Google+ Badge

Monday, 21 December 2009


The Coldstram Guards are in the streets this Christmas with begging bowls to support the families of soldiers who have been injured or killed.

Politicians are ranting about having to repay overclaimed expenses, which in fact is a refusal to recognise theft. They have already voted themselves pay increases and enhanced pensions.

Gordon Brown has promised astronomic sums to fight climate changes, but does not have enough money for weapons for British soldiers to protect themselves.

Next week Gordon Brown's Honours List will be published to decorate the valiant efforts of political cronies who have fought for the good causes.

There will not be any politicians in the streets with begging bowls. For that we will have to wait until the date of the next election is announced.

Am I the only one who thinks that Gordon Brown has lost the plot ? Not at all !!! I think he needs a long, long holiday in a secure and quiet place to think things over.

Wednesday, 16 December 2009


This conference on climate changes has given literally hundreds of politicians from everywhere the opportunity to make themselves better known on the international scene. They have spent two weeks talking about a subject where views are diametrically opposed. Even after this conference one can wonder if anyone is really any the more wiser of what action needs to be taken by the participating countries.

African nations have already withdrawn from this United Nations conference; they know full well nothing concrete will emerge in the foreseeable future.

However, while they withdraw, hordes of other politicians are arriving in droves to be there in time for the closing ceremonies and receptions. Did you see me, they will ask their friends when they get home ?!!! Gordon Brown left England two days earlier than planned, but this blog forecast this last week. In this way he escapes more questions on the pre-election mini-budget.

Will Silvio Berlusconi make it ? The poor soul, but the less said the better !!!

At least those who can make it to Copenhagen will be able to quaff a glass of Champagne and wish each other a Happy and Prosperous New Year. The politicians never miss a trick, do they ?!!!

Monday, 7 December 2009


With our Darling's "mini budget", which will certainly have a maxi sting in the tail for anyone who is not considered a secure Socialist voter, the country can only expect the worst.

The timing of this "mini budget" is a perfect example of escapism. The recess of parliament is approaching. Gordon Brown, I bet, is more interested in the Copenhagen Conference on climate changes rather than being present to answer questions on the "mini budget" !!! Next week he will certainly be too busy to attend "Prime Minister's Question Time" !!!

So why this "mini budget" now ? Because the year-end figures have to be massaged. Because in the run-up to Christmas people are happy !!! If this "mini budget" had been planned for a later date electors might get the impression that it was an electoral ploy !!!

It's pointless to worry when nothing can stop the "Socialist Bandwagon" ! Gordon is organised and full of surprises. No one can stop him now ! His Honours List for the New Year is certainly ready and will ensure definite support in the short term future.

The Opposition in Parliament, the Conservatives, must sharpen their knives ! They must repeatedly tell the Government, and in this way make clear to the electorate, that Labour's last desperate promises and laws, will be reversed if the Tories win the election; that finally a referendum will be held over whether the U K remains in the European Union !!!

Britain is completely bankrupt, it has already lost everything. It is not the E U which will help to put the U K back on its feet. Every country in the E U is fighting for its own interests.

They all want not only the living standards the U K once had, but even a lot more !!!

Thursday, 3 December 2009


President Blatter and FIFA have not updated their rules since the "Hand of God" by Maradona which led to the elimination of England in the World Cup in Mexico in 1986. Now they are faced with the "Hand of Henry", more than 20 years later, and in the press today speculation is that Henry could face a suspension !!!

Henry should not be punished, the French national team should not be punished, and the referee should not be punished either !!!. The fault and the problem is solely the result of FIFA's inadequacy !!!

Why ??? The referee was alone and applied the rules. He saw nothing wrong !!! He did not have the help of modern technology, like referees in other sports have. (Rugby, Tennis for example !!!) Maradona was not punished, so why should Henry be punished ?

FIFA are now going to investigate !!! Why ? Have they not already realised that the absense of modern technology is responsible for these problems ? Do they need more proof ?

Television coverage will be at all the grounds where World Cup Matches are played next year. What does FIFA lack to install television replays as a basis for modern controls like in other sports ? Billions of spectators expect this !!! They also want to be able to see the proof of what is decided. In their way they want to be part of the spectacle.

Football does not need two extra referees behind the goals. Just one in the television studios. No investigation is needed, Mr Blatter. All you need is to consult the rugby unions !!!

Thursday, 26 November 2009


Dans la presse on a pu lire que Thierry Henry a été tenté d'arrêter sa carrière de footballer en raison de "l'incident" au cours du match France - Ireland. Même l'arbître de la rencontre, qui n'a pas pu voir "la main d'Henry" veut tout "plaquer" suite aux humiliations subies dans la presse.

Quant à Sir Alex Ferguson, qui n'apprécie pourtant guère les arbitres en général, il dit que Martin Hansson n'a pas pu voir l'incident.

Des articles de ce Blog ont déjà signalé ce que d'autres Organisations Sportives ont fait pour résoudre des problèmes semblables. L'UEFA et la FIFA ont beaucoup de retard. Mettre un arbître supplémentaire derrière chaque but ne resoudrait rien. Que peut faire l'arbître si l'incident se passe derrière son dos ?

Lorsqu'il y a un problème de réglementation, il faut agir.

La FIFA vient d'annoncer qu'elle tiendra une réunion extraordinaire le 2 décembre prochain, au Cap, en Afrique du Sud. A l'ordre du jour notamment: le conrôle des matchs. Souhaîtons que cette réunion aboutira à des solutions pratiques et modernes !!!

Monday, 23 November 2009


I explained in my blog a few days ago that I was of the opinion that Thiery Henry scored a goal but that the match could not be replayed. The rules of F I F A are clear. The referee decides and no one else.

This simple rule is too simple !!! FIFA needs to modernise its act. Everyone remembers the "Hand of God" of Maradona, now we have the "Hand of Henri" !!! There have been other disputed goals and there will certainly be more in the future, unless FIFA act and adopt modern viewing techniques.

Other sports have introduced video replays to settle difficult or disputed incidents. The naked eye cannot always see everything. Referees need help. You cannot shame the referee in the France vs Ireland match.

Cricket, Ice Hockey, Rugby and Tennis are just a few of the sports who have modernised their approach to judging difficult incidents in sport.

When will FIFA or UEFA accept there is a problem ? What is holding them back ? Do they not have the money or do they not have any idea of what needs to be done ?

Friday, 20 November 2009


I was completely duped by Tony Blair's flirtation with the candidacy for the post of President of the European Union. I had always understood that he coveted this possible appointment and that to this end he had visited numerous leaders in the E U to encourage or drum up support.

I also read in the press that he had toured Brussels with the help of estate agents to sound out where he and his family could possibly accept to live.

I was not surprised either that Gordon Brown and David Miliband wholeheartedly and totally endorsed his candidature. After all, they are two of his socialist heirs. Their unreserved support for Tony Blair, their admirative descriptions of his qualities as the leader Europe needed, now reflects how much they too, were completely duped !!!

In the end I was lead to understand that Tony Blair had never been a candidate for the job of President of the E U !!!

Gordon Brown and David Miliband will soon embark on the election trail. Their objective will be to save their bacon by explaining (or duping !) the electorate to accept their programme for their next five years in office.

If ever Tony Blair comes to their aid by volunteering his services, I hope the Socialists accept !!! The electorate has been duped by his tactics so often, the next time could certainly be fatal for all those involved !!!


