan is doing his best to slaughter. It would be like the UK hosting a State Visit for some brutal Salafist head-chopper. Oh ... I see. Sorry.

The Somalis, Ethiopians and Nigerians on the streets of Rome will no doubt be kept out of sight of the EU's unelected Nomenklatura as they meet to feast and drink this month to commemorate the Treaty of Rome, but will nonetheless serve as reminder of the hordes of migrants waiting in Libya to cross this Summer. Add to those a million more Iraqis and Afghanis in Turkey pushed over the border by a furious and petulant Erdogan denied his pretence at being a democrat, and Europe is facing an issue that puts the petty virtue signalling of our party funders retirement home back in its place. 

Owen Jones must learn to weld

Although watching the Labour Party disintegrate gives a wonderful pleasure, nothing has really changed. I spent enough of my career attending those dreary trade conferences in bland 'international' hotels off the Euston Road to have met an entire cross section of the nation over stewed coffee and rubber chicken. The ones I genuinely enjoyed were those we termed, with real affection, the 'Northern bastards'. Oblivious to our soft southern conceits they would happily demand of conference executives "I'm parched here, love; be a poppet and fetch me a cup of tea, would you?". Their night out in London would involve beer and strippers. Even though they were construction managers, they were also local councillors, Labour party officials and at home were as likely to be drinking in their local 'institute' than in the golf club. By and large they were humorous, jocund and good value. They were a million miles removed from sensitive souls such as Owen Jones and the fashionable metropolitan left, but in their own way (expressed as "I don't mind poofs, me" or something similar ) were really quite liberal.

Anyway, for years now Labour has been trying to be a broad enough church to accommodate both the Northern Bastards and the London Poofs. And even though the Northern Bastards were quite good at committees, rules and procedures, the Southern Poofs were good at the media, and won. They immediately demanded that the Northern Bastards dropped 'pet' 'love' 'sweetie' and similar terms of endearment, made their own tea and flew a rainbow flag at the Durham Miners' gala.  

Even though they're no longer part of the same coherent party, both sides are still there. The Northern Bastards are still running vast swathes of local councils and the Southern Poofs the London boroughs; they still have a shedload of MPs. The problem is to come. If the Southern Poofs become a sort of rump regional far-left party, the Northern Bastards need a home. And as much as I'd like this to be UKIP, I don't think this will work. We're lacking a social democratic white van man and working men's club party, where wives make the tea and cobs for the meetings.     

My time in the North taught me several surprising things. Everyone north of Leicester, it seems, can weld. Perhaps it was taught in schools, perhaps it's a dad thing. If Labour is to survive in any form perhaps this is the answer. Little Owen Jones must go to Middlesborough and learn to weld, and in return he can show them how to open Prosecco and eat mussels or something. I can't think of anything else that would prevent there being two Labour parties.

Who will get the taxpayer's grapefruit bowls?

Gerald Kaufman was one of the most egregious expenses cheats exposed by the Telegraph in 2009. Amongst the misuse of tax funds for his London gaff was £220 for a pair of crystal grapefruit bowls, items Kaufman claimed were 'essential' for him to perform his work as an MP.

No hypocritical encomiums here today I'm afraid. Kaufman and those like him did more to devalue and befoul our ancient Parliament than those for centuries past. Here's a litany of his tax-theft;

The former environment minister was asked to attend a meeting with officials from the parliamentary fees office to discuss details of another claim relating to £28,834 of work on the kitchen and bathroom at his London flat. He told them that the work was necessary because he was “living in a slum”, though his second home, off Regent’s Park, is in one of the most fashionable areas of the capital. He was eventually reimbursed for £15,329. 

On one occasion he asked a civil servant “why are you querying these expenses?” and on another threatened to make a complaint unless a dispute was settled by noon on the day in question. In one document, an official in the fees office noted that invoices Sir Gerald had submitted took him to “within 6p” of his annual limit. He also claimed £1,262 for a gas bill that was £1,055 in credit.

Between 2001 and 2008 the Manchester Gorton MP, one of the Labour party’s longest-serving members, claimed a total of £115,109 in additional costs allowances on his London flat, which he owns outright. In June 2006, he submitted a claim for three months’ expenses totalling £14,301.60, which included £8,865 for a Bang & Olufsen Beovision 40in LCD television. The maximum amount MPs are allowed to claim for TVs is £750.

On July 7, 2006 the fees office wrote to Sir Gerald to say: “I regret to inform you that this item falls within the not allowable category of luxurious furnishings, and as such has been rejected.” He was paid £750. In March 2007 Sir Gerald submitted a claim for £1,461.83 for a “second-hand rug replacing 24-year-old carpet”, with an additional £389.91 for “customs duty on rug”, which was paid. The receipt showed that Sir Gerald bought the rug from the Showplace Antique Centre on West 25th Street in Manhattan for $2,750. The Green Book strictly forbids “antique, luxury or premium grade” furnishings. Later that year, on Dec 29, Sir Gerald, who was knighted in 2004, submitted an invoice from ABC Carpets in Harrods for £598, which was also paid.

A note of a telephone conversation between Sir Gerald, 78, and an official in the fees office, states that his reasons for claiming £28,834 for home improvements between 2005 and 2007 were: “Old flat, facilities out of date, decrepit, health reasons, update, living in slum.” Sir Gerald added that he had “not carried out any repairs/maintenance for 32 years”.Sir Gerald was also challenged over regular claims for “odd jobs” which he submitted without receipts at a rate of £245 every month — £5 below the then limit for unreceipted expenses. He replied: “Why are you querying these expenses?” On May 18, a senior official in the fees office noted details of another conversation about the kitchen and bathroom, saying: “MP believes that I have seen a detailed breakdown of the £12,416.51 claim he has submitted [for that financial year]… MP is becoming agitated and will be making an official complaint against me, if this matter is not resolved by 12 noon today.” When detailed invoices were submitted, they included £575 for undertile heating in the shower room and £2,695 for Bosch and Miele kitchen appliances. Sir Gerald was asked to attend a meeting with officials on the matter and the fees office eventually agreed to pay him £15,329 of the £28,834. Sir Gerald accepted, saying that he wanted to “draw a line under the issue”.

