Google+ Badge

Monday, 13 December 2010


In my opinion Judge Trigger very rightly imprisoned the crook Kevin Howard for five and a half years for his crime spree on vulnerable and particularly elderly women. Howard needed the proceeds of his crimes to fuel his needs for drugs !!!

There are some major questions to be answered:

a During his previous imprisonment did Kevin Howard have access to drugs ?
b During his new imprisonment is there any guarantee that he will not have access to drugs ?
c Was he on a drugs rehabilitation program during his previous term of imprisonment ?
d Will he be on a drugs rehabilitation program during the next five and a half years ?
e Could Kevin Howard or other prisoners in the same identical situation in which he now finds himself, qualify for early release ?

The basic question is how to protect the honest and harmless citizens in our country. One often reads that drugs are freely available in prisons. This is also true in other countries, not just in Britain.

The Socialists had a soft approach to the problems of prisoners and prison capacities. To kill off the drug barons supplying prisons, would it not be tactically better to build specialized prisons on an island off the north coast of Scotland or somewhere else very remote ? This could provide employment in the outer reaches. Is it still necessary to have prisons next door to where a criminal is active ?

The approach of David Cameron to scythe into the excessive expenditures of the Socialists is admirable. However, not to update prisons and connected policies will prove to be a false economical policy.

Nick Clegg should also shoulder his part of the responsibility on this issue !!!

Sunday, 5 December 2010


The scandal of the secret FIFA voting procedure which led to the adoption of Russia and Qatar as hosts of the 2018 and 2022 World Cups has left everyone except Sepp Blatter, the President of FIFA, bemused if not simply horrified !!!

On 2 December 2010, The Times newspaper published on the morning of the votes an admirable statement of information concerning the 22 members of the Executive Committee who had the right to vote. It revealed that 6 members were under the age of 60; 7 were aged between 60 and 65, and 9 were aged over 65 !!!

Sepp Blatter has been involved in the organisations of the last 8 World Cups, either as General Secretary of FIFA on the first five occasions or as President during the last three World Cups. He is now aged 74, having served FIFA in one capacity or another since 1975, i.e. during 35 years.

A perusal of the Statutes of the FIFA Organisation reveals that there is no age limit concerning the re-election of the President or any member of the Executive Committee.

An obligatory retirement age would certainly rejouvinate the Executive Committee and avoid the number of problems and abuses encountered recently. On the internet at least three current members (not suspended) are cited as having been involved in bribes a few years ago.

The Statutes of FIFA, which can be easily consulted on the internet, make no mention of whether the President or Executive Committee members can be or are remunerated. Likewise, who has the power to authorise any payments of remuneration if they are made ?

What the Statutes of FIFA do make clear is that Elections are to be carried out by a secret ballot !!! This is understandable generally but in retrospect regrettable in view of the recent elections of Russia and Qatar as World Cup hosts. Everyone wants to know what motivated Executives of the Committee to vote the way they did.

Finally, is it morally right to permit Zinedine Zidane, a former international footballer for France, to present the candidacy of Qatar ? Who accepted or endorsed this ? Presentations are normally proud, national duties !!!

Wednesday, 24 November 2010

PLATINI and BLATTER must act now !!!

The Italian Football Association decision to suspend and fine Samuel Eto'o, the Inter Milan player for head-butting Bostjan Cesar of Chievo should be applauded universally by the World of Football.

Apparently this head-butt was in retaliation for a foul by Cesar on Eto'o. That may be so but this is not the object of this article.

The Italian F.A. have apparently used television images to identify, suspend and fine the culprit. They have sanctioned this unforgivable action which millions of television viewers saw, but which happened behind the back of the referee !!! The referee, alas, did not see the incident. Can you criticise the referee because he did not have eyes in the back of his head, and who does not have video images to call on like rugby referees ?

When referees miss something or make a wrong decision, they are indirectly punished by the very people, namely Platini and Blatter, who should be protecting them with modern technology !!! They are downgraded or removed from certain official lists.

The fact that Platini and Blatter are frightened to embrace modern technology, as for example in the Rugby World, is unacceptable. What holds them back ? Is it money ? Would EUFA or FIFA have to pay for the use of television rights ?

FIFA was recently basking in the glory of the recent World Cup inspite of the flagrant refereeing errors !!! What has happened since ? Nothing has changed during the last decade !!!

Can we expect anything new to happen if Platini or Blatter are re-elected to their respective posts ? Is there no time limit to their tenure ?

When there is a wrong refereeing decision the result could be that a club is relegated, the manager is sacked, players are not retained, referees are downgraded and the owners of clubs have to cover the financial consequences. And the fans........!

Thursday, 28 October 2010


It is to be hoped that Kenneth Clark, the Justice Secretary, has noted what the Lord Chief Justice, Lord Judge, voiced as his concern about violent criminals who are not brought before the courts.

For far too long in Britain criminals have escaped prosecution in order not to overcrowd jails even more. Social do-gooders invoke all sorts of arguments in order to avoid the prosecution of identified criminals. Theft is one thing but as Lord Judge points out the non prosecution of offenders when violence has been involved in a crime, is not acceptable.