La FIFA a des règles et il faut les appliquer. Par exemple, celle selon laquelle l'arbitre est maître pendant le match; après le match on ne peut pas infirmer les décisions de l'arbitre. Donc le résultat d'un match ne peut pas être changé !!!

Ainsi, conformément à cette règle, le match France - Ireland ne pouvait être rejoué.

Comme la FIFA, les règles du football existent depuis longtemps. Ce qui pèche, c'est que la vieille dame FIFA ne s'est jamais modernisée contrairement à d'autres fédérations sportives qui ont introduit un deuxième arbitre (le Hockey sur Glaçe) ou le recours à des gros plans télévisuels (Rugby et Tennis). Quant à l'athlétisme, les performances sont mesurées en centièmes de secondes !!!

Avec les techniques modernes, on pourrait sûrement réduire certaines infractions, actuellement très mal contrôlées, telles que "body checking", "shirt pulling" et "wrestling", que l'on voit de plus en plus, et qui ne sont pas assez sanctionnées.

Pourquoi la FIFA est elle si réticente à envisager l'utilisation de telles techniques modernes ?

Au président de la FIFA, Sepp Blatter, et au président de l'UEFA, Michel Platini, de donner l'impulsion nécessaire pour faire évoluer la réglementation.

Wednesday, 18 November 2009


So much secrecy surrounds the choice this evening of who will be the first President of the European Union, after the steamrollered adoption of the Lisbon Treaty, that hardly anyone knows who is on the list of candidates.

This is a cloak and dagger operation led by politicians who are not elected Members of the European Parliament, but who are, however, with all due respect, leaders in their respective countries. However, the unknown candidates, who are not MEP's either, are manoeuvering for a very powerful and important position.

One of these faceless candidates is going to be pulled out of the magicians' collective hat to become European President for two and a half years. Contrary to normal practices, before his appointment we do not know what his avowed intentions for the future of the E U are. It goes without saying that candidates are certainly making costly promises which the E U, ultimately, will be encouraged to adopt.

These practices fly in the face of all the principles which have become accepted standards during the last two or three hundred years. The people who run the E U should be elected on their avowed election programme, and MEP's from their midst should elect their President.

The E U organisation should not become the Gravy Train for the outplacement of unelected Personalities. Such intentions should be rendered impossible by further changes to the E U Constitution.

Tuesday, 17 November 2009


As Sir Thomas Clegg knows full well, there are various systems of accountability for claiming reimbursement of expenses. Whatever the basis of the claim, repayment of out of pocket expenses with justifying vouchers, or pre-agreed forfeitory claims for rental charges and the like, where vouchers are frequently not available, every reimbursement claim must be signed by the claimant.

Delegating the work of preparing an expenses claim to a secretary can never absolve a claimant if there are errors, latent or not.

The next step is that the claim is normally authorised by the signature of the heirarchical superior of the claimant.

This signature and the underlying vouchers are then normally passed to the accounts clerk for payment. To justify and to retain the proof of the authorisation for the payment, the accounts clerk must then make photocopies of the documents justifying the expenses claim.

This means therefore that before any payment is made by the accounts clerk, he has a duplicate file of what is being claimed. If an accounts clerk cannot justify what he has paid out, he faces dire consequences.

When the press blithely reports that expense files of certain politicians have been accidentally destroyed, it makes me smile. Sir Thomas Clegg knows that accidents can happen: once, yes but twice with the same files ?

There must be other reasons or weaknesses in the system which have not been revealed !!!

Monday, 16 November 2009


Politicians are very politic !!! They do not like putting their noses out of joint. They consider it is better to avoid a political conflict if risks are involved. It is better to be safe than to be sorry afterwards !!! This is even more true when an election is approaching !!!

So what is the most important issue or problem that politicians in the United Kingdom are presently avoiding or not addressing ? The reply is simple:

"Should a referendum be held to decide whether the United Kingdom remains in the European Union or whether the U.K. should withdraw ?"

A few simple facts can put this key issue into perspective viewed from the point of view of a British voter.

1) The official accounts of the European Union have not been officially approved for the last 13 years.

2) Margaret Thatcher, the Iron Lady of British politics, obtained a reduction of the British contribution to the running costs of the EU in 1984. The amount was variable but worth at least 2.5 billion pounds annually at the time, with upward revisions possible !

3) Tony Blair promised in his election manifestos that there would be a referendum on the E U.

4) Tony Blair, on the advice of Mandelson and the Socialist Cabinet, decided, in December 2005, to abandon the Thatcher EU rebate, which by now was worth about 7.0 billion pounds per year to Britain. In return Britain got nothing !!!

5) The Socialist promise of a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty was abandoned: Gordon Brown realised that it would be quicker, surer, and more convenient to do like all the other countries, what better excuse, and get it voted through Parliament on the back of the large Socialist majority.

Now that the Lisbon Treaty has been adopted by Europe, the problem of a Referendum would seem to have gone away. However, is this really the case ? To be practical, all the countries have adopted the Lisbon Treaty, which originally was called the E U Constitution. Only Ireland held a referendum, not one, but two !!! Some people would even go so far as to say that the whole process is comparable to a political stitch-up !!!

If adherence to the E U becomes an election issue, if finally a referendum is promised to the U K electorate, the question could be on what terms would Great Britain be prepared to remain in the E U ?

There are many in the E U at present who are very critical of the laxity with which decisions are made. One could say that the E U at present is like a ship without a rudder.

There are too many unelected Directors and Advisors, the accounts of the E U have not been officially approved for 13 years. How can you run the International Company of Europe without controls and a responsible organisation ?

This whole E U problem is something which should be discussed seriously in the run up to the coming election. We should examine very closely the credentials of those who seek our votes !!! Gordon Brown and David Cameron should explain what they intend to do in this area.

Sunday, 15 November 2009


The next general election has not been lost yet, which also means to say that it has not been won either. Both the Socialists and the Conservatives have a lot of manoeuvering to do in order to reassure the electorate and obtain votes.

Gordon Brown has started to detail his intentions and plans for the next five or ten years in areas like prison capacities and nuclear reactors for electricity production. He neglects to explain that these urgent problems in Britain today are the direct result of years of neglect by his government.

The gravity of this negligence is highlighted by the fact that in France more than 80% of its electricity requirements are produced by nuclear reactors. France exports electricity to all its neighbouring countries, including England.

In these areas and others the long term plans he now proposes should have been started ten years ago, when Tony Blair was Prime Minister and he, Gordon Brown, was Chancellor of the Exchequer.

The cost of these plans and others are never revealed, nor where the finance required is coming from. In fact the next election, whatever the date, will take place just before or just after the financial year-end on the 5th of April. Hard official figures for the Year 2009/10 will therefore not yet be available; but there will certainly be unofficial estimates or guestimates.

It is hard to believe that such guestimates will be allowed to embarrass the Government. Socialists in fact already have the experience of how to win an election.

Political pre-election window dressing is not to talk about past failures but to talk about dreams for the future. Do not talk about increasing taxation: talk about redistributing national wealth. Politicians should not frown or look worried: they should smile, look happy and be confident. They should talk a good story when they are addressing electors.

Saturday, 14 November 2009


La carte de visite de Tony Blair, candidat non encore déclaré à la Présidence de l'Union Européenne, n'est pas très glorieuse en raison justement des realités et de l'historique de son passé.