In June last year Sir Gerald submitted a £1,262 claim for his gas bill, covering the period March 2006 to May 2008. The fees office pointed out that his gas account was £1,055.60 in credit, and only agreed to pay £122.46. A note in the file on July 10, 2008 quotes Sir Gerald as saying: “I received a letter from [official] saying not pay as is credit. I paid £1,252 THIS year so want reimbursing!!!”
The fees office wrote to him on July 14 to say: “You might wish to ask British Gas to repay you the credit.”

Sir Gerald’s claims between 2004 and June 2008 also included £19,200 for food — close to the maximum — and £4,692 for cleaning.

Last night Sir Gerald offered to repay the money for the rug and admitted that his claim for the £8,000 television was “a bit daft”. He said that his flat had been in need of complete refurbishment because he had “neglected” it over the years and he had overclaimed for the gas bill because he “misunderstood” the invoice. He said that his odd jobs bill was actually more than £245 a month, so he had claimed close to the limit. His food claim was “appropriate” because his job meant he often had to “spend a lot of money” eating out, he added.

Deplorables must defeat the Illiberals to preserve democracy

I think my earlier confusion about what to call the self-righteous didactic restrictive bansturbators of Guardianista bien-pensants has been solved. From now on they will simply be the Illiberals. And I am content to be counted amongst the ranks of the Deplorables - deplorable presumably because we stand for free speech, free thought, universal suffrage, secret ballots and the rule of law. 

And it's the Illiberals of course who now pose the greatest threat to Western democracy. Since June last year I've catalogued on here the shock and horror of the Illiberals that the majority of the British people didn't do as they were told. Little Owen Jones joined Polly Toynbee in a profound shriek of pain. Even Roger Scruton declared that ordinary people were too stupid to make such decisions - before contritely recanting. 

And Mick Hume in a good piece in the Mail lists the others who think that democracy cannot be trusted to the people; A.C.Grayling's eunuch-like whine, John Major, Gina Miller, Richard Branson, Tony Blair, Hilary Mantel, all making crass and unintelligent comments. The litany of hate, insults, abuse, crude stereotyping, the street thuggery, bullying, coercion and intimidation employed by the Illiberals and I suspect experienced in some form by all of us, in reality or online, tells eloquently the extent to which they are ready to abandon democratic and civilised behaviour for the totalitarian Illiberal jackboot.

And now the tame stooges of the Illiberals - the think tanks, academic institutes, professional associations, the RSA and so on - are beavering away to find novel means of subverting democracy so as to silence the voice of the majority. 

We must stand absolutely firm. We must uphold the rule of law. We must defend free and open elections and ballots, universal adult suffrage, the secret ballot, free association and above all freedom of expression, speech and thought. Our freedoms are under prolonged and sustained assault by a fanatical enemy who will stop at nothing. We stand here against the Illiberals. We stand firm. 

 

Blair's Big Tent to have a different name again

Blair's big tent, constructed over several acres to accommodate all his enemies pissing out, and otherwise known as the Millennium Dome, is set to be called something different for the next ten years in a deal reported to be worth £125m.

The venue is expected to host the European scrabble championships in 2017 and an Algarve timeshare show next year.  

That's all.

Martin Schulz just another bent bastard after all

The man tipped to replace Merkel as 'leader of the free world' as the wimpering Guardian would have it, Martin Schulz, a man endowed by the leftie press with virtues of humility, sanctity, mission and aptitude, now turns out to be just another bent bastard politician after all, with his great sticky hands covered in corrupt Euros. 

He's a socialist, so it should be no surprise that his aptitude was actually for diverting huge swathes of EU taxpayers' money to his chums. Yes, the man hounding UKIP and Marine Le Pen over mis-spending trivial sums of their EU Parliament party grouping money on campaigns is himself mired to his neck in shit from his chiselling corrupt peculation. 

What he's been doing is breaking all the EU's rules to appoint his chums to lucrative and obscenely well paid EU jobs. And the leaks have come not from Merkel's campaign team but from the EU's own administrative staff, revealed in Der Spiegel.

Personally, I think there's something of a whiff of a palace coup about it all. Two of the EU's several Presidents are the targets. The drunkard Juncker, whom determined efforts are being made to defenestrate before his 2019 termination date, and Schulz, have proven to be unusually incompetent even by EU standards, and all the little Daniels dependent on the vast Brussels scam for their livings are not happy.  

In Defence of Europe

It has been NATO, of course, and not the EU that has played the principle part in maintaining peace in Europe since 1949. Indeed, it is now widely recognised that the actions of the EU in the Balkans, and in Ukraine, have acted to foment conflict rather than peace. This is tacitly recognised even by the EU Empire's fervent German press outlet, Der Spiegel; "NATO always aspired to be something more than a defence alliance. It viewed itself as the protective power of liberal democracy, the West and Western principles. It was a moral framework, the foundations for their existence. But are we certain that the West is still a community of shared values? If it's not, then what is NATO defending?"