Kenneth Clarke wants to reduce the cost of the prison budget, which is admirable. However, he cannot avoid his responsibility which in the final analysis is to ensure the protection of the public from criminals. In no way can he not provide the prison space required when he expects Judges to punish criminals in accordance with the law.

Kenneth Clark must realise that the soft approach to the conviction of "criminals" by the Socialists during the last 13 years resulted in the non construction of prisons. This in turn meant the avoidance of prosecutions favoured increasingly the soft approach.

Prosecutions and punishment, particularly terms of imprisonment, are effective methods which make criminels think twice. This was originally behind the idea of building prisons. Lord Chief Justice, Lord Judge, would not deny any of this.

For reasons outside the scope of this article, the Death Penalty was abolished in Britain and many other countries. As far as this concerns murderers who are found guilty a second time, this policy could be regretted. However, should one not punish those who repeatedly commit crimes? If the punishment is doubled each time the same criminal is convicted would this not provide the deterrant which the Lord Chief Justice seeks ?

Repetitive crimes, even by small time criminals, are the cause of much anxiety in communities. The Justice Secretary would do well to reflect on this aspect before wanting to reduce the Prison Budget !!!

Wednesday, 20 October 2010


One can only admire the courage of David Cameron and George Osborne, enshrined in their "Austerity Plan", to correct 13 years of the Socialists non-control of their financial objectives.

It will take at least five years of pain to reverse the effects of New Labour's spend-spend mentality to bring Britain back onto a sound financial basis. At present Britain is bankrupt and will remain so unless the "Austerity Plan" is firmly carried out.

There is of course another huge problem which awaits the Conservative and Liberal Coalition. This is the absolute non-control by the EU of EU policies.

Ten years ago the EURO was introduced as a currency. Now, already, there are at least three or four countries in dire straits facing "Bankruptcy" . Why ? Is it not due to a non-control mentality ? Have the highly paid EU Eurocrats been asleep and not really controled the activities of member countries ? The answer is evident !!!

When a trading company loses money, for whatever reason, and it cannot find finance, creditors close in and the company is ultimately dissolved. Creditors are the losers !!! Is a EU member country different ? Should any EU member country and its taxpayers help to save, for example, Greece ?

It is certainly not the highly paid, sleeping Eurocrats who will accept to pay up !!!

The EU started with six original member countries. Over the years the EU has grown and there are now 27, and there are more potential candidates on the horizon, knocking on the door !!!

The original ideas and principles were defined fifty years ago. Treaties were drafted to which new member countries were obliged to adhere. Years later these culminated in the so called "Treaty of Lisbon". This was a massive political fraud !!! It was adopted by European Parliaments without being required to call for a vote by the electorate of their country. The ultimate taxpayers did not have a word to say !!!

Eurocrats, elected or not, are paid graciously and guide all policies or decisions ultimately voted by the EU parliament members. No EU member country has anything ressembling a majority influence in the EU parliament.

However, member countries are obliged to accept and introduce EU directives in their countries' laws. The costs are often not reimbursed !!!

David Cameron, Nick Clegg and the House of Lords cannot refuse to apply EU laws. Judges in the UK are no longer independent of the EU. British judicial decisions can be appealed and overturned to take into account principles which contradict what a British citizen or politician would accept as justice !!!

This Blog is not the place to enter into greater detail about the growing shortcomings of the EU. However, there are serious economies possible if Britain were to insist on a complete revision of the conditions which govern membership of the EU !!!

The moment is ripe ! Many countries are aware of the EU shortcomings. All countries are not ready for all the EU directives; they cannot afford them. Many of these countries are too small to be able to voice their disapproval !!!

There is social unrest in several countries, in others unrest is brewing !!! France is a perfect example !!! Eurocrats do not face the brunt, local elected politicians do.

It is to be hoped that David Cameron and Nick Clegg look closely at the EU problems for their next raft of economies !!!

Monday, 11 October 2010


The floated idea of a new "Backdoor Tax on Graduates" is just another type of "Wealth Tax" or should one say "Stealth Tax" ? This time it is aimed not at those who have money but those who could, in the future, earn a good income !!!

It is aimed at students who have attained their objective. They have graduated in their chosen subject !!!

The Lib.Dems and the Tory majority should not confuse the issue for their supporters !!! Nick Clegg and David Cameron must iron out their differences on this issue. They were not elected to introduce new Gordon Brown style Stealth Taxes.

They should look at the "Front Door" entry system into University Education instead and look there for possible savings!!! It is no good to encourage "students", who obviously will never get beyond the first year, to go to University !!!

Saving the costs of obvious "Front Door" failures would more than cover the expected net income (receipts minus recovery costs) from a graduate tax !!!

Finally one should be practical. All graduates do not earn as much as MPs !!! If in spite of this they still get taxed, some will certainly move abroad !!!

Friday, 1 October 2010


What is this ?

It is people working for cash which they do not declare as income ! The person who pays does not declare he has employed anyone !

The consequences are that illegal imigrants survive and scroungers living on National Health handouts remain undetected !!! So called employers avoid paying Social Security charges but taxpayers and the State ultimately suffer all the consequences.