Tony Blair a été Premier Ministre du Royaume Uni pendant dix ans. En 2007 il a enfin donné sa démission, mais le pays était déjà complètement cassé. Il n'y avait plus de contrôles de l'immigration, les caisses de l'Etat étaient vides, la justice peinait à remplir ses fonctions, et les soldats en Afghanistan n'avaient meme pas les armes vitales pour lutter contre les Talibans.

Plus de cinq ans, peut être même dix, seront nécessaires pour que le pays qu'il a gouverné, retrouve son équilibre !!!

En tant que citoyen anglais, je crains qu'avec Tony Blair comme Président, l'Union Européenne subisse les mêmes mésaventures que la Grande Bretagne.

Méfions nous !!! Renseignez vous !!!

Friday, 13 November 2009


Sir Alex Ferguson has been judged by the Football Association, fined 20 000 pounds and warned as to his future conduct. In fact he also has a four match touchline ban, of which two are suspended until the end of the 2010/11 season.

This is a derisory punishment !!! A fine for a Scottish millionaire may be hard, but to think that for two matches he will have to shout his criticsms from the stands to make himself heard, is hardly a punishment.

This is not justice from a sporting point of view nor from a legal point of view. This blog has already clearly said that the remarks and comments by Sir Alex Ferguson after matches or before coming matches are such that they incite disturbances among spectators before, during and after matches.

The tame pussyfooting by the Football Association does nothing to discourage public disturbances. Does the F A not have any responsibilities in this area ? Or does it consider that the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP), KeIr Starner, is the person whose duty it is to act in connection with public disturbances at football matches ?

It would seem that everyone concerned wants this whole problem to be filed and forgotten. However there are problems which persist and which have not been addressed. When you are a paid watchdog, in the F A or the DDP offices, the public expect action, not pussyfooting !!!

Thursday, 12 November 2009


Le maire de Paris, Bertrand Delanoe, est en train de mener une politique qui ignore complètement les droits des piétons. Partout, sur les trottoirs, on trouve des motos, garées sans gêne, n'importe comment, n'importe où. Jamais, il n'y a trace d'une contravention !!! Est ce la conséquence de la réglementation, ou de l'absence de réglement ?

Si une voiture est garée dans la rue, même sans gêner quiconque, une contravention est immédiatement apposée sur le parebrise comme souvenir !!!

Il y a des espaces de stationnement pour les motos. Il y en a de plus en plus. Cependant il n'y en a pas assez. Et il n'y en aura jamais assez !!! Il faut observer le propriétaire d'une moto arrivé à sa destination; il cherche où il peut laisser sa machine. Normalement il ne veut pas marcher plus de 20 ou 30 mètres. Que sa moto puisse gêner les piétons âgés ou handicapés, de cela il n'en a cure !!! De plus, il s'y gare pour la durée qui lui convient.

Y-a-il quelqu'un à la Mairie de Paris qui se préoccupe des intérêts et des droits des piétons ?

Thursday, 5 November 2009


Once more, in the name of equality, Socialists in the present Government, want to change the rules about when children must go to school. They also, in the observance of the sacrosanct principle of equality, want to abolish or vary the traditional classifications of university degrees.

Is there not one Socialist in the United Kingdom, being of the level of Government competence, who has suspected that young children develop varyingly, that some are ready earlier than others, and that to force the others could be traumatic ?

Young children are not equal in early life, in the sense that some need more time to develop and to become "conscious" of what is expected of them. To push them too early to go to school would be traumatic.

With respect to the evaluation of degrees obtained from a University, Oxford, Cambridge or any other University, has nobody in this Socialist Government, of Ministerial level, ever realised that a degree is not an end in itself ? A degree is a visiting card !!! It gives you a chance to be interviewed !!!

From there on you are judged daily on your performance. If you are up to the job, all is fine. If you are not up to the job, excuses do not help you. You are facing the exit. Changing the way of evaluating degrees does not help one bit. That is the basic rule in private business, because they cannot carry the cost of non performers !!!

Even if everyone gets top marks in their school leaving exams, even if everyone then goes to University and they then all get a degree, they will be found out !!! A degree is a visiting card. It does not last more than five years, but could, if you build a successful employment history.

When will someone in the Government get a realistic fix on the value of a successful education ?

Monday, 26 October 2009


The problem Sir Alex Ferguson cannot resolve is how to controle the people who run and organise English Football, and they in turn do not know how to controle Sir Alex Ferguson.

People are sick of the fact that every time Manchester United play football and do not win, you can bet your last dime that Sir Alex will have a public rant about the referee. He just cannot understand that his bunch of angels can be beaten fair and square every now and then, simply because the other team is also a professional outfit and better on the day.

The real problem is what can be done to gag Sir Alex so that he behaves like other normal managers, who do not systematically criticise the referee when a decision goes against their team. Sir Alex should have been gagged years ago, but nobody in authority seems to have had enough courage to tackle the problem seriously.

When Sir Alex warns people about the problems he expects in the forthcoming match, frequently with references to previous encounters, it is nothing less than an incitement to create a difficult atmosphere for the referees, the players of the other team and their supporters. Sir Alex would probably glibly defend himself by saying it is gamesmanship. That may be the true but it is only half the story; such talk is an incitement which creates public disturbances.

Can anyone imagine what would happen if Arsene Wenger or Rafael Benitez or half a dozen other top class managers in the Premiership all started ranting and abusing the referee because their team had not won !!! People would be fighting and the police would have to step in !!!

Yes, the police would act !!! They would do what is in their powers and in the end they could and would obtain ASBO's against delinquents. They cannot, however, lay their hands on the person who encourages these "yobs". Catching this fish is like fishing with bare hands !!!

So if this problem is not addressed what will happen ? Sir Alex will continue as heretofore. As if nothing had ever happened. The members of the Football Association will hum and ha and will be happy to bank their remuneration, until their next re-election to the board.

The Referees Association, which has never really been very vocivourous nor critical of Managers who attack their members, will also hum and ha !!! They too, would just be happy if this whole problem could just go away !!!

So what is the solution ? One should apply the law !!! When "YOBS" are apprehended for instigating or participating in disturbances they are quickly dealt with. For repetitive offences they are served with ASBO's - Anti-
Social Behaviour Orders.

The terms of these orders vary; many ensure that the convict must report to a police station and cannot be freed before the end of the match. In the case of Sir Alex Ferguson this should mean solitary confinement without a television.

Sunday, 25 October 2009


Before Sir Alex Ferguson starts bleeting about the referee and his scandalous misjudgements during the game, I will say that I cannot understand why Rio Ferdinand was not sent off after Fernando Torres managed to score the first liverpool goal. Ferdinand tackled from behind, was never anywhere near the ball and was deliberately trying to knock Torres off his balance.

At the very least a yellow card would have been amply merited. I fully understand the advantage rule, but it does not mean that when a goal is scored foul play should not be punished.

Friday, 23 October 2009


When politicians want to explain something, they manage to pull out of their hats all the statistics imaginable to support their proposed course of action.

When politicians do not want to talk about something, they just say that the figures necessary for a reply are not available. They do not then say "I'll ask one of our thousands of government employees to prepare a reply".

The Queen's soldiers, for example, are regularly highlighted in reports when they fall in action !!! When they are killed they enter into the statistics of the "dead in action". As far as I am aware, as a member of the public, this is the only statistic which is regularly reported on and updated.

What I want to know is how many soldiers have been wounded in battle, in Afghanistan, Irak and elsewhere since the New Labour Party was elected. Some injuries have been horrific; now and again one sees reports in the newspapers. Some injuries are less spectacular and because of this are not commented on in the press. Again, some injuries are, happily, forgotten because they were minor.

