So much for political principles - Cleggstyle

A good spot from Paul Waugh who tweets: "Clegg rails against 'brutal' Remploy factory closure...in 2007"


If nothing else brings home that our politicians are 'men (and women) of the moment' then this video does! They care nothing for those that vote for them and subsequently fund them; they care nothing about principle and honour; they care nothing about the country they are meant to safeguard; they care nothing about anything but themselves and their careers!


The sooner we, as a country, adopt direct democracy and referism the better and freer we will all be, as the Judas Goats amongst us will be castrated and we sheep will learn that we can think and decide matters for ourselves!


Just saying.........................

Here come the scare tactics

Following my post yesterday in which I stated that the europhiles would waste no time in jumping on the bandwagon warning us of catastrophic consquences about failure of the eurozone, Douglas Alexander has wasted no time in climbing aboard with his article in today's Guardian. He writes that Labour's task should be to tell a new story about Britain and Europe, rooted in the need for reform revealed by new economic and political realities and that cutting ourselves off from a market of 500 million customers wouldn't just imply we had lost faith in Europe, it would suggest we had lost faith in the ability of British companies to outcompete their European rivals. That last sentence is pure hogwash because we would not be cutting ourselves off from any markets in Europe and to imply that leaving the EU would suggest we did not believe British companies could compete with those in Europe is not only hogwash, it is pure balderdash.

Paul Waugh, writing on Politics Home, implies that Alexander is signalling a shift in Labour's attitude to the European Union and links to another article in the Guardian by Patrick Wintour. That both articles in the Guardian don't tell us anything about what Alexander, or Labour, really want other than stating they would not join the euro and hinting about repatriation of powers or a re-balancing of powers (whatever that may mean) leaves me wondering whether all this is just another political 'empty' gesture in order to garner anti-EU votes.

It speaks volumes that Alexander follows the political belief that only they, the politicians, have the knowledge and right to decide this country's future which raises the eternal question who gave them such dictatorial power? That politicians can make unfounded assertions, ones that are not backed up by proof - in effect plucking statistics out of the air - and do so without engaging in debate where by those statements could be challenged shows the paucity of their argument for continued membership of the EU. It behoves each and every member of the electorate to demand politicians provide proof of their statements and one sure way of getting that would be for a petition to be posted on the Coalition's website demanding an independent cost/benefit analysis of EU membership.

That 'EUnnoying' debate

There is much is being written, in the media, about the forthcoming debate on a motion for a referendum to be debated in the House of Commons, including an article by Graham Brady in today's Daily Telegraph, one that can be accessed via Richard North. Paul Waugh, Politics Home, makes great play of the news that those Conservative MPs who have signed Nuttall's motion has grown to 60 and has also just announced on Twitter that Ed Miliband is instructing his MPs to vote against the motion. Likewise is Guido Fawkes reporting that Nick Clegg is imposing a three-line whip on his MPs.

That a frenzy is being built up over this debate, to the point of being utterly ridiculous, comes with a further posting by Guido Fawkes that upto 15 ministers and whips are prepared to defy the three-line whip that Cameron is reported to be imposing. Everyone seems to have forgotten that as this motion came from the Backbench Business Committee it must be voted on as written and as such the possibility of an amendment, one more favourable to Cameron et all, is not on the table. That is not to say that an alternative motion could not be tabled but then Bercow would be placed in a position of choosing that, when the Backbench Business Committee have in effect stated that they want the existing motion debated. Another point that seems to have escaped the notice of those partaking in this hysteria being built is that if Labour and the Liberal Democrats are whipped to vote against the motion, the motion is as good as lost anyway.

Not wishing to crow, but this latest political shannighan just confirms that which I have been saying for some time now - we do not live in a democracy, but in a democratised dictatorship! Methinks just for once Cameron's advice should be adopted by all and sundry, namely: "Calm down dears"!

As an aside, in the Daily Telegraph letters column today is one from Richard Craven, Pickering, West Yorkshire who writes that Mr. Cameron would do well to rememebr that it is the voters who elect MPs, not the Prime Minister and that those MPs should consider the wishes of their constitutents. He ends by pointing out that MPs should remember that voters have longer memories than they are given credit for.  With no disrespect to Mr. Craven, whose surname would appear to mirror his views, voters do appear to have extremely short memories - why else would Labour be holding an 8% lead in opinion polls?