David Cameron and Nick Clegg must address this problem and would do well to appoint a specialist to look at the system which operates in France.

The system encourages people who need short term or long term family help from workers like cleaners, gardners, home helps and teachers, etc, to declare payments made to them. The costs which include social security and pension contributions are deductable from the personal income tax payable by the employer. The worker profits from the pension contributions and national insurance. The system is appreciated by both employer and employee.

The existence of this system does not absolve the State from verifying that companies and businesses do not employ "black labour" !!! Restaurants and building sites are well known black labour employers, but they are not the only ones.

Friday, 10 September 2010


The only thing that has happened during the last year is that FIFA is now basking in the glory of having staged the 2010 World Cup !!!

We saw the usual number of dubious refereeing decisions, but the referees never did have the right to consult instant video replays. Some of these referees will reach the official age limit and disappear, others will be quietly sidelined.

Likewise, some of the managers of countries in the World Cup have been uncerimoniously sacked because their country did not win the Cup. Sometimes refereeing decisions were not in their favour and sometimes their star players did not perform as expected. Such players can also expect to find themselves on the scrap heap !!!

The big and urgent question is: " How long will it be before FIFA or another international football association permits the use of instant video replays to help referees ? " The technology is already available !!! The members of the FIFA board need only to sneek a view of a televised rugby or tennis match, to understand why referees sometimes want instant replays.

Why do EUFA and Michel Platini not lead the way and thus show FIFA and Sepp Blatter what needs to be done !!!

Before the next Council Elections for FIFA take place, there are many people who would like to see age limits set for candidates to key posts. Likewise the total length of service for key positions should also be limited. At the present time FIFA is under-performing in this modern world !!!

Monday, 30 August 2010


Fundamentally David Cameron and the Tories have been landed with two main problems;

- those which arise from the uncontrolled policies introduced by the Socialists during their 13 years in power;

- those which result from the surrender by the Socialists to the E.U. of Britains' rights to determine its own fundamental policies.

Correcting uncontrolled policies has started and revealed the extent taxpayers' money has been wasted.

What cannot be reversed are the ever increasing powers of the E.U. and its Directives !!! The only way out would seem to be a unilateral withdrawal from the E.U.. The referendum promised by the Conservatives could come into play.

However, if Britain clearly states that in order to continue to stay in the E.U. it would want to renegotiate a certain number of obligations and conditions, this could have a sympathetic ripple effect throughout the E.U.. There are a great number of people in Europe who feel uncomfortable at the present moment about how certain decisions are arrived at and imposed.

Monday, 9 August 2010


Every day one reads in the press details of the latest discoveries, and the costs, of overpayments to scroungers of the social benefits system. The last Socialist Government, during 13 years, paid without ever querying, Billions of pounds which were not justified. Withdrawing such benefits would have been extremely unpopular !!! This policy avoided a landslide Conservative Majority at the last election !!!

The same Socialist Frontbench Politicians are now fighting each other to step into the shoes of Gordon Brown !!!

Let us not be duped for the second time. The new socialist leader, when he is elected, will not accept to be responsible for the failings of the Blair/Brown years. It will never be NEW LABOUR reinvigorated !!! It will be another Labour in new sheep's clothing !!!

They will never defend the past. They will always attack the new Coalition of Cameron/Clegg for what they can get without proposing constructive new policicies. They will only ever want to embarass.

It is therefore time that David Cameron should consider a speech in the mould of a "Statement to the Nation" when when Parliament resumes after the summer break.

What is required is a Financial Statement which highlights the cost of the scocialist neglect of non-control of "Public Funds".

Press leaks is one thing; Responsible reporting to the Electorate is another.

Wednesday, 4 August 2010


Gordon Brown, the saviour of the Western World during the recent Banking crisis, left an uncontrolled mess in Britain when he was ousted from power at the recent elections. David Cameron now finds himself in the unenviable situation of having to clear up this mess !!!

This Blog clearly said early this year (February, 4,10, and 28), that any Government must legislate to control the activities of Banks.

Diplomatic words and promises by Politicians or Bankers to each other will achieve nothing !!! What is required are new, fundamental constraints which oblige Banks and Bankers to change their ways. Without laws and sanctions nothing will change.

Bankers, and above all International Bankers, have a duty to enrich their shareholders. They have no legal responsibility to do what a Government would find agreeable if it does not enrich the Bank's shareholders.

President Obama clearly said that Banks are too big !!! He is absolutely right !!! No one country can pass laws which could bring multi-national, multi-continental Banks to heel. Some of the big Banks are even bigger than the countries in which they operate.

Only two alternatives are available to legislaters to control the situation;
- agreement on a world-wide basis to control Multinational banks. This would necessarily become a long term project.
- local legislation to favour "National Local Banks" which are independent of foreign control.

If Multinational Banks are deprived of local cheap "Tap" money, this would favour local banks who could then lend the money to industry and local clients at reasonable interest rates. This would enable a government to introduce policies to help those in most need. The interest rates which the Big Banks want to impose cripple anything a Government has in mind.

Everyone knows that Banks were bailed-out after they made losses not from investments but speculative "bets" on financial markets. Had they stuck to the well tried principles of yesteryear the current tensions and suspicions surrounding the financial market today would not exist.