I can understand that the Government does not like Questions on the cost of these wounded soldiers. However, such statistics must be available even if they are not published. How can you run a company or a country without knowing where costs paid, come from ?

Soldiers invalided out of Army Service are provided for. This is all part of their "contract" to fight for our Nation. Are these costs conveniently lost in the cost of National Pensions, or in the National Health costs ? Are these costs so anonymous because politicians do not want to really know ?

Electors and taxpayers want answers to these Questions. How many wounded soldiers are there, long term, medium term and short term ? Where are the costs, how much ? What are the costs of widows' pensions?

The only statistic regularly published, the number of dead, does not even reveal the number of broken hearts behind the information !!! The parents, the siblings, the widows and the children.......

Monday, 19 October 2009


Certain British MP's want to plead "Parliamentary Priviledge" to prevent prosecution for "theft" concerning unjustified expense claims !!! What next ?

The way I have always understood the rule concerning "Parliamentary Priviledge" is that MP's cannot be sued in the courts for what they say in debates in the House of Commons. This rule enables and ensures honest and fearless debates.

The MP's concerned, who have made dubious expense claims and who now, unashamedly, want to bend Parliamentary rules, to avoid the public disgrace of a prosecution for theft, have never understood what being an MP is all about !!!

Their electors will certainly have taken note of their greed.

Wednesday, 14 October 2009


When they are candidates to become the local Member of Parliament for a constituency, they present themselves as people of the highest integrity and they swear that their sole aim is to improve the living standards of their electorate. They promise the world will change !!!

What then happened in Britain is not really so exceptional in this world. The electorate suddenly discovered that MPs were voting themselves higher salaries and higher guaranteed pensions. This was after having set up rules (not laws) covering what expenses could be claimed by MPs.

The next discovery for electors was that questionable expense claims had been made and paid. Really, had no one ever queried anything ?

So much so for their pious election promises !!!  Their greed is now there for all to see on the internet. Not just a few MPs but more than 600 of them.  The hapless Speaker of the House of Commons was forced to resign and was kicked upstairs (in accordance with tradition) to the House of Lords where he has become known as Lord Martin of Springburn.

Gordon Brown ordered an audit of the situation and this was organised by Sir Thomas Clegg.  Following the revelations in his report, Gordon Brown wants all MPs to repay unjustified expenses ! 

He has, however, been met with a blunt refusal from a certain number of MPs who plead that the "House Rules"  (not the law which governs electors) on expenses were not clear. It is therefore not their fault !!! A certain number of MPs no longer care anyway; they already know they will not be re-elected at the next General Election.
Simply said Tax payers and Non-tax payers on the breadline all think the MPs involved are thieves.  MPs pontificate to get themselves elected but do not really understand the difference between right and wrong !

The basic rule about expenses is that they should be reimbursed, but the claimant should not make a profit. This is the normal rule in the business world !

This whole sorry mess in fact, reflects badly on ALL politicians, who are ALL being tarred with the same brush, even those who have not lined their pockets like little thieves.

This is the last straw for the old Socialists and for the New Labour Party, who are all reeling, but in particular  for Gordon Brown. He no longer knows where, or to whom, to turn to next.

Tony Blair, on the other hand got out in time, but has other skeletons in his private cupboard ! 


Monday, 12 October 2009


New Labour are at it again. They are jealous and they do not like the slightest bit of criticism. They do not like hearing the truth.

A few weeks ago a frustrated Judge Ian Trigger accused the Government of failing to control illegal immigrants. As a result he is facing a probe. If he had praised his paymasters, the Labour Government would certainly not have said anything.

Now General Sir Richard Dannatt is the object of their spite and venom again. Again, because the first time General Dannatt presented Gordon Brown with a list of equipment he wanted for his troops in Afghanistan. The immediate reaction was to query and scrutinise his expense claims like no MP's expenses have ever been scrutinised. Alas for them, they drew a blanc. His expense claims were justfied.

Now retired, Sir Richard has decided to join the Conservatve Party. The Socialists have fiercely criticised this move, as if he had done something criminally wrong.

I think the Socialists are walking on a tightrope. By their actions and reactions are they not denying Judge Trigger and Sir Richard their Human Rights, namely the right to say what they think ? With an upcoming election in sight some people are becoming very nervous.

Friday, 9 October 2009


On apprend que Jean Sarkozy, fils de Nicolas Sarkozy, sera désigné Président de l'Etablissement Public chargé d'aménager le quartier de la Défense, le 4 décembre prochain. Il succèdera ainsi à Patrick Devedjian, 65 ans, ministre de la relance, atteint par la limite d'âge.

Ce jeune homme de 24 ans, toujours étudiant en deuxième année de droit, n'a jusqu'alors obtenu aucun diplôme. Son seul mérite être le fils du Président de la République!

Alors soyons sérieux: cela suffit il vraiment pour prendre la direction de l'aménagement du premier pôle tertiaire en Europe?

Thursday, 8 October 2009


The Irish have voted and are in favour of the Treaty of Lisbon, but there are still two other countries who have to notify their agreement: Poland and Czech Republic. When in due course they notify their acceptance of the treaty, which is expected shortly, it means any future changes to the Constitution of the European Union could be made by the politicians without any referendum to the electors in Europe.

Because of article 48 of the Treaty of Lisbon, the politicians in the European Council can change the constitution without consulting the 500 million electors in Europe. Democracy will have gone out of the window forever ! This contrasts starkly with the history of almost all countries in the world during the last two hundred years or more, when citizens fought to get the right to vote and be represented.

The next question is who will elect the first President of the European Union ? That is not a problem ! No referendum is necessary ! The 27 leaders of the countries in the E U will elect the President.

Who are the candidates to become President ? There are not too many but the leading candidate seems to be Tony Blair who was the Prime Minister of Britain for ten years between 1997 and 2007.

Blair left Britain in dire straits and it will take years to recover. The seriousness of the situation was clearly explained by David Cameron today at the end of the Conservative Party's annual conference.

Blair has a perpetual smile on his face and his photo is in the press every day. What are not published are the photos of the wincing faces of Blair's suffering and deceived electors.

I do not want to see another 450 million people in Europe suffer like the British are suffering now. Britain is bankrupt because since 1997 its money has been squandered and it has nothing to show for it.

Please do not make Tony Blair the President of the European Union.

Wednesday, 30 September 2009


In most of the discussions about migrants and immigrants, it is difficult to understand whether legal or illegal, migrants or immigrants, are the subject of the discussion.

What is a migrant ? It is a person who has the right to enter another country because he has the legal right to do so. He has obtained the right to immigrate, i.e. to settle in a given country, to work and live there and to pay his taxes there ! He has made an application to immigrate and has been accepted. He is not a tourist or short term visitor.

If a tourist has overstayed his permitted visit, or if a migrant has not made a prior request to immigrate, or if the request has been refused, he can only be described as being an illegal immigrant.

To be very precise: if there are foreigners in the Calais area without paperwork which permits them to stay in France or to travel on to Britain, they should be apprehended !!! They should have been refused entry into France at their first attempt to enter the country.

The Mayor of Calais, Natacha Bouchard, should protect the citizens of Calais. Leaving illegal immigrants to roam around in the Calais area is dangerous. To survive they will turn to crime as they have already done in the past.