And here we have the intellectual crisis of the Neo-Illiberals. They don't like democracy being used by people who don't share their values. They are intolerant of any political system that doesn't work the way they want. They know they are right and will bully, coerce and manipulate in order to make everyone realise this. And they simply don't understand a NATO that defends democracy, universal suffrage and the secret ballot, and the right of self-determination. They want an ideological NATO, as grandiose, idealist and theocratic as the EU Federasts themselves. They want a NATO that will be the EU's armed stormfront. 

This dichotomy therefore defines the positions of Europe's actors, played out yesterday in Munich against the background of US VP Pence's speech.  

Brussels Wants to replace NATO with a militarised EU - A European military alliance as allowed for by but not yet enabled by Article 42 (2) of the Treaty on European Union (TEU). Juncker has signalled that he sees this starting as a 'soft' military capability - airlifts, peacekeeping, border security, maritime patrol and SAR - geared at projecting power and showing the flag rather than in maintaining heavy armour pointing East. Undoubtedly this will also involve the strengthening of capacity by the EU Gendarmerie to subdue any outbreaks of democracy within the EU. Argues that up to half of existing (target) 2% defence spends should go to the EU military alliance with the remaining 1% to a reformed NATO. 

The EU's house magazine Der Spiegel echoes this approach; "In the medium-term, Europe must be capable of sufficiently defending itself and providing for its own security. What is most needed in order to make that happen is unity. If Germany and other Europeans now spend more on defence, they will also have to increase their military cooperation as well as massively expand the EU's Common Security and Defence Policy. Europe's alliance should not replace NATO, but it must enable Europeans to stand by each other if the Americans will no longer do it."

And this could define Europe's flashpoint of the future. An EU nation, backed by NATO upholding liberal democracy and the UN upholding the right of self-determination, moves to break out of the EU after a clear referendum. The EU, in seeking to use whatever means possible to prevent such secession, mobilises its own military alliance, including French nukes under Brussels command.  

UK & USA Want a full 2% defence spend to go to NATO to maintain an effective military shield against Russia and also paradoxically to build co-partner forces with Russia to face Islamist threats to our common southern borders. Want no modification of NATO or UN structures and will seek to keep down or veto EU efforts at militarisation.

France Will be asked to give up her UN seat to the EU and her Nuclear potential to EU command. These issues may surface in the forthcoming election, and candidates including Mme Le Pen asked to make their positions clear

Germany Is struggling with her identity like never before. The nation has a huge inbuilt resistance to becoming a militarily strong player, but alone amongst the EU's partners has the financial strength to do so. Pouring money into Juncker's 'soft' military alliance is one option - pouring money into expanding French military capacity another, though this will stick in the craw of German voters. Germany's terrier-like resistance to giving away even a pfennig of her savings may well act in the UK / US interest - for without German gold, the EU's ambitions will come to nought.

Blair struggles to rise from the political grave

The most loathed ex-politician in Britain is scrabbling to rise from his political grave; Blair, whose mummified features can barely raise a plastic smile these days, is sufficiently mentally deluded to think he can lead a successful minority coup against Brexit. With even his most crooked and morally corrupt ex-supporters having deserted him, he is bereft of any effective support and driven only by a zombie-like primal urge to cause trouble. 

He has so far escaped prison for his mendacious Iraq adventures, though the possibility of crowdfunded private legal action against him is growing, and he may yet find himself in the dock in 2017. His Brexit performances may be an attempt to distract from having to face justice.

Blair has also announced plans to set up his own Disinformation Service to drip his own venomous version of reality onto social and mainstream media. Apart from the editorial staff at the Guardian, few will be gulled (or gulled again) by Blairthink.

There has also been no confirmation to date that Blair's efforts at resurrection are inspired by secret cash from George Soros, whose own seditious attempts to subvert democracy both in the UK and in America are bringing him perilously close to arrest. 

Extraordinary arrogance of deluded Brussels fools

Like a partner in an ugly divorce who just won't realise they have no say in their ex-partner's share of the split, the EU just won't leave go of the UK's assets. Proof if ever proof were needed that the rest of the EU has been doing far better out of Britain's membership than we have. We can't escape the clutches of their Federast courts for years to come, they claim. And we must pay them at least €60bn when we leave, to make up for their reduced income. Now they say they want to keep our fish. 

In a leaked document published by the Guardian, the EU makes the mistake of seeming to claim as a right that which can only be granted by the UK - access to resources within our 200 mile economic territorial waters. We will manage our own fish stocks to our best advantage - that can be anywhere from fishing 100% ourselves to licensing others to fish it. And we may use that power to negotiate licenses directly with the nations involved, including Denmark and Holland, rather than with the EU. 

Of course it will take years to build our fleets up again - not only boats to be built, but men to train, skills to acquire. And the management of fish stocks to assure our future prosperity to be achieved. If there is one red line for the British people, it is regaining total and absolute control of our waters. No conditions. No restrictions. Any foreign boat that fishes in our waters after we leave must do so with our explicit consent or be seized, have its crew imprisoned and its catch forfeit. That's international marine law. 

Really, the sooner those deluded fools from Brussels realise they're dealing with a sovereign independent nation and one with warships to boot (though not nearly enough) and not some cowed Euro-Satrapy, the better.

In fact, Mrs May could send the appropriate signals by ordering now the building of ten new fisheries patrol vessels, suitably armed and equipped to carry Royal Marines boarders, and new fisheries patrol drones. The foreign aid budget is rich in resources - and fisheries patrol can be said to be a form of foreign aid. 

Never mind the BBC ... feel the EBC

Well, they've got the flag, the motto, the anthem and they've paved the way for the army, or at least for a Brussels ceremonial guard in Ruritanian uniforms. One just knew somehow that it wouldn't be long before the Federation airline and the Federation broadcaster came along. 