Who talks about usurious interest rates or exhorbitant bank or credit card charges ? Only the consumer !!! There are too many similar examples to mention for an article like this !!!

David Cameron must lead the way in Britain, legislate and introduce sanctions. He must coerse the Banks to fall into line !!! The E.U. will not help, only talk, talk, and talk. There is no majority in the E.U. Parliament !!!

Monday, 21 June 2010

Des Bleus à l'image de la France ?

Le comportement des bleus, footballeurs de l'équipe dite de France, est à l'image de ce qui se passe dans la société française actuelle.

Cela commence à l'école, au collège où des enfants ne respectent plus leurs enseignants, insultent voire agressent leurs professeurs.

Cela continue dans les cités où des policiers se font caillasser.

Cela se termine en pleine coupe du monde, dans un vestiaire de l'équipe de France où un joueur insulte gravement son sélectionneur dont il conteste l'autorité.

On s'indigne mais qu'attendre de joueurs qui refusent de chanter l'hymne nationnal et d'adhérer aux valeurs de notre nation?

Il est plus que temps de réagir à tous les niveaux de notre société et de cesser de faire preuve d'indulgence à l'égard de tous ceux qui se comportent comme des voyous.

Wednesday, 26 May 2010


The answer to this question in the U K was always "YES, MY HOME IS MY CASTLE". It used to mean that there were legal means, like the police, to help home owners to protect their HOMES, that is to say their "CASTLES". Is it too much to ask of the police these days ?

There used to be legal means to protect HOMEOWNERS. Burglary, breaking and entering, stealing electricity, are well known criminal offences but they are no longer applied when expected by the public.

Almost every week there is a story in the National Press that holiday makers return from abroad to discover that their home has been forcibly entered and possessed. WHY ?

Are the police not paid to arrest criminals in these circumstances ?

The police defend their inertia with the plea that such matters are a "civil matter" between the owner and the tresspasser !!! This is ludicrous !!! Is the police not employed to protect lawfull abiding citizens ? Should they not pursue tresspassers, who are frequently footloose immigrants ?

Is it the Chief of the Police, or is it the Minister of the Interior, who are not addressing the problem ?

To put it more simply. Has anyone ever known a case where the home of a policeman or a politician, at any level of responsibility, was illegally possessed ?

To put it another way, is it not the moment to recognise that every Briton has the right to expect that he and his CASTLE have the right to police protection.

Monday, 24 May 2010


I am watching Murray playing at Roland Garros and regularly when he has been serving against the Frenchman Richard Gasquet, some one has been shouting "fault". Is it a line judge or somebody else in the crowd ?

The "faults" are rarely peenalised !!! This is annoying and distracts the concentration of everyone. When Gasquet serves there is utter silence !!!

If it is a line judge he should be replaced. If it is a spectator he should be thrown out.

Sunday, 23 May 2010


The Office for Judicial Complaints has rebuked Judge Ian Trigger for comments he made in court about the lax administration by the Labour Government of their immigration policy. Judge Trigger made these comments in July 2009.

As was stated by this Blog at the time, the only fault committed by Judge Trigger was that, in a moment of frustration, he criticised the Labour administration. This has now been deemed to be an inappropriate judicial intervention in the political process. Would he have been rebuked, or perhaps even praised, if instead he had complemented the Government for something ?

It was clearly a very difficult case for the Minister of Justice, Jack Straw, who was also inundated with work connected with the recent General Election. It took 10 months to reach a verdict !!!

Judge Trigger should now, at least, heave a huge sigh of relief !!! He should be thankful. There are countries in this world where the Death Penalty awaits those who dare to criticise the Government !!!

Thursday, 20 May 2010


Ordinary people in the street in "EUROLAND", taxpayers and non-taxpayers, who still pay VAT when they buy anything, cannot understand why there is a crisis concerning the EURO currency.

Politicians in Europe are scratching their heads in order to get a grip on the problem, to find a solution and to fend off criticism. They have real fears for their next re-election !!!

The EURO was introduced as a money in the year 2000, but now only ten years later Greece and about four other countries are bankrupt or verging on bankruptcy.

Why ? That is the real question !!!

The answer is simple. The countries involved have overspent!!! They have lost control of their finances.

Every family knows, like every businessman knows, that if you spend more than your income, then the ultimate result will be bankruptcy !!! When that happens you lose all you have got. Your unpaid creditors also lose.

The ultimate and real question is "Why did this happen"?

The answer is quite clear, even if it hurts. The E U does not control what is going on !!! No one in the E U ever tells a country to stop spending !!! Politicians do not like being unpopular. They prefer to pursue idealogical goals and not be fettered by having to count the cost. Any family or private businessman in such a position is quickly made to realise that without money you cannot go on spending.

What has startled and petrified EU policians so suddenly is that they have realised that Greece is part of their family and that Greece cannot repay its debts !!! Even an austerity program in Greece will not solve the problem. The recent unrest and disturbances in Greece are the proof of the present conundrum. What is worse is what is to come; there are other countries in a similar position to Greece.

