Huhne pays the 'Pryce'

So Huhne and Pryce have been charged by the CPS, something which has set the twittersphere ablaze with comment and condemnation. It has to be made clear at the outset that both must be considered innocent until proven guilty as it also has to be made clear that the CPS must be fairly sure of their ground when considering the amount of time that has been spent on the case.


Leaving the question of guilt or innocence to one side, the Huhne/Price matter magnifies what is a most serious problem within the system of democracy we presently have - and it is one illustrated in a tweet from Paul Waugh who states that the letter from Clegg to Huhne "hopes he can 'rapidly' clear his name and 'return to play a key role in govt as soon as possible". 


Whether Huhne is found guilty or innocent, the initial charge will 'stick' and were Huhne to escape conviction on a technicality the initial charge will 'stick' even more. Too many examples exist of politicians who have committed 'crimes' - whether proven or not, think expenses - and yet remain as MPs, subsequently being re-instated in ministerial positions or positions of importance within government or their party. 


These individuals are those who impose their laws - very often laws that dictate how we must act and the punishments should we break those laws - yet are then welcomed back by their own at a later date (witness David Laws?). It is not illogical to demand that those who profess to be able to govern must perforce be as 'white as the driven snow' - their probity must be beyond question,


Peter Hitchens, in his latest blogpost, writes about the disgraceful state of our political parties and politicians, ending: "How are we to obtain reform of the parties, and to get parties that actually care about what the people care about?". The answer must surely be that a change from representative democracy is urgently needed because, as I have repeatedly maintained, it is but a system of democratised dictatorship. The change required is one to a form of direct democracy including a dose of 'referism and on Sunday next two articles will appear on talkconstitution.net on the limitation of government and how a system of direct democracy could be enacted. It is also hoped that at the same time, or shortly thereafter, a new draft constitution will also appear.


How much longer will the public's patience hold while example after example appears demonstrating their lack of honour and principle, disregard for the public purse, disregard for the law (alleged) and disdain shown to those who pay their wages and expenses? The time has surely come whereby this corrupt system of democracy and government must be axed and a fair, transparent system put into place.




Afterthought: While pure speculation, a thought occurs and that is what is Huhne's position if he maintains his innocence and Price opts to plead guilty? Hell hath no fury like a woman scorned - and all that?


Afterthought (2): Presumably Huhne and Pryce will appear in the dock together? One has to wonder how that thought appeals to each of them?

Here's another fine mess you've got us into......

As Laurel and Hardy used to say - well, one of them did.

Peter Hitchens, Mail on Sunday, writes about the case of Victor Akulic - an article on which Richard North, EU Referendum, passes comment. On the same day we are informed that Cameron - aka Dav il Cam - is to 'confront' the judges from the European Court of Human Rights (ECHR), telling them: "Stop meddling in British justice." - on which again Richard North comments, linking to Autonomous Mind. On the same subject  of ECHR 'rulings' we have the recent decision from the ECHR on the matter of Abu Qatada, yet another decision which shows just how impotent is our supposed government.

It is readily acknowledged that I have been 'banging on' about the defects of our membership of the European Union and all that that entails, but the problems we face are compounded by membership of organisations like the ECHR in which we have no place under the present terms of membership. The plight of our country is further compounded by deficits in our present system of democracy, namely representative democracy, which amounts to democratised dictatorship, in that elected politicians are able to enroll our country in agreements and treaties over which we the people have no voice.

That 'power' which politicians have taken invariably leads them into a situation from which there is no escape - witness membership to the ECHR. It is that 'power' that has allowed our nation to be subsumed into the European Union - and, as with the ECHR, led us to be 'governed' by forces outside our control. All the above begs the question why we allow a government to exist that is unable to govern?

Is it not time that those who controlled the shovels with which they dig an even bigger pit, into which we are forced to fall, had their shovels taken away from them? 

Hitchens 'on form'

A rather long post from Peter Hitchens but one well worth reading. A snippet:

"The second group are those who continue against all evidence  to believe that the Conservative Party is in fact conservative. In many cases, they believe this out of habit, and increasingly out of a fear (which they seek to suppress)  that it is not true.  For if it is not true, they might have to think and act – and anything is preferable to that."

H/T: Richard North, EU Referendum

Lobbying one's MP - or as I wished, just lob!