Yes, the European Broadcasting Corporation was let down the slipway this week by Der Spiegel. A 24-language, full colour HD pan-Europe broadcast service via both analogue and DVB-T transmission

• To be funded by the EU directly and by a 5% levy on turnover imposed on Facebook, Google and Twitter
• Facebook & Google (You Tube) also to be forced by law to transmit EBC content for 5% of their output
• None or limited advertising

Finally, we are promised third-rate programmes from sources not good enough to be commissioned commercially - rather like those rather crap feminist stick-man cartoons bought by the Canadian state broadcaster;

"Third, the aim should be much more than just to establish a new media actor that tries to happily co-exist with existing private and public media. Instead, the EBC will also open up new sources of income for private quality media by acting as a platform for private journalistic content."

The hope must surely be that this ponderous, Soviet-style broadcaster can compel itself on captive audiences - on station platforms, in government offices, on giant screens in streets and squares - for in an age of 'pull' media consumption and off-line viewing, it's likely that hardly anyone will watch EBC voluntarily. 

Finally, EU spokesman Margaritis Schinas justified an initial demand of €60bn from the UK by saying it was like buying your round in the pub ..

UK prisons - the Lead effect

The UK finally ended sales of leaded petrol in 2000. From 2018 we should start to see the benefit of this in terms of a substantial reduction in the need for prison places. London's sparrows, sadly, are unlikely to recover.

I suspect readers are divided amongst those who know exactly what the para above is above and those frowning in puzzlement. Well, Lead in petrol and crime rates are very closely correlated, and as nations banned tetraethyl Lead as a petrol additive from the 1970s onwards they began to notice, with a lag of about 19 years, substantial reductions in many crimes as blood lead levels dropped in young people at peak offending age. The science behind this is very robust - each nation's drop in crime follows very closely from the drop in leaded petrol. And not only crime but teenage pregnancies, ADD, and other problems.

There's a good quality paper HERE from Mother Jones with good links to many of the research papers. 

Sparrows? Well, they have disappeared from large cities as air pollution from leaded petrol has decreased. No one knows why. Populations in smaller cities and market towns are fine - places where traffic concentrations and low speeds were not a problem. 

Prisons are having a crisis at the moment due primarily to overcrowding and understaffing. The government, rightly, are holding back from building yet more prisons. In a few years, unless we discover even more widespread Muslim gang child sexual abuse, demand for prison places will fall. The crisis will solve itself. 

I once had an officious safety official demand that I take steps to remove Lead-contaminated dust from a building conversion in London down to a level of 25ppm (25mg/kg). I was happy to refuse and tell him to get lost. The background Lead level in the soil outside, and for miles around, was in excess of 350ppm. Two thousand years of Lead pipes, roofs, windows, industry, crafts, glass, potteries, paint and half a century of leaded petrol have gifted our big cities with Lead levels in the soil that are off-the-scale - but not a major health issue. You really need either to eat Lead or to breathe it in from vehicle exhausts or burning processes to be affected. It's very insoluble and does not penetrate the skin at all easily.  

Funny though that all our proactive scientists who are so good at telling us what's bad for us actually managed to miss Lead completely.

Civilisation

Kenneth Clark's original 'Civilisation' documented a linear progression from Egyptian Pharaohs to Edwardian London in which the birth and death of Christ, the son of God, enabled advances in linear Civilisation not possible before.  Clark was pretty clear about what constituted civilisation. Worshipping a stick or a bit of rock, wiping your arse with your hand or enslaving the folk from the next village didn't cut it. Everywhere, Clark's civilisation was evidenced by advances, by making and building and discovering, by art, construction, thought, literature, technology and societies and cultures benefitting from the Christian virtues. 

The BBC is going to remake the series, which inevitably means a few hours of spewy, nauseous garbage overloaded with moral relativism that will fail utterly to understand what Civilisation means. Yes, the BBC will say, worshipping a tribal stick, smearing your body in mud and beating out a bass beat with a rock and a log is just as civilised as a Thomas Tallis sung Eucharist in a gothic cathedral; and sawing someone's head off for laughing at your holy rock or throwing them off a cliff for eating shrimps on Wednesday in contravention of the Prophet Glob's teaching just as civilised as reading Goethe by candlelight to the sound of a woodwind quartet. 

Above all, the BBC will try to convince us that Islam means civilisation. They will point to the architectural glories of Moorish Spain and to Arabic advances in medicine, algebra and astrology that all bloomed briefly and were absorbed into Western civilisation before leaving Islamic north Africa and the Middle East as a primitive, backwards and uncivilised shithole. Only they'll stop at the blooming stage and try to ascribe Islam's historic virtues to the nasty, brutish and bestial mess of evil, torture and death that Salafist Islam now projects across the world. 

In other words, before viewing even a second of the BBC's nauseous new trash I know exactly what disinformation, what distortion, what omission and what outright lies it will embody and project. It will be crude propaganda, paid for by public taxes, and it will fail.  

Are these kids tomorrow's coal miners?

Are these kids tomorrow's coal miners?

Not a referenced post, but picking up on Steve's comments, which are worthy of a whole series of posts, on the replacement of substantial numbers of jobs in the economy by robots. But surely it's not all negative? I'd far rather send expendible robots 3,000' underground to mine coal, for instance, than men. Methane, silicone dust, explosives, flooding, rock falls, risk and injury all avoided - and mines that can work 24 hours a day without needing a town full of people built on top of them.

Well, a bit of googling found a mine robot prototyped in 2013. They must be working somewhere by now. 

Not just coal, but tin, copper, rare earths. Robot miners can exploit small seams deeper and more hostile than men can. Even underwater - what about mining the seabed within the 200 mile economic zone? Just another post-Brexit asset we've got. 