Politicians are past masters in the art of massaging the presentation of facts and figures and statistics. Many retire before they are found out !!!

What will happen next ? Taxpayers in all the countries which have the EURO as their currency will have to pay to clear up the Greek debts and possibly others. The only other alternative is to scrap the EURO and return to the previous currencies. That would be an even messier solution !!!

Angela Merkel seems to be blaming in part the banking crisis for the EURO crisis. The banking crisis is another mess which has very little to do with the EURO mess !!! One should not confuse the two.

Likewise the British twin Prime Ministers, David Cameron and Nick Clegg, should not be too complacant about the EURO problems. They can thank Gordon Brown and Tony Blair for not having adopted the EURO currency, but after 13 years of uncontrolled overspending, bankrupt Britain urgently needs first aid and less idealogic E U rules.

Wednesday, 12 May 2010


Boris Johnston said the new coalition in Westminster was like crossing a Bulldog with a Chihuahua, but did not say who, in his opinion, was the Bulldog and who was the Chihuahua !!! Perhaps he was being diplomatic !!! Why ?

Friday, 7 May 2010


Nick Clegg has the offer of a coalition with the Tories or with the Socialists.

Not bad, but the choice is difficult if Nick Clegg and the Liberals want to drive a hard bargain for immediate gain. In fact his own reputation and that of his party will be judged on the choice that is made.

The options are clear !!! Which of the following does he favour ?

a) Help to change the direction of politics in Britain with David Cameron and the Tories.

b) Help the Socialists to sort out the mess that Gordon Brown and Tony Blair have left as a legacy ?

Whatever Nick Clegg decides, the electorate will remember the results achieved during at least the next twenty years !!!

Thursday, 6 May 2010


In the E U 16 countries out of 27 have adopted the EURO as their official currency. The crunch has come because Greece has not respected the financial and economic conditions that the E U requires. Greece has broken the rules !!!

Initially Greece wanted help of about 40 Billion Euros as loans to cover it's banking crisis. A closer inspection of Greek affairs has raised this amount to 110 Billions Euros.

Greece adopted the Euro in 2001 and since then has not controlled its excessive expenditures. It is undeniable that Greece is bankrupt !!!

However, what is also undeniable is that the E U, in spite of all its rules and legislation, has been completely surprised by the Greek bankruptcy and the consequent turmoil we now see in the press !!!

Who controls what in the E U ? Which hightly paid experts were asleep on the job during recent years ? This is not an unexpected overnight drama !!! Is there no one who has the courage to raise these questions ?

The real question now is "What happens next ?" In fact Greece has the option of quitting the E U , readopting its former currency, and then massively devalue !!! This will not affect its debts which are in a foreign currency. It will still have to repay its debts in EUROS !!!

Alas, creditors of Greece will have to wait a long time. Greek debts are bad debts and comparable with discounted Junk Bonds. Creditors have really already lost their shirts !!!

What is worse is that there are other countries in the wings watching carefully how the Greek problem is solved. They too want to ask for help !!!

Thank God that the U K has not abandoned the Pound Sterling in favour of the EURO !!!

Monday, 26 April 2010


In the second leaders debate Gordon Brown destroyed Nick Clegg who suggested that an amnesty should be considered to resolve the problems of immigrants !!! David Cameron presented figures which suggested that immigration during the last 13 years had more than doubled !!!

Does this mean that Gordon Brown prefers uncontrolled immigration rather than an amnesty ?

"To get really fair", as Gordon Brown would like to hear things, would be to state the facts as they really are !!! Socialists legislate to cover everything, (in private industry we call this CMA) but in fact they never control anything !!! The problem of immigration into Britain is a simple but very typical example of Socialist non-control.

There are in fact two very basic problems, Euro-migration and then immigration, whether legal or illegal !!! None of the three Leaders really commented on the solutions necessary to cover all the aspects of this complicated problem !!!

Should an Identity Card not be delivered by the EU country of entry to any non EU immigrant ? Should the originating EU country not then be held responsible and be made to compensate for unearned or unmerited benefits claimed by EU migrants if they then enter the UK or any other EU country ?

Should illegal immigrants into the EU not be returned to the countries where they entered ? Should not all border countries be rendered responsible for the illegal immigrants they "invite" or permit to enter into the EU at their ports of entry ?

Of course the foregoing suggestions would create an upheaval in the current, comfortable conduct of affairs in the EU !!! The ultimate question for the Three Leaders in the political debate is: Should the poor British taxpayers eternally have to bear the cost resulting from the inertia of the EU politicians ?

What alternative solutions do the three leaders, Brown, Cameron and Clegg propose ? The electorate and Taxpayers in particular, want and need a convincing answer !!!

Monday, 19 April 2010


Brown blandly talks about the solid past, which it took 13 painful years for the Socialists to create, saying simply that it will serve as a base for the future he foresees after the coming election !!!

No comments on any of the pains !!! Have all the politicians really forgotten ?