Nicolas Sarkozy closed Sangatte but that did not solve the problem. Now Eric Besson, the Immigration Minister, has tried by announcing he would close the "Jungle". When he got there most of the illegal immigrants had hidden elsewhere !!! The longer this story goes on the more it looks like a Punch and Judy show !!! Eric Besson needs to have a second look at this problem and finish the job. This is not the job for the Mayor of Calais.

What is the solution ? France should expel illegal immigrants. Britain should stop all and any social help or aid to illegal immigrants. And the answer to the next question ? The human rights of French and British citizens should be upheld !!!

Tuesday, 29 September 2009


Pendant plus de 30 ans,Polanski s'est volontairement soustrait à la justice des Etats Unis alors qu'il était impliqué dans une affaire de moeurs avec une enfant de 13 ans.N'est ce pas là le vrai scandale?
Pourquoi le fait d'être un réalisateur de grand talent serait il de nature à le mettre au-dessus de la loi?
Pourquoi monsieur Mitterand ,ministre français de la culture , déclare- t-il avoir peur d'une Amérique dont la justice s'exerce indépendamment de toutes pressions politiques ou autres?


For more than 30 years Roman Polanski has been on the run from justice: he had been accused of having sexual relations with a 13 year old girl. Those are the basic facts of this scandal.

If we want to maintain the basic principles of the legal system, criminals must be brought to justice. No one is above the law !!! Is it wrong to want to protect our children and grandchildren from perverts ?

I cannot understand how celebrities and politicians can jump to Polanski's defence !!! They are a poor example to the public in general. They are in fact trying to pervert the course of justice.

Monday, 21 September 2009



En 2002 Nicolas Sarkozy, Ministre de l'Interieur à l'époque, avait ordonné la fermeture de Sangatte. La semaine dernière, Eric Besson, l'actuel Ministre de l'Immigration a annoncé que cette semaine il allait fermer la "jungle" à Calais avec l'aide de bulldozers. Bien entendu, prévenus, de nombreux immigrants illégaux venus dans l'UE ont déjà quitté la "jungle" afin de se cacher ailleurs dans la campagne au nord de la France mais à proximité de Calais.
M. Barroso, recemment réélu President de la Commission Européenne, a déclaré, avec le soutien du français Jacques Barrot, le Vice Président de la Commission Européenne, qu'il est en faveur d'une politique selon laquelle les immigrants arrivant dans l'Union Européenne seraient reparties dans tous les pays de l'UE. La base du calcul serait le ratio de la population d'un pays par rapport au total de la population en Europe
Les résidents de Calais ont une très grande expérience des immigrés !!! En somme, tant que les immigrés ne sont pas empêchés d'entrer dans l'UE, les problèmes persisteront.
D'experience nous savons tous comment protéger nos droits et nos biens. C'est un principe fondamentale de la vie. Chaque proprietaire ou locataire comprend que, pour se protéger et pour protéger sa famille, il doit verrouiller ses portes et fermer ses fenêtres.
Pendant des siècles ce principe a été observé par tous les pays du monde afin de sauvegarder ses frontières. Il faut maintenant rappeler ce principe à tous les politiciens de l'UE afin d'assurer la sécurité de l'UE et de ses citoyens.
Lorsque ses frontières auront été sécurisées, l'Union Européenne sera en mesure de choisir et d'appliquer sa politique en matière d'immigration. Pas avant.


In 2002 Nicolas Sarkosy, the then Minister of the Interior, ordered the closure of Sangatte. Last week Eric Besson, the current Minister for Immigration, announced that this week he would close the "Jungle" at Calais by razing it to the ground with the use of bulldozers. Needless to say, forewarned, many illegal immigrants into the EU have already left the "Jungle" near Calais to go into hiding elsewhere in the north of France in the surrounding countrysides.

Mr. Barroso, the newly re-appointed President of the European Commission, with the help of Jacques Barrot, the French Vice-President of the commission, has declared that he is in favour of a policy whereby immigrants into the EU are lodged in all EU member countries based on the ratio of the population of member states.

The residents in Calais have a vast experience of immigrants !!! As long as illegal immigrants are not stopped from entering the EU, these same problems will persist.

In fact, we all have a long standing experience of what to do to protect our rights and possessions. It is one of the basic principles of life. Every householder understands, that to protect himself and his family he must lock the front door and the back door, and in certain cases close the windows as well. If he does not do so, unwanted intruders and criminals will take advantage of the situation !!!

For centuries this same principle has been applied by every country in the world with respect to its frontiers. Now this same principle must be adopted and observed by all EU politicians to ensure the security of the European Union and its citizens.

When the frontiers are secure we would be in a position to be able to choose the immigration policies which the electorate of the EU would find acceptable.

This article will be translated into French and published later.

Sunday, 13 September 2009


Early September 2009 Jacques Barrot, Vice-President of the European Commission, proposed the creation of a single Immigration and Asylum Policy in the European Union.

Now, less than two weeks later, the President of the European Commission, José Manuel Barroso, wants all member states in the European Union to accept refugees and thus share the burden which is at present borne mainly by the southern European members of the Union. Mr. Barroso wants to introduce such measures if he is reelected next week as President.

Britain would have to accept 13% of the immigrants based on its population !!! If the surface of each country in the EU was used as the basis this would be more favourable from a British point of view. However immigrants, once they have been accepted into the EU, once they have the right to live in the EU, will migrate to find their Utopia. Could Britain then apply a selective immigration policicy ?

There comes a time when British politicians, and I do not only mean the MEP's, must make themselves heard. They must vigorously defend the rights and needs of people who live in the UK !!! Those politicians who have been elected must work for the British electorate. Alas, there are many unelected politicians with important jobs in Europe who escape the scrutiny of an election.

On Septmber 3, 2009 I commented in this Blog on the EU Resettlement Program, proposed by Jacques Barrot. That was a smaller program than that now proposed by José Manuel Barroso.

I repeat what I then wrote. We in the EU need to secure the frontiers of our EU to prevent illegal immigrants entering the EU. "Inviting" immigrants is not the way to stop them. It only encourages more to come and try their luck !!!

Britain cannot afford the cost of more immigrants. Britain is already bankrupt and living standards are falling daily. Comments like this can be found in almost every newspaper every day. I therefore appeal to our elected politicians to do all they can to stop the immigrants. At least give a chance to the workless already in Britain.

Tuesday, 8 September 2009


The questions about Lockerbiegate go on and on, in Scotland as well as in Westminster, and now in Libya as well. Who is responsible for what ? All defensive explanations start with: "I did not ......" The hallowed, basic principle, which is enshrined in law, in life in general, in daily business life, and in political life as well, is generally summarised as follows:

"Delegation is not abdication"

Managing Directors in business companies, even Owners of football clubs, Prime Ministers, all those who delegate their responsibilities to others in their chain of responsibility, cannot in doing this, escape the initial responsibility for which they were appointed originally. They are held to be responsible in law and are judged on the final outcome of events. He who delegates can sack traitors or those who act beyond the limits of what they were delegated to do, but he cannot escape from the ultimate responsibilities inherent in the position he holds.

Saif al-Islam, the son of Colonel Gaddafi, stated clearly in an interview on television that Gordon Brown took no part in the discussions concerning the early release of al-Megrahi, adding that these negotiations were undertaken at a lower diplomatic level.