It may also be worth compiling a running list of those professions most at risk from robots. At the top of mine are fighter pilots; it makes no sense building fast jets half the tech of which are pilot UI & life support systems. Drones with just weapons and avionics can have greater endurance, greater speed, tighter G and in direst emergency can be flown into a target, all at a tenth the cost of a conventional fast jet with no risk to the highly trained pilot. RAF fighter pilots of the future can also be fat, middle aged console-kings downing Chinese Migs in their underpants, reserving our lean, fit risk lords for vital gardening, cooking and bar-service roles for which robots can never replicate human skills. 

Sajid Javid just a Marxist central statist, says Guardian

Simon Jenkins has penned a corker of a column for today's Guardian - it should be compulsory reading for every town planner, every council officer and every elected politician in Britain. I, of course, commend it to you. Just to give you a flavour;

"Demand is not need. The famous quarter of a million is crude “family formation”. The implication is Leninist, that the state’s duty is a home for every citizen, irrespective of choice, price or district. I could answer that Britain has 700,000 empty houses, and London last year converted thousands of offices into flats. Is that the end of the shortage? Only a bureaucrat in a bubble could talk such nonsense, yet the BBC trots it out as a “crisis” day after day.

By imposing one size fits all building targets on all communities across Britain, Javid is seeking total mastery of the private housing sector. He is completing a last link in Labour’s 1940s nationalisation agenda, bringing to housing the same welfare centralisation, bureaucracy and insensitivity now afflicting the NHS."

He makes the moot point that a changing, dynamic economy such as Britain's needs a high degree of labour mobility - which means that a large rented sector is better for the nation than a workforce of inflexible, static owner-occupiers. By accident rather than design, this what we've got. 

He also identifies that housing isn't a British problem but a London problem, and the answer is to increase density in London. I've been saying this for years. The photo below is of a 1920s council house estate within Zone 3. I'll bet that most are now RTBs and rented out - and that such owners wouldn't turn down the offer of a free additional rental room for every one they own by co-operating in replacing these tiny, cold houses with four storey apartment blocks lining the road frontages.  

If councils can't stomach that, I've also long advocated building on sites such as Blackheath. There's nothing natural or heath-like about this vast space; it has no more ecological merit than a municipal gang-mowed playing field. The tiny corner of original gorse-clad, undulating heathland left intact on Blackheath is used by local dog-walkers, who come to watch the outdoors homosexuals playing in the bushes. 

Jenkins is also right that money needs to be switched to managed hostels for those simply incapable of sustaining themselves in their own rented flats. Anyone who has watched an episode or two of  those TV docs that follow high court bailiffs and sheriffs will know that evictions for non-payment are generally of two sorts; those just taking the piss, who move on from private landlord to private landlord as serial rippers-off, and those who genuinely just have such chaotic lives that they can't be trusted to live independently. The latter are deserving of care, and need to live in managed units being fed if necessary, and given some pocket money for clothes and cosmetics.

Yes, I know that 300k net migrants a year are a huge pressure on housing, but as Jenkins says, such pressure is demand and not need. They will have to live in garden sheds, garages and 6 to a room in their relatives' homes if they cannot afford commercial rents. Eventually things will find an equilibrium.   

Gunning for controlled EU borders

Many of Europe's nations take a fairly laid-back approach to firearms, and do so with hardly any of their citizens being shot at all. Many others, including the UK, are constipated about weapons to the extent that even some children's toys are illegal, and lots of people still get shot. In Austria, for example, only military-style Category A firearms are prohibited; with a Weapons Pass one can own Category B arms - pistols of all types and semi-auto rifles. Without a pass, anyone over 18 can buy and own as many shotguns and bolt-magazine rifles as they like - but all such Category C weapons must be registered through a gun-shop. For black-powder weapons, cannon, older revolvers, muzzle loaders, CS gas guns, Verey pistols and the like - category D - no registration at all is needed and they can be bought by mail order. 

As ORF reports this week, when police investigated a weapons-pass holder over an unrelated matter recently, in addition to an arsenal large enough to equip an assault platoon with pistols and semi-auto assault rifles (all legally held) they found fragmentation grenades, light machine guns, fully auto assault rifles and other Cat A kit. They told him he was very naughty, confiscated them and fined him €6,000. 

In the UK I expect the Cat A haul would have earned him 20 years. This enormous disparity in criminal law is just another fundamental reason that the 'convergence' needed to create a united Europe is many, many generations away. 

An Austrian schoolgirl returning home from a school trip to London was stopped at airport security late last year with a CS gas spray in her hand luggage. Cue panic and armed police. She explained that many schoolgirls in Austria carry them quite legally, given the new threats in public places, and that she had brought it into the UK with her. She had no idea she could get 5 years chokey in Britain for it. Thankfully, on this occasion she was allowed to go home without charge. 

As long as Europe's nations value their own standards and want to retain their own customs and laws on these matters, borders are needed - needed for all our good. 

The mostly-legal gun haul - only the grenades earned the owner a fine

Art is Art, Crap is Crap

It was in 1985 that I sat spellbound in Ronnie Scott's at Nina Simone. A musician, songwriter and performer of the most superlative talent, whose cadence, timing, keyboard touch and vocal skills are simply utterly brilliant. I'll remember that gig all my life. She had me, soul and heart, and that's what real art does.

However, this is where the logic of the illiberal left falls. "Nina Simone is Black. Nina Simone is a great artist. Therefore all black people are great artists" is simply a logical fallacy. I've tried and tried, for example, to see any merit in Maya Angelou's dreary words. Agaist Seamus Heaney, Robert Graves or even Larkin her verse is clumsy, ugly, untalented stuff, dross that should never have escaped from some smudgy gestetnered student rag.