- the Billions Blair gave back to the EU and which Magaret Thatcher fought so hard to get? It's easy to buy personal popularity with taxpayers' money !
- the Billions Brown lost by selling off British Gold Reserves too early ? And he wants to be recognized as the great saviour of the Western Economy !
- the Billions of exceptional tax levied on Private Pension Funds, which as a result were destroyed. They were the envy of the world !!! Where has the money gone ? Into indexed, non-contributary pension schemes for politicians !!! What is not covered now will be covered by future taxes, but Private Pension Schemes are now in deficit !
- the Billions paid by Britain to Illegal Immigrants ?
- the lack of realistic controls concerning benefits paid to social security claimants ?

Gordon Brown does not talk about the past. He avoids all searching questions. He does not talk about the big black hole in the British Economy which is the cost of future national pensions !!! He just wants to continue spending !!!

Like a young lover he sets out to woo the electorate. He never talks about his past, he only makes glib promises to get now what he wants most !!!

One can only hope that the politicians in the opposition, like David Cameron and Nick Clegg, will attempt to expose the consequences of another hasty quick fix by Gordon Brown !!! No one can afford to listen to his soothing words. Britain is already bankrupt, and the electorate must understand the consequences of this situation !!!

Monday, 12 April 2010


There are many small problems to put to bed before real discussions between Labour or Conservative politicians can take place.

One of these "small" problems, which rancles all voters, is to know what measures the Left or the Right will take to cover the abuse of Bonuses for Bankers !!! Not only bankers but all the other extraordinary remunerations which directors of companies now expect !!!

The ordinary taxpayer feels destroyed by the figures he sees in the press. As a worker, the taxpayer or shareholder, who works similar hours compared with a Director, feels the difference in remuneration is not justified.

Is the simple solution not to oblige companies to file all contracts and their details, before "extraordinary remuneration" is proposed to a new or current employee ? Should shareholders not have a right to vote on such contracts ? Obviously the details of such a law must be thouroughly studied. The electorate wants to know what the main parties intend to do. Will this be an election promise ? Will they act ?

Remuneration committees exist, but do they do the job expected of them ? Are they impartial ? Are they paid ? Who appoints them ?

These questions and others need to be covered by legislation !!!

Thursday, 8 April 2010


If every politician who wants to be the next Prime Minister needs to have more experience than Gordon Brown, then he, Gordon Brown will be in power for the next 25 years, unless of course Tony Blair makes a comeback !!! Would Great Britain be better off with Blair in the driver's seat ?

The idea that a young politician cannot be trusted to conduct the affairs of the State is ridiculous !!! In no way does it absolve the failures of the Blair/Brown regime. Blair was inexperienced, and Brown his pupil, was no better when they became the Prime Minister !!!

Winston Churchill in his youth persevered and had flair. In his time he had to fight to carve out his place in politics. Stoic politicians did not want to accept him !!! Britain, however, in 1918 was more than thankful !!!

Britain now has to elect the next Prime Minister. David Cameron is equally well qualified and experienced as the duo of Blair and Brown in 1997. Britain is at present Bankrupt. There is no money left to pay for the current policies of the Labour Party.

Electors must vote for a change or expect changes that Socialists will not announce during the next month !!!

Wednesday, 7 April 2010


Shirley Chaplin, a 54 year old hospital nurse for more than 30 years, was banned from wearing her crucifix after her appeal against the Royal Devon and Exeter NHS Trust was dismissed.

Must this humble blog have to draw attention to the fact that the Church of England has the duty to protect the faith of the realm ? The Archbishop of Canterbury, Rowan Williams, appears to be reticent and not wanting to be implicated in this controversy !!! He should perhaps come off the proverbial fence and guide his flock !!!

Likewise, the Minister of Justice, Jack Straw, seems to have opted to keep his nose clean and not to intervene. Gordon Brown obviously has concurred !!!

Why has Jack Straw not intervened ? Does he really want, by his inertia, in the name of Human Rights perhaps, to let other faiths like Islam usurp the Establishment ?

Does Gordon Brown really support the passive decisions of his Minister of Justice? Who controls what ?

Will David Cameron state that he will change the laxities of the past and Defend the Faith ? Will any politician clearly state what his point of view is with respect to Shirley Chaplin ?

The electorate will be watching !!!

Tuesday, 6 April 2010


Gordon Brown's biggest problem now is not what he can promise the electorate he will do, but to explain at the same time why he and the Socialists have not done it during the last 13 years !!!

Friday, 2 April 2010


Joan Higgins, aged 66, a petshop owner for more than 20 years, was fined 1000 Pounds sterling and tagged for selling a goldfish to a boy under the age of 16 !!! In addition she was given a 7pm - 7am curfew.

The simple facts of this case highlight "dozens" of direct and indirect (hidden) ineptitudes in the chain of those who govern and those who are governed.

Gordon Brown, the unelected Prime Minister, delegated responsibilities to Jack Straw who became the Justice Secretary, but neither has lifted even his little finger to prevent the sentence meted out to Joan Higgins !!!

Keir Starner, the Director of Public Prosecutions, has not reacted either !!!

Iain Veitch, the head of public prosecutions at Trafford Council, maintains that this prosecution sends out a clear message that unnecessary suffering to animals will not be tollerated !!!

The message, from the top to the bottom is clear. "I delegated and no wrong has been done. What is the problem?"