The PanAm crash at Lockerbie happened in 1988. Tony Blair became Prime Minister in 1997, and Gordon Brown became Prime Minister after the resignation of Tony Blair on June 27, 2007. This problem has been simmering for more than twenty years. Tony Blair visited Libya a few times, but has Gordon Brown ever made a visit ? Taking on a problem like this after so long is not easy.

Monday, 7 September 2009


I think John Riley, the head of Sky news, is a little naive if he really expects Gordon Brown to accept his invitation, to participate in a televised "Leaders' Debate" with David Cameron and Nick Clegg.

In the current circumstances it's like giving Gordon Brown the choice of either sitting down in a lions' cage, or to put his head on a chopping block for it to be axed. Gordon Brown rightly ignores the invitation.

Good political fights on television are always serious, but good fun for the viewers. So why not therefore, organise a debate with aspiring second string politicians who would not normally get such a chance ? They would not want to resist such an invitation !!!

Sunday, 6 September 2009


I repeat, word for word, the last paragraph of the article I published in my Blog last Wednesday, September 2, 2009 ;

"Secondly it appears that al-Megrahi is dying of cancer. Was he not treated while he was in prison in Scotland ? Were the doctors not aware of his terminal condition ? What does the report of all the doctors say ? Were they all in agreement that he was terminally ill ? He looked resplendant when he arrived in Tripoli, but now we see pictures of him under an oxygen mask!!! That's strange, even curious. "

Today the Sunday Telegraph reveals that two UK doctors, and a third doctor who was Libyan, examined al-Megrahi and came to the conclusion that he had only three months to live !!! The two UK doctors were paid by Libya !!!

The two expert UK doctors were Professor Karol Sikora and Professor Jonathan Waxman, but they were probably not the only doctors who knew the details of al-Megrahi's health. After all, he had been in prison for a number of years.

The mental climate of the politicians involved in this whole saga is clear for all to see. Everyone is scared and nobody wants to be identified as having taken part in the decision to liberate al-Megrahi.

What can be done ? It is for disciplinary panels of the medical profession to decide whether their profession has been brought into disrepute by any of the doctors who have treated al-Megrahi. With respect to all the politicians involved in LOCKERBIEGATE, the electorate will have their chance to sanction them in the not too distant future.

Saturday, 5 September 2009

LOCKERBIEGATE : Finally the truth ?

Finally it has been admitted that there were other reasons than "compassionate grounds" for the early release of al-Mehari from his prison sentence of 27 years. The admission that there were in fact "important trade considerations", was wholly expected by the public but had been kept secret by the politicians.

Gordon Brown, however he would want to apportion the blame for what has become the Lockerbiegate crisis, cannot escape the fact that he was responsible for UK Foreign Affairs, even more so than the Ministers he appointed. However, he can justly curse the poisoned chalice he inherited from Tony Blair who visited Libya more than just once.

Everyone involved in the intrigue, politicians and counsellors, in England and in Scotland, has lost face. How can anyone plead ignorance of what was going on, when so many people were involved ?

Lockerbiegate will have many consequences. The in-fighting among Labour politicians for the Leadership has already begun, even though Gordon Brown has not yet resigned. Lord Mandelson, who has been relatively invisible in recent weeks, may well have a swaying effect during the coming days. The Labour Party Conference in Brighton on September, 27 to October 1, 2009 promises to be a lively affair.

Friday, 4 September 2009


Gordon Brown's speech on Friday, 4th September 2009, was long and covered everything, but it did not convince me. It has already been a long war and it will not be over in the foreseeable future.

Early August 2009, General Sir Richard Dannat in a radio interview, revealed he had a "shopping list" for Gordon Brown. He wanted, amongst other things, more helicopters, extra troops and spy-in-the-sky surveillance drones for the war in Afghanistan.

Would it not be possible for a journalist to interview Sir Richard Dannat (now retired), who has "lived" the Afghan war, to hear what he thinks of Gordon Brown's long report. He could also reveal whether his "shopping list" has been or will be delivered !!!

Thursday, 3 September 2009


The aim of the EU Resettlement Programme is to establish a single Immigration and Asylum Policy in the EU. This project is being launched by the European Commission vice-President Jacques Barrot.

Britain must make itself heard in Europe on this question. Britain has moral and legal obligations with respect to the members of the Commonwealth to consider, before undertaking new obligations to resettle refugies from unknown origins. Furthermore, France and Britain already have an enormous problem concerning illegal immigrants who try to cross the Channel between Calais and Dover. See the article in this Blog entitled "No Sangatte, just more illegal immigrants".

It seems to me that once again the EU is embarking on a project before the EU is in a position to capably control what it wants to undertake and achieve.

The first step, in my opinion, must be to secure the frontiers of the entire EU. This must be strictly supervised by the EU and should be paid for by all countries, including countries which do not have any borders with non EU countries. This is by far the biggest problem, which France and the UK experience daily. Illegal immigrants continually converge on Calais with the hope that they can hide on vehicules and reach Dover.

Secondly, another important objective must be that every citizen rightfully living in the EU must have an official EU identity card. Many countries in the EU already have national identity cards, but some like the UK, do not ! Without EU identity cards efficient controls would not be possible.

It goes without saying that there are a multitude of other considerations necessary to achieve security in the EU, not least of all, centralised computers. The EU has grown enormously in recent years and I think we must consolidate what has already been undertaken, before we embark on new projects like this one.

Wednesday, 2 September 2009


The damage limitation exercise has begun with the pubnlishing of "all relevant" correspondence by Downing Street and the Scottish Government. It reveals, so far, that finally everyone was pleased to see al-Mehari sent back to Libya "on compassionate grounds".

It does not appear that Gordon Brown, Prime Minister of England and in charge of foreign affairs in the UK, could not prevent the return of al-Mehari. The Scottish First Minister, Alex Salmond, was initially against the release of al-Mehari, but finally authorised the repatriation to Libya on "compassionate grounds". He bravely overlooked the feelings of the electorate of Lockerbie.

Gordon Brown has a lot to answer for, not only in the UK but also in the USA. I am sure that President Obama will make his feelings known in due course. There are still many unanswered questions in this saga.

In earlier articles in this Blog, I have expressed my feelings about terrorists who have unashamedly killed innocent victims. Have they not forfeited their Human Rights ? They have ended the Human Rights of their victims !!! The existence of the Death Penalty for terrorists would perhaps deter some potential terrorists. Albeit.

However, there are two key questions which require answers. Firstly, seven years after his conviction, al-Mehari had an appeal against his convction pending. This seems a long time. Why was the appeal not heard earlier ? Was he perhaps innocent ?

Secondly, it appears that al-Mehari is dying of cancer. Was he not treated while he was in prison in Scotland ? Were the doctors not aware of his terminal condition ? What does the report of all the doctors say ? Were they all in agreement that he was terminally ill ? He looked resplendant when he arrived in Tripoli, but now we see pictures of him under an oxygen mask !!! That's strange, even curious.

I am sure that tomorrow we will have another dose of explanations in this saga.

Tuesday, 1 September 2009


Late yesterday afternoon, it was announced that the UK Government would, in the evening, publish "all relevant" correspondence with the Scottish Government, concerning the release of al-Megrahi, the Lockerbie Bomber. This intention was then postponed until today. Not to be outdone, the Scottish Government made a similar promise to publish correspondence with Westminster.

Today, Tuesday, the 1st September 2009, newspapers are full of speculation, concerning little known events which are, it seems, linked to the Lockerby Bombing, including assassination attempts, trade links.......