I spent a delightful day yesterday in London, sharing the company of Mark Wadsworth, The Boiling Frog, The Talking Clock, Katabasis and Harry Aldridge amongst others. Having previously assembled on College Green where a demonstration of defiance was staged by Ukip against the impending debate and vote in the House of Commons, processed around Parliament Square, it was time for a drink or two prior to queuing to lobby our individual MPs. Having waited for two hours, the queue being allowed entry in groups of 30, it was our turn, where security is akin to that at airports. Never having visited Parliament previously it was an intriguing experience - on entering one has to obtain a green card on which it has to be stated the MP you wish to see, your name and address and the subject matter to be discussed. From 'the lobby area' a short corridor leads to another vestibule area beyond which are the doors, opposite the Speaker, into the chamber. The short corridor is guarded by two members of Plod to ensure that those members of the public who do not have the requisite piece of paper cannot proceed further. After two hours, during which my MP appeared not, I approached one Plod and requested whether it would be possible for him to go and finger the collar of my MP and inform him he was wanted for questioning. This met with a wry laugh from Plod and, needless to say, a refusal. 

At 6:15pm it was necessary to leave as The Boiling Frog and I wished to attend a debate held by the Bruges Group, the debate being entitled "Euroscepticism or Secession". The speakers were supposed to be Peter Hitchens and Mark Pritchard MP, however with the parliamentary debate having been brought forward obviously Mark Pritchard was unable to attend and his place was taken by David Campbell-Bannerman MEP who had, a few months ago, defected from Ukip and joined the Conservative Party. Peter Hitchens was on good form and tore into the Conservative Party and Cameron to the extent that both were left in tatters. At one point Campbell-Bannerman made the statement, in answer to a question, that he did not believe in 'renegotiation' and preferred a 'free trade' type of association with the EU. This prompted me to ask him the following question (verbatim):

"It would be agreed by most people gathered here that a most important deficit in our democracy is the lack of principle and honour of politicians. Bearing this in mind I would like to ask Mr. Bannerman whether it was political principle that made him join a party with whose views he was at such variance"

Needless to say the question was not answered. There will no doubt be a video of the proceedings produced by the Bruges Group and when available I will post a link to this. It was also a delight to make the acquaintance of Helen, Your Freedom and Ours, a most delightful lady and one whose views I hold in high regard.

I am now going to listen to the debate in the HoC and will be posting on that later today. 


Update: The Bruges Group have made available videos of the speeches by Campbell-Bannerman and Hitchens:

Faux politicians and faux politics

We have all read about the 'faux europsceptics headed by 'Useless Eustice' but we seem to have ignored the 'faux politicians' and 'faux politics' that has happened, not just since May 2010, but for decades now. From Peter Hitchens in today's Mail on Sunday, writing on what he terms the fake fights twixt the LibDems and the Tories within the Coalition:

"Mr Cameron is far closer to Mr Clegg than he is to his own voters. He loves being manacled to him, and much prefers Coalition to governing alone. Mr Clegg helps David Cameron ensure that the Government remains pro-EU, pro-crime, anti-education, pro-tax, politically correct and pro-immigration."

In those three sentences Hitchens sums up the present state of our political system and those involved in that circus - because circus is exactly what it is. By allowing Clegg to dictate policies such as Human Rights, EU membership and a host of other matters allows Cameron to maintain his 'liberal left-wing tendencies', whilst at the same time controlling the more right-wing members of his own party - or at least the odd half-dozen or so who have no desire for a ministerial position but who still wish to continuing receiving their 30 pieces of silver by remaining under the Conservative banner.

That the Lib/Lab/Con will never, ever agree to a referendum on EU membership; that they will never, ever agree to a cost/benefit analysis of EU membership; that they will never, ever even agree to a public discussion on EU membership cannot now be beyond doubt. That Party Leaders are able to continue to exert their hold over our political system by means of their ability to nominate those for 'elevation' to the House of Lords; that Party Leaders likewise exert a dictatorial control over the selection of party members and in which constituencies those party members may be included for selection as a candidate, is also beyond doubt.

Bearing in mind the tribalistic voting patterns, I wonder whether anyone has actually bothered to talk to those committed 'tribalists' to explain just exactly how they are being led by their noses? To explain just what exactly is going on and the future to which we are all being led?

In today's edition of the Sunday Telegraph Janet Daley has an article entitled "What is the point of the Labour Party" - bearing in mind the troughs of dispair into which our country has been led, I would pose the question: What is the point of any political party?

Just bear in mind policies that are presented by the Coalition as devolving power to the people and thus to put the people in charge, are a sham - or to be more precise; a bloody great sham. I give but one example and that is the Localism Bill in which we, the people, are to be 'allowed' to have a referendum on any local issue we wish - but in the small print it also states that if local authorities wish to ignore the result of that referendum they have the power to do so. Whatever policy you care to read, ultimate control resides with central government and so the process of controlling us continues by the political elite. 

Just remember the words of Ronald Reagan:

"When dictators come to power, the first thing they do is take away the people's weapons....... it makes it so much easier to force the will of the ruler upon the ruled."

That our political elite are disarming us by placing obstacles in our democratic path must also be obvious and therefore the only means of rectifying the situation will be by us taking to the streets and forcibly removing these bastards!