Does Joan Higgins have no Human Rights? Is she a bigger criminal than any murderer or terrorist, whose Human Rights are always scrupulously protected and upheld?

Does selling a pet goldfish to a 14 year old boy merit being tagged? If so, why are M P's who have embezzled taxpayer's money with false expenses claims not tagged? In fact, if they were tagged, taxpayers would perhaps find out where they really spent their nights. Their wives would too !!!

If Gordon Brown wants to win the next election, perhaps he ought to explain clearly why he or one of his team has not intervened to uphold the Human Rights of Joan Higgins !!! She would perhaps, in the circumstances, be best advised to make an appeal to the European Court of Justice to obtain compensation !!!

Tuesday, 30 March 2010


Politicians always want to destroy each other with the hope that voters will side with them. Socialists are defending their past whereas conservatives attack their failings. What voters really want to know is what they can expect, what changes they are expected to vote for.

Voters are sick and tired of :-

- the blatant greed of MP's
- unlimited immigration
- uncontrolled crime without punishment
- soldiers without armes
- uncounted invalide soldiers
- twisted statistics
- uncounted social benefit scroungers
- increased taxes
- promises and even more promises

All the foregoing points are well known, and many others also. Voters want solid propositions of what changes are going to be made in the future to change the past.

For example what will either party do on assuming power:-

- to reduce immigration
- to reduce the number of permanent scroungers on "social security"
- to control free trade and asian "dumping"
- to control or restrict EU beaurocracy
- to limit the introduction of EU ideals

What Britain needs in this hour of need and crisis is a pragmatic man like Winston Churchill. It is not the EU that will come to its rescue !!!

Tuesday, 23 March 2010


If Mohamed Al Fayed reads the recent articles in this blog he will realize that he is not alone and that there are many other people who have been deeply disappointed by the inactivity, the inertia, of not only Mr Blatter and FIFA but also by the uselessness of Mr Platini and EUFA.

No one acts or wants to act in order to introduce modern technology into football in order to help referees. Have these gentlmen never watched an international rugby match, or a Grand Slam Tennis tournament, a cricket match or even an ice hockey match? Are they really so blinkered ?

This Blog recently suggested that the FA in England could introduce this modern technology without waiting for the help of either EUFA or FIFA. This could even be done before the World Cup !!!

Mohamed Al Fayed could write his name into the history books of football if he could force this issue with his club at Fulham. Show them how to do it, Mr Al Fayed !!!

If FIFA or EUFA attack you or Fulham, be sure Blatter and Platini will get the chop !!! No right thinking person could or would want to fault you.

Monday, 22 March 2010


M P 's are now selling their services by offering to lobby the interests of their paymasters. Up until now the main problem was the expenses scandal. Before that they voted themselves increased salaries and gold plated pensions way beyond what a poor old taxpayer could ever dream of getting.

Seen in this light it is quite clear why Tony Blair got out of politics when he did. He has become a multi-millionaire since he got on to the list of available After Dinner Speakers. Alas, he is not rich enough yet to be able to pay for the cost of protecting his properties in the United Kingdom !!!

In fact what taxpayers and voters are continually asking themselves is "Do all these politicians ever make any tax declaratioins?". For example, is Tony Blair, his working wife and his family resident in the UK ? Are politicians expected to pay tax on non-Parliamentary income ?

Does anyone anywhere check that M P's who should make tax declarations, have in fact made them ? Every week there seems to be a new scandal. Shortly, the Government will go wooing for votes and will promise sweet nothings in electors ears !!! They will be waiting to give candidates and earfull in return. Roll on the elections !!!

Wednesday, 17 March 2010


Now that the leaders of the three major political parties have have finally agreed to participate in pre-election debates on television, one should recognize and respect their courage. Such debates already take place in many countries and they permit and help electors to decide how they will finally vote. These debates are therefore of the utmost importance.

While the iron is hot, should there not be agreement now that in future when an election is called, automatically a leaders' debate on television like the one now planned, will always be programmed to take place ?

Should not the first question to be put to the three leaders in the first debate seek their agreement to enshrine this intention in an Act of Parliament ? The first Act would probably not be perfect, but it could be modified subsequently to correct problems which arise in future debates.

A system must be put in place. It is a voter's right to be informed correctly. If there is a snap election there will never be enough time to again hammer out an agreement about what should or should not be covered in debates. Such debates should be considered as being obligatory for political leaders (not their henchmen !) and a right for electors.

Monday, 8 March 2010


FIFA has again refused to adopt modern technologies to help referees. Even the managers of top clubs are confounded by this inertia.

Alex McLeish, the manager of Birmingham City was unconvinced about a crucial decision by the referee in the cup match against Portsmouth. He did not attack the decision of the referee, he simply said fooball needs more technology !!! And he is absolutely right !!! The only real, remaining, question is when will the Super Powers of FIFA and Sepp Blatter accept and admit that something has to be done !!! And when will they make a public and binding promise to act ?

Indirectly FIFA ensures the appointment of referees to "control matches". To be very crude referees are armed with only a whistle and dressed like undertakers !!!

