Richard North, EU Referendum, has kindly linked to a short post of mine - although when he writes that my point is one insufficiently expressed and that this is another of those issues where the UK incurs substantial expenditure, but the people have never been consulted as to whether they wish to make such payments, I am unsure whether the criticism is directed at me or commentators generally. Suffice it to say my wrists are now 'stinging'!
Never one to miss an opportunity (I hope), one section of Richard's post is worth repetition:
"The more one looks at the conduct of the government, the more apparent – and glaring – these anomalies become. Inherent in the result of the general election is the assumption that, in electing one or other party to government, we automatically and necessarily approve the budget plans for the next five years, or authorise our MPs to approve them.
But, as anyone with even the slightest knowledge of the system knows, the budget approval process has become a meaningless rubber stamp. The annual budget is barely scrutinised, and approved automatically along party lines.
It is thus the case that included in the budget each year are payments, such as to the EDA budget, that few people would approve, and for which no meaningful approval has ever been sought.
But there are also some payments of which most people actively disapprove, and given the opportunity, would actively vote against them. One such is the aid given to India...... "
Not just the budget - although Richard's point is well made - but in every aspect of 'government'; when we elect one or other party to government we automatically and necessarily approve, in advance, whatever decisions that they decide to impose on us - and we can do nothing to stop that process!