I smell the blood of an Englishman - and blood there may well be some time in the future when the people will, no doubt wake up far too late, regardless of what may be thought by others.
It is conference time again and where the Conservative Party are concerned that means a change of attire, whereby the don their 'anti-EU' garb in order to
impress fool the electorate yet again. As Richard North, EU Referendum, so rightly says, this story is nothing but another attempt to make the Conservative Party appear anti-EU, something which we know to be the exact opposite bearing in mind the words of his Party Leader who has stated that out future lies in continued membership of the EU. In order to ensure that EU memebership does not become 'the' topic of the Conservative Party conference we get this article from the BBC featuring a plea by Nick Boles that the topics with which the British public are most concerned about are growth, jobs and the rising cost of fuel, not their little petty obsessions. The fact that the rising cost of fuel can be laid at the very door of those about which he does not want his party to become obsessed illustrates just what a narrow and small mind Master Boles possesses - but hey, fairs fair, he is but a Conservative politician. With regard to Boles, it has long been held that he is the unofficial mouthpiece of Cameron - presumably the 'bottom' one - so anything that Boles says can be taken with the required sheets of Andrex.
During the run-up to the Conservative Party conference we have been presented with an 'alternative' view of what that party should stand for with the publication of a paper authored by Dominic Raab, Andrea Leadsom and others. Lo and behold, yet another view has been authored by Graham Brady, Geoffrey Cox, Edward Leigh, Colin Moynihan, John Baron and David Davis. In his introduction to this new 'alternative' view of what the Conservative Party should stand for John Redwood uses the word 'we', so one can but presume he is in full agreement with its stated aims. Redwood writes:
"We want affordable and effective government, doing those things which only government can do. We prefer our government to be more enabler than provider. We like government to remember that the best answer for most people most of the time is that they be left free enough to take responsibility for their own lives." (Emphasis mine)
We all know that government can 'do' squat diddly, as they have demonstrated time and time again, so it must surely be that government butts-out of trying to 'do' anything - other than that which the people have said they want done. To state that government should be more enabler than provider is but code for allowing people to do whatever they want, providing our elected dictators have permitted same. As for the part in which Redwood states that people should be left free to take responsibility for their own lives, then why the hell is he a proponent for government?
That Open Europe has long been held as a mouthpiece for Cameron's vision of EU membership is amply demonstrated by this post. For an organisation which appears to pride itself on the research papers that it produces, it is totally amazing that they fail to mention that which Richard North highlighted, namely the hand of Blair. At the same time, whilst FactCheck are correct when they write:
"Given this dubious evidence base, Mr Duncan Smith’s comments are going to stay firmly down at the Fiction end of the FactCheck-o-meter for the time being."
it would seem that they need to get the full facts.
If the Conservative Party 'faux eurosceptics' really wished to 'stir the pot' then they would be discussing this snippet of news, one supplied by Ian Parker-Joseph!