In fact referees exit their tunnel like gladiators in ancient Rome. They enter the arena to face the possible wrath of 60 000 spectators if not more. If a referee makes a bad decision, woe betide !!! FIFA, UEFA (including Michel Platini), The FA in London will all be on his back and they will act !!! But none of these Organisations are prepared to commit themselves by introducing video technology to help a referee in moments of need !!!

Is it because all these Super Organisations are so very cost conscious ? Not at all !!! Armchair spectators anyway see all they need daily !!! Compared with other sports, football really is at the bottom of the pile !!!

If FIFA and UEFA will not act, why cannot the English FA take the initiative and lead the way ? Alex McLeish with his contacts with other managers in football could create a groundswell to encourage, or even oblige, the FA to act !!!

After all, where was the game of football first created ? Certainly not in Switzerland, the home of FIFA !!!

Thursday, 4 March 2010


The E U has three fundamental principles which are FreeTrade, Free Migration and Human Rights !!! Alas the basic rights of natives born in the E U are not protected !!! Their only remaining basic right is to pay taxes to cover the costs of E U policies and E U politicians !!!

E U politicians legislate and expect and oblige member states to implement the effect of E U laws. E U politicians do not count the cost of their policies because the costs are borne by E U member states. And the number of politicians that any member state is permitted to elect ensures that no sole member state can ever, theoretically, have a majority. No individual E U politician can be held responsible for a law that has been passed !!!

The local politicians of E U member states are therefore condemned to apply E U laws, and woe betide those member states which do not do so !!! The E U appeal court is not only in place but active to ensure that E U laws are implemented !!!

Member States cannot alone stem the flow of illegal immigrants into the E U or limit the application of Human Rights legislation. Free Trade means that cheap-labour Asian goods can be dumped in Europe where unemployment is rife and a major problem.

When Gordon Brown and David Cameron face each other in the pre-election T V debates each must clearly inform the electorate of their intentions with respect to the E U, together with their cost estimates of the solution they favour.

The big election question is: Should Britain remain in the E U or get out ?

Sunday, 28 February 2010


The basic reason for almost every problem in Gordon Brown's Britain is that there are many laws, which nibble at profound problems, but they never provide the honest and real means, nor the intentions, to follow-up the problem they pretend to address. Judges and Courts of Law are left helpless !!!

The Bank of England "tap rate" is currently 0,5% !!! One half of a percent !!! Banks can borrow at this rate.

Credit card rates, however, are a banker's dream !!! Banks are skinflints if they have to consider paying interest to customers on deposits, but overdraft charges, like credit card rates, are astronomic.

The Government, led by Gordon Brown, the recent Great Saviour of the World Banking Crisis, no longer knows, or wants to know or understand, the old principle of usurious interest rates. This old principle is no longer recognised or applied by courts of law. Should this rate not be controlled by Governmental Legislation and vary in line with the "Tap Rate" ?

There are a few very simple reasons for this passive inertia. Banks do not want to refuse credit at high interest rates, even if the customers are not really credit worthy. Banks can and will always sell doubtfull debts at a discount to cut their "losses" !!!

The Government does not want to legislate because this would depress trade, sales to the ultimate consumer !!! This is a political decision and would reflect badly on the Government.

The banks are the winners. With a lot of smiles, a lot of small print in their conditions, they can vary their interest rates and protect their performance bonuses !!! With impunity they point out that customers should read the conditions before signing the contract.

However nothing will change quickly for the time being. As far as the Government is concerned these mundane problems are of the past. The fire to fight is the coming election !!!

Can David Cameron understand this gripe by the British electors ? The polls are not moving in the favour of the Conservatives. He must spell out clearly the policies the Tories intend to put into practice !!!

Thursday, 25 February 2010


The Olympic Games reveal perfectly the inner feelings of spectators, who scream with uncontrolled delight when a sportsman from their country competes, or even better, wins a medal. National feelings and pride overflow with happiness or sorrow.

Yet what do we find on the political stage ? The E U has been created, and it has relegated National Pride to the history books. No one shouts in support of E U sportsmen !!! The E U has relegated the role of national parliaments to a secondary function, which is to implement E U laws and directives. Beware he who transgresses, for there is always a sting in the tail called Human Rights, and to boot, an E U appeal court.

British electors, unlike the Irish, have never had the chance to vote on whether they wanted to join the E U. Do British MEPs have a determining influence on E U laws ? Of course not, they are a small minority.

The Scottish, Welsh and Northern Irish Parliaments, through their representatives do at least give a chance to their electorates to express their feelings. This reduces the workloads of Westminster MPs. Quangos also reduce their workloads !!!

Except those who are still embroiled with their expense claims, MPs are now increasingly preoccupied with their re-election, probably on May 6. Their E U problems have of course already been hived off onto the MEPs.

Sunday, 21 February 2010


In 1982 Argentina attacked the Falkland Islands. After all, what could a mere woman called Margaret Thatcher do, 6000 miles away in London ? Acting Argentine President, General Galtieri soon found out to his cost !!!

Now the Argentine President is a woman called Christina Kirchner, and as someone seeking to catch votes, she too wants the Falklands !!! But she is prudent and wary, and she is seeking to invoke the help of the United Nations !!!