Corrupt EU Nomenklatura miffed at Romanian justice win

Political corruption is endemic throughout Europe, and Britain can only boast that our populist checks and balances make it harder here for bent politicians to cheat, steal and defraud than elsewhere. Despite a Parliament-wide expenses fraud scandal in the UK, jut a handful of the most egregious thieves were jailed. The political establishment rapidly realised that the Commons green benches would be empty if all the crooked MPs were acted against. The rest remain on probation, watched by the hawks of a free press that they yearn to muzzle. 

Elsewhere, auditors simply refuse to consider the EU's risible offerings of accounts. So mired by fraud and corruption, so deeply infiltrated by organised criminal networks, so abused by bent and hungry power-seekers are the Federation's finances that no one in Europe regards seriously their fatuous offers of financial records. The EU is corrupt to its core. 

I must admit that my previous confident prediction that François Fillon would walk the French Presidential election looks somewhat shaky now. It emerges that he fraudulently bunged his family members hundreds of thousands of crooked stolen Euros on the pretence that they worked for him - much on the same basis that our MPs claim their young nieces are qualified parliamentary assistants worthy of a £30k salary. It's just theft. Just not the sort of theft that earned a young rioter who stole three bottles of water six months banged up in a Victorian cell with a Muslim rapist and a bucket to shit in. 

So when Romania passed a decree legalising theft, fraud and crookedness by politicians and public officials provided the sums stolen came to less than £38k, bent little ears pricked up all over Europe. This may be small beer in the UK, where £38k is just a year's worth of flipping homes by our MPs, but in Romania it will build you a tasteless vulgar palace with gold taps and individual stables for the goats. I'll bet the EU nomenklatura were particularly interested; if they exempted all transactions of less than €0.5m from accounting transparency, they might just be able to find a bent auditor somewhere in Europe to sign off their accounts. All seemed well and establishment politicians and public officials were rubbing their hands.

Then the people of Romania took to the streets. The politicians remembered what happened the last time they did so, and rapidly backed down. The thieves decree was rescinded. All over Europe one could almost hear the gentle hiss as miffed politicians abandoned dreams of new scams and frauds and let the air out of the hubristic pomposity that criminal immunity confers. Little tear-soaked tissues were flushed from the cloaca of the Berlaymont. Empty Sancerre bottles crashed inverted into Westminster ice buckets. We, the people, have won this round - but the price of a Parliament free from corruption is eternal vigilance.

BBC & RT news rivalry can only benefit the public

The chap criticising RT on the Today programme declared that it was a state-sponsored national broadcaster subject to government control and which represented the views of the establishment, before pausing awkwardly for a second or two as the leaden weight of the irony filled his soul. It was, I imagine, as he glanced about him with a sinking feeling knowing where he was and who was broadcasting his opinion.  Yes, of course RT and the BBC are equivalents; of course both broadcast untruths and of course both represent the view of their controlling establishment through biased production values that no-one is advised to take at face value. 

And that is exactly why their news rivalry is of the greatest public benefit. With RT exposing the BBC's fake news and the BBC doing likewise to false RT stories, by flicking between them one can get an approximation of the reality. 

The watershed was Aleppo and the BBC's mythical White Helmets reporting from the besieged enclave. Except they weren't there. They didn't exist. No-one there had seen them, and when the final rump of rebel fighters surrendered there was no trace of them. Either they escaped to Idlib disguised as rebel fighters - hardly the behaviour of an aid organisation - or they were never there in the first place. Despite which the BBC continued to broadcast their fake accounts of life under siege until near the end, accounts in all probability originating no further from White City than Vauxhall. 

Have you heard a single mention of the White Helmets since the fall of Aleppo? It's as though the MSM has realised that the secret is out and is desperate for people to forget all the past lies. 

Back at the height of the Cold War I used to tune to Radio Moscow on a short-wave valve radio receiver whose qualities I now greatly miss; the xylophone gongs of the 'Moscow Nights' station ident before the news quavered over the ether, with an impression of great distance. The Soviet news if all was well would be predictably dull; a speech from the Agriculture Convention of the 34th Plenary of the Uzhbek Soviet, mine production output gains in Novobyersk and so on. The absence of war rhetoric was, at the time, some sort of assurance that the 4 minutes had not yet arrived. 

Now forty years on we're back in the same place - trying desperately to find the truth in the ground between the liars. 

Christian crosses to stay in Austria - and Britain

Austria is going ahead with a ban on the Niqab and Burqa in public venues - places where there is an expectation that people will show their faces. I don't think this is anti-libertarian, and I apply the same policy personally; I simply refuse to hear or recognise anyone whose face I can't see, including anyone who tries to talk to me whilst wearing mirror sunglasses. They don't exist and are ignored. 

The backlash has come already in Austria, where the majority of public venues including courtrooms are graced with a Christian crucifix. Having a cross bearing Christ crucified in the judge's line of vision seems a compassionate boon to defendants, surely, as a constant reminder of love, goodness and mercy? Some judges have taken to removing them when sitting, but should I ever find myself in an Austrian court I should insist they were restored. Take every help you can. A legal attempt here (should we start terming these vexatious actions as 'Miller cases'?) to class crucifixes in the same way as Islamist head-bags* has already failed, and the crosses stay. 


We also have ubiquitous crucifixes in the UK, though somewhat more discreet.

On every police helmet, pillar box, court or government building; on every government report, paper, news release and letterhead, in and on every thing in the realm that bears an image of the sovereign's crown, we have the Christian cross. Mounted on the orb that is this world, it surmounts all - world, monarch, realm and people. And it says without any ambiguity Christus regnat!