The Lockerbiegate plot thickens by the hour. However, it is sure that the more "all relevant" correspondence that is published, the more questions will be asked. In other words, the least said the better, - for those involved !!! But all that is now already too late. Westminster will publish, the Scots will publish and Tripoli will certainly help out to clarify matters by supplying any missing details !!!

The fact that MP's are still on holiday is almost a guaranty that this whole question will carry on for a few weeks yet. In comparison, the Watergate Saga was quite simple.

Monday, 31 August 2009


Suddenly yesterday, Sunday, secret documents were leaked to the press concerning the circumstances which led to the release of the Lockerbie Bomber, al-Megrahi.

The murky details are in fact as clear as mud !!! Alex Salmond, the Scottish First Minister, at first said they were against "early release". Jack Straw in the end did not oppose al-Megrahi being included in the P T A (Prisoner Transfer Agreement) with Libya. Finally everyone was happy and relaxed when al-Megrahi was released on compassionate grounds, because he only had three months to live !!!

So what happened next ? Colonel Kaddafi and the whole of Tripoli staged an exuberant celebration last Saturday evening to mark the release of al-Megrahi !!! Who can blame them ?

Jack Straw seems to have been in the thick of negotiations as Justice Secretary after the resignation of Tony Blair as Prime Minister and the nomination of Gordon Brown in his place. Whether Jack Straw acted unilaterally or not, is of little importance. Gordon Brown was Prime Minister and the release of al-Megrahi was a Government decision.

So what has Britain got out of all this ? An oil and gas exploration deal for B.P.. Britain has, however, lost face with its hitherto constant ally, the USA, and President Barrack Obama. It had been agreed that al-Megrahi would serve out his whole term of imprisonment of 27 years in Scotland.

Finally, this whole sorry tale is still not over and will drag on until questions are discussed in the next session of Parliament which starts on the 12th. of October. The Socialist Government and Gordon Brown in particular, will be remembered forever for the LOCKERBIE GATE saga, especially if al-Megrahi survives beyond the coming General Election !!!

Saturday, 29 August 2009


The denials and affirmations by Gordon Brown, concerning the release of the Lockerbie Bomber, bear a strong ressemblance with the affirmations by Richard Nixon in the 1974 Watergate affair.

The only thing which seems to be absolutely clear is that Colonel Kadafi is the uncontested winner. He has had a field day !!!

Gordon Brown, the Scot in England with a PhD in History from Edinburgh university, Chancellor of the Exchequer in 1998 when the devolution of Scotland was decided, denies any responsibility for the release of the Lockerbie Bomber. The Scottish Parliament also denies any responsibility. Is this really so complex?

I have always understood that the Scottish Assembly (like the Welsh and Northern Irish Assemblies) were not empowered to act on matters like Foreign Affairs and matters of Defence. These responsibilities remained with the Government in London.

So the real question is: on which side of the fence was Gordon Brown sitting ? Did he know what was going on ? With an election coming, this whole matter is a real hot potato !!!.

Tuesday, 25 August 2009


According to the press, the Shadow Home Secretary, Chris Grayling, is about to deliver speeches or lectures on Drug Gang Culture. Everyone already has a good idea of how and why the gangs flourish and who is to blame for their continuing existence.

What everyone really wants to know is what the next government intends to do to reverse current trends ! How is the next government going to increase the protection of innocent citizens from gangs and thugs ? This topic weighs heavily with the electorate and will definitely be a vote winner if it is treated convincingly.

The Prison Reform Trust has published some interesting figures on the capacity of prisons. Socialist Ministers have pledged to increase prison capacity to 96 000 by 2014. At present there are 84150 inmates and the report says prisons are overcrowded by 8865 prisoners. Without overcrowding, the new capacity of 96 000 promised represents an increase of 11850 cells. At the moment, to avoid overcrowding, 2500 prisoners are released early each and every month !!!
Socialist Ministers have pledged, i.e. promised, 11850 cells during the next five years. They should have promised this ten years ago and delivered on the promise five years later. This would have permitted the police to pursue criminals and delinquents more efficiently. This would have avoided some of the problems which are described daily in the press and on television. Socialist Ministers talking tough on crime has not acted as a deterrent and has not frightened criminals.
David Cameron and Chris Grayling would be well advised to organise a meeting with a cross section of Judges to understand clearly what they think the most urgent urgent problems are. The Judges are in closest touch with criminals and crime. I hope that Judge Ian Trigger would be invited to such a meeting.


Gordon Brown, much to the annoyance of President Obama, permitted the early release from prison of al Megrahi, the Lockerbie Bomber. This early release, like that of Ronnie Biggs the Great Train Robber, was on Human Rights grounds. Before their release, the fate of their victims was hardly considered.

It is now rumoured that Bernard Madoff thinks he does not have long to live. He has just started serving his sentence of 150 years in prison for a gigantic fraud, perjury and false reporting. Can anyone believe a liar like that, or give him an early release on Human Rights grounds ?

I hope President Obama will clearly spell out the rules for early release from prison. I hope his rules take into account the long term suffering of the victims of crime.

A clear pronouncement on this subject is sorely needed, in Britain at this particular point in time and in Europe also. Everyone wants Human Rights. However, is there not a point in time when criminals forfeit some of their Human Rights ?

Sunday, 23 August 2009


In 1997 Tony Blair, the then Prime Minister and Gordon Brown the then Chancellor, callously decided to axe the tax relief on dividends paid to Pension Funds. Why they suddenly needed to destroy Private Pension Schemes in taking this extra tax remains a mystery. It was probably for purely idealistic reasons.

The private pension schemes in Britain were, in 1997, the envy of the world. They were run by companies for their employees and guaranteed them a pension in accordance with the conditions of the scheme. These schemes had been running for numerous years. They complemented the meagre State Pension.

After this tax raid, companies had to increase contributions to cover the liabilities of the various schemes. This ultimately led to many companies closing final salary schemes and other schemes were for new employees only.

It is now 2009 and Britain is less than nine months away from the next General Election; you may well ask what Gordon Brown will do before that election !!! The latest news is that he is going to put money into Northern Rock and Bradford & Bingley to protect the final salary pots of employees and Directors. Yes, Gordon Brown is going to bail out the Bankers again.

You may well ask why the hell is he throwing good money after bad again? Why can he not help other private pension schemes? He does seem to be acting like a gambler who is putting his last penny on the last throw of the dice.

I have a hunch !!! Gordon Brown himself had a comfortable majority of 18000 in his constituency in 2005. He himself may be re-elected but if the Socialists lose the General Election, one could say he will lose the leadership of the New Labour Party. Before that happens I think he would prefer to resign quickly and look for a job. But where.....?

Blair already covets the job of EU President, so politically he cannot go any higher for the time being. That is why I bet he will look for work with friends in the Banking Sector !!! After all, he has bailed them out with all he has got !!! And I bet he negotiates himself a Pension Pot !!!

Friday, 21 August 2009


Every week we read in the press that a criminal has been released early for one reason or another. Most recently, on "compassionate grounds", the Lockerbie Bomber and Biggs the Great Train Robber have been given their freedom. Why show compassion to criminals who cold bloodedly committed their crimes ?

These are but two examples which have hit the headlines, but there are many many other criminals who are released, but which we, the public, do not necessarily hear about on their release. When they reoffend shortly after their release we discover the true situation and are shocked.

We do, however, have a good idea why prisoners are released early. Prisons are full and space is needed ! This is not the reason given for an early release. That would be politically incorrect. The fact that prisons need to be built to enable judges to dispense justice and to help them maintain law and order, is not a consideration that has endeared itself to the Governments of Blair and Brown.