We're not quite finished yet.

*OT but true ...
==============
As a callow youth first in London at a time when Jim Davidson and his ilk regularly termed ill-favoured women as 'double baggers' in their acts, and the parlace of 'yeah with a bag over her head ...' was the disgraceful sexist banter of the public bar, I was nevertheless actually shocked to see a large market sign declaiming "Head bags - 2 for £10". Well I was from Suffolk, so how was I to know that 'Head' brand bags were a London fashion item? For several months I actually believed that Londoners had recourse to bespoke tailored full-length hats for their women ... 

We must help the EU turn from self-destruction

A European customs union in which goods, services and capital can circulate freely is a pretty good idea. The power of Europe's 440m people as a trade bloc, the internal savings from lower frictional costs of trade and the spin-off advantages of a talking-shop at which representatives of the national governments meet to discuss trade matters are all powerful benefits of such a union of convenience. 

Unfortunately, what the EU has become is an unelected cabal of little men from small nations who want to be big. Maltese, Luxembourgers, Belgians and Dutch like the ability to talk on equal terms at France, Germany and the United Kingdom. Sadly, it has led to delusions - delusions that the EU can be a global superpower, and all it needs is an army to go with the flag and the anthem. Germany, the only member with the means to pay for this jejune fantasy, will only go along with it all whilst she is able to exploit the enforced poverty of all the nations of southern Europe that keeps German exports cheap. 

Tusk is one of Europe's little men who wants to be big. He is also literally a small man, with all the comedic chihuahua snappishness that comes with Small Man Syndrome. As the EU crumbles around him, all he can think of to say is "Everyone is against us. Therefore we must have even less democracy and a big army, now". Sadly, it is this sort of blind stupidity, remote from voters and the reality of democratic elections, remote from all modern reality in the make-believe Brussels bunkers, that will hasten the EU's failing. 

But it's neither in Britain's or Europe's interest to see it all crash. We must now work to turn the EU into what it should have been all along - a trade bloc that benefits its members, not a clumsy attempt at a Ruritanian world power run by the Mayor of Gozo. There's no point talking to fools such as Verhofstadt - they're all away with the fairies. We need to take a dialogue directly to the peoples of Europe's nations and plant the idea of a fundamental reformation of the EU.

USA & Australia set the new standard for immigration

The majority of illegals held after trying to enter Australia are not Indonesians, Thais or Vietnamese but Iraqis, Iranians, Sudanese and Libyans. Australia's uncompromising migrant policy sees them held in camps on Nauru and Manus. They will not get in. 

Trump's measures, though they will result in many injustices for those who are true friends of America and who have the economic capacity to contribute, are no greater than the measures that Australia already has in place. Both nations now make it easier for the UK to make migration policy more targeted - excluding nationals of the 7 banned nations, but plus Pakistan and Bangladesh, from whence much of the UK terrorist threat comes.

The outcome is that Anglophone nations are now making the point that the world is not some free, open, ownerless place in which migrants hungry for wealth unavailable in their home countries can move freely en masse and without restriction . They are making the point that nations are already owned by the people that live in them and whose ancestors have fought, bled suffered and struggled to make them what they are. The message is 'Go and make your own'. The message is 'If we want you, we'll call'

The United Kingdom now has the opportunity to join two other great anchors of the Anglophone world. And despite Trudeau's words, migrants will find it a lot harder to get into Canada than they might imagine. 

The Roots of Evil

SS-Sturmbannführer Ernst Lerch started adult life working in his father's cafe in Klagenfurt. A secret Austrian Nazi, when war came he served with the infamous Otto Globocnik in the purges of Jews in eastern Europe, being deeply implicated in the extermination programme. After the war, and whilst the British were occupying Kärnten, Lerch sneaked back to more or less openly run the family cafe. Oh, both the Brits and the Austrians tried to prosecute him, but not very hard. A charming schmaltzy character who presided lovingly over the Tanzcafe Lerch whilst tipsy British officers waltzed with dirndl-clad Mädchen. A loved and respected family man, he lived until Tony Blair formed his first government in the UK. A new play here, 'Tanzcafe Treblinka', explores the myriad issues around the astonishing tale of the man implicated in over a million murders. 

Franz Stangl, the commandant of Treblinka, was of course also Austrian. He was captured in 1970, and in the brief period between incarceration and death was interviewed at length by Gitta Sereny, whose book, Into That Darkness, remains one of the most profound and affecting books I have read. She believes that when he finally allowed himself to admit his guilt, the weight of his evildoing crushed him. His heart attack struck him 19 hours after the admission.

When I search for common characteristics, common backgrounds, amongst these people, not monsters of horror but ordinary, dreary men - Arendt's 'Banality of Evil' - I find unquestioning conformity, a willingness to believe, respect for bureaucracy and hierarchy, trust in the establishment, unwillingness to voice contrary opinions, dogmatism and, yes, limited emotional intelligence. All the characteristics, in other words, that you and I spend our time on the interweb decrying, destroying and combating, whether we find them in individuals or institutions. 

Every illiberal bully who wants to ban and control thought and language, to restrict personal choice, to subvert democracy, to limit people's control over their own lives, to coerce and twist and emotionally blackmail, has the potential to grow into an Ernst Lerch or Franz Stangl if allowed enough oxygen. Our work in checking them can never be done.

EU Disinformation Unit 'clarifies' Bulgarian Snowman Story

For non-readers of Cyrillic (including me) the headline in the Bulgarian Times claims that the EU intends to ban Snowmen as racist and sexist - unless they are non-white and recognisably female.