Early release is one method of avoiding overcrowding in prisons. The other important measure is not to prosecute ! This method does not help to maintain law, order and security one little bit ! It encourages, above all, petty criminals and juvenile delinquency, because they all know full well there is an overcrowding problem.

Sometimes I get the impression that criminals and offenders are released from prisons all too early and too easily. I would like to see a centralised registry where the reasons for an early release are set out, as well as the name of the criminal, the names of the people proposing the release and the names of all the people authorising the release. Such register should also indicate whether the trial judge has or has not agreed with the proposal of early release.

From the foregoing it seems to me that the efficacity of the British system of justice and the efforts of our judges is being undermined.

Friday, 14 August 2009


In spite of the fact that Sangatte was closed in 2002 on the orders of Nicolas Sarkosy, the French Minister of the Interior at the time, after a meeting with David Blunkett, the then UK Minister of the Interior, illegal immigrants still continued to arrive in great numbers in the Calais area afterwards.

Many of us were scandalised to read in the press and to see on the television hundreds of illegal migrants living like tramps in the "Jungle" area near Calais. Our attention was drawn to them because of the health risks arising from a recent outbreak of scabies. This obliged the local authorities, on Human Rights grounds, to provide toilets and showers, as well as tents for decontamination purposes.

However, before we all, British and French alike, start ranting and raving about the existence of illegal immigrants near Calais, because we all know that they want to hop over the Channel and settle in the UK, or failing this, remain in France and settle there, we should become aware of and take into account the important changes which are currently taking place. These are briefly outlined below.

On the 16th October 2008, as a result of the initiative of the President of the European Union (EU), Nicolas Sarkosy, all 27 EU member states adopted the "European Pact on Immigration and Asylum".

This complex and tricky problem was then followed by the UK-French Summit which led to the signing of the "Declaration on Immigration" on 6th July 2009 at Evian in France.

As a result the two countries have created a working group in Calais, with experts from both sides. This group is now in operation and the intention is that it will meet each month.

Let us hope that the foregoing plans and intentions will once and for all rid us of the illegal and uninvited migrants in the UK and in France. In this connection we should remember that both countries already have a system for selective admissions of non-EU immigrants. These systems will need regular revisions and updating to eliminate newly idientified abuses.

Bearing in mind all the foregoing developements, the amnesty for illegal immigrants already in the UK, which was proposed by Boris Johnson, the Mayor of London solves nothing. On the contrary, it would probably create a new tide, a tsunami perhaps, of desperate, illegal immigrants.

Without here and now going into the details of current problems concerning illegal immigrants, there is one fundamental observation which needs all our attention. The fact that Britain does not have a system of Identity Cards like almost every other major country in the world is an anachronism; it is inadmissible and it is certainly the most important reason why the UK cannot control illegal immigrants on its home soil.

Britons must face up to the fact that the world has changed. Now is no longer the 19th century. For a Briton today, the fundamental right he used to have, to be able to circulate in his own country without any official document permitting him to be identified, must be replaced by an obligation to always carry an Identity Card.

The Socialist Government has tried but failed to produce a computer package required for the introduction of Identity Cards. It is regrettable, but with the problems of this modern age, the project of introducing Identity Cards must be pursued with determination.


Friday, 7 August 2009


The Treaty of Lisbon provides for the new post of President of the European Council. The council elects the President, and his mandate is for two and a half years, renewable only once. The President will ensure the continuity of the work of the European Council and represent the European Union on issues concerning its common foreign and security policy.

The position of President of the European Union is of the utmost importance, not only for Europe, but for the world. The fact that Tony Blair dearly wants this nomination is a well known "top secret". The question that remains to be answered is whether Tony Blair has the qualities and the experience handle such a demanding Job.

He was Prime Minister of the United Kingdom during ten years.

Together with President Bush, he lead Britain into the war against Irak for reasons which even his own spin doctors could not explain convincingly. He appeared to be George Bush's poodle.

During his term in office he could not controle the flood of immigrants all parts of the world; he wellcomed them all with open arms and social benefits to the detriment of British born taxpayers.

He plundered more than 100 billion pounds from private pension funds, which through this have been completely destroyed.

During his tenure of office, he did not appear to be a convinced European, as was evident from his position concerning the European Charter of Fundamental Rights. On the other hand, it must be pointed out that, to the ire of British taxpayers, he cancelled the annual rebate of more than two billion pounds which Margaret Thatcher fought so hard to get to reduce Britain's contribution to the European Budget. This was probably the only time he appeared to be acting like a European ...

The poisoned challice Tony Blair bequeathed to his successor, Gordon Brown, remains a daily reminder of his time in office.

I personally feel after his disasterous time in office in Britain, his credentials do not fit the post of President of the European Council. He speaks well and he has a nice smile, but is that sufficient to be nominated President of the European Union ?

Wednesday, 5 August 2009


Judge Ian Trigger is to face an investigation over his comments about illegal immigrants. It is not what he said that is the problem. Everyone agrees that there is a big problem concerning illegal immigrants.

The Government, represented by Jack Straw in this case, believes that Judge Trigger in the courtroom should not openly criticise the Government for its failure to controle illegal immigrants. You should never criticise your paymaster !!! It goes without saying that to praise your paymaster would not create any problems for anyone. The fact that Judge Trigger is exasperated by the great number of illegal immigrants that come before him is therefore beside the point.

The ultimate punishment Judge Trigger may suffer will be very political and full of political correctness. The electors will be watching very closely and will at the same time be judging the Government. In addition, this case will certainly create a precedent in political history. A case to be referred to in future incidents of this kind. If the punishment is too severe, the Government risks being compared with certain totalitarian Regimes.

Will Judge Trigger be reprimanded or dismissed? Who knows how Political Correctness will be satisfied? I will hazard a guess at the outcome !!! Judge Trigger will be put on 12 months gardening leave with pay.


During recent weeks I have noticed that people with very important responsibilities have dared to express their frustration at the way Great Britain is being run.

The Governor of the Bank of England, Mervin King, said he was staggered by the "Extraordinary Public Deficit". To put it simply, Britain is going bankrupt.

General Sir Richard Dannatt demanded more helicopters, extra troops and spy-in-the-sky surveillance drones during a radio interview. This is how he revealed that he had a shopping list for Gordon Brown.

Judge Ian Trigger vented his frustration in court when faced once again by an immigrant who had not been deported years ago, and who has lived off the proceeds from the sale of drugs.

This week, the Director of Public Prosecutions, Keir Starner, (as a result of the Debbie Purdy case and the House of Lords judgement) has decided to work on guidelines explaining how he will approach the problem of whether to prosecute in assisted suicide cases. This is because the 1961 Suicide Act has not been revised.

All the above people are at the top of their professions and they all have a wealth of experience. They should be complimented for their forthright criticisms ! The government has spent all its ressources elsewhere, so our soldiers have no arms, prisons are full, laws are not updated, etc. and so on.

All these courageous people are venting their frustration ! I am sure there are many more in other areas who are equally frustrated and I encourage them to speak their minds in public. This is the only way that Gordon Brown and the remaining socialists can realise how serious the problems in Great Britain are.

The electorate, the Opposition in Parliament and David Cameron need to know well in advance the urgency of all the problems to be dealt with after the next election. It is highly probable that there are problems we know nothing about yet.