An EU spokesman immediately branded the story as nonsense, and the EU Disinformation Unit clarified the misunderstanding as follows: (unverified)

"The Commission merely reminded the Bulgarian government of the EU Public Actions Directive, which requires that European governments and local authorities undertake service provision in line with anti-discriminatory EU law. In this case, snowmen erected by government or local government staff, or erected in public parks, or on public highways, or military bases, or any land, locus or place on land or water owned or controlled by a governmental or quasi governmental organisation, must undergo a full Risk Assessment, be constructed in accordance with a written Method Statement, with any significant costs (e.g. for carrots or pieces of coal) submitted to the EU under the State Aid regulations, including the requirement for a 'Nil' return, and that each Snowman erection must be documented in an Equal Opportunities Achievement Statement. The erecting authority must demonstrate and publish electronically how the Snowman helps achieve the EU's aims in the Year of Organic Diversity of sustainable craft development and in imprinting the semiotics of diversity. 

So you will see this is no prohibition and there is no new legislation - the existing Directives, agreed democratically in secret by several commissioners democratically appointed by other commissioners - are quite adequate"

Good. Glad that's clear.

...And now for the Peers

I'm going to skate over comments on the Brexit court decision yesterday; everything has already been said elsewhere. Suffice to say that Gina Miller is no angel but just a rather petulant, selfish rich woman used to applying wealth and sharp elbows to get her own way, and we will be glad in the end that Parliamentary sovereignty has been adjudged supreme. Despite my initial anger.

Now for the hurdles in the Commons and particularly the Lords. Even though the government has offered to allow the Lords to "talk until they wet themselves", the place is unfortunately full of the corrupt, the venal, barrators, panderers, frauds, hypocrites, thieves and peculators and all the other rancid filth swimming in the festering ordure that is the output of the life peerage system. A vast number of these slime-coated denizens of the Eighth Malebolge owe greater allegiance to Brussels than to their sovereign. 

Which is exactly the reason I'm willing to allow my name to go forward to become one; if Mrs May has to pack the place with 'sunset peers' who are available to take up voting immediately, I'm happy to do my duty. The per diem and the decent bars and restaurants will more than make up for a few weeks of all night sittings, my bladder is strong and I'm both eloquent and erudite and used to speaking in such settings if required. And I won't mind if in February Mrs May then abolishes several hundred life peers from sitting, including me. 

I'm sure many regular readers are in a similar position. A regular luncheon table in the Lords licenced cafeteria made up of blog commentators would be rather fun. 

English Law - our £25bn a year service asset

I'll bet that if I mention Carlill -v- Carbolic Smoke Ball Company at least half of you will get the reference. For any that don't, it's one of the first contract law cases that English professionals from all sectors learn when first at the teat of contract law & tort. I aced law, and kept up with it all through my professional career, through both the Times law reports and those in Estates Gazette. Over the years I've come not only to respect but to regard with a deep affection the wonderful, elegant and self-evolving way in which the corpus of civil law works in England and Wales. No other nation could have developed a separate, parallel stream of law such as Equity - a shield, not a sword - to use when the mainstream was lacking. And the Chancery barrister from whom I first learnt my law was equally in love with it all. My final act before I retired was to wholly resist a claim of £1m under NEC3 at adjudication with the law supplied by an eager young chap from one of the big city firms. I thoroughly enjoyed myself. There ain't nothing so elegant as a 300-item Scott schedule with our column totalling to zero. 

Anyway, that little encomium apart, the Standard recognises the importance of it all both to the City and nation;

The Justice Secretary, Liz Truss, identifies one of them today in her summit with leading law firms. She promised to protect Britain’s status as the world’s biggest legal capital — a status which is worth some £25 billion a year. More importantly, it adds to the country’s historic reputation for probity, integrity and fair dealing. English contract law has evolved over centuries and it is used in contracts between individuals and countries which have little to do with England or the UK. Then there is the  reputation for professionalism of the English legal profession and the independence and quality of the judiciary — however much the judges may occasionally irritate us. And if England is the centre of the legal world, London is the centre of the centre.

Our justice system could of course be improved, notably the efficiency of the courts. But the Government is right to do what it can to safeguard the lawyers’ position. It should sign up to the Hague Convention on Choice of Court Agreements immediately after Brexit — it cannot do so while we are in the EU — and seek a replacement for Europe’s “Recast” rule. This is crucial. Let’s look to our strengths; right now we must make the most of them.

With English law, rather than Euro Napoleonic codes, forming the basis of North American and much of Asian-Pacific law, we are wise to pull it away from the perversion and debasement of inferior European jurisdiction. It is self healing, and the Euro errors of the last 40 years can be healed and absorbed. With TTIP dead in the water, and CETA peculiar to the Euro Napoleonic 27, we stand in good stead to continue as the world's tribunal capital. In relation to 'recast', Allen & Overy have published an opinion, but it can be summarised in their graphic 

Brussels Regulation: Article 23

Brussels Regulation (recast): Article 25

"If the parties, one or more of whom is domiciled in a Member State, have agreed that a court or the courts of a Member State are to have jurisdiction to settle any disputes which have arisen or which may arise in connection with a particular legal relationship, that court or those courts shall have jurisdiction. Such jurisdiction shall be exclusive unless the parties have agreed otherwise."

"If the parties, regardless of their domicile, have agreed that a court or the courts of a Member State are to have jurisdiction to settle any disputes which have arisen or which may arise in connection with a particular legal relationship, that court or those courts shall have jurisdiction, unless the agreement is null and void as to its substantive validity under the law of that Member State. Such jurisdiction shall be exclusive unless the parties have agreed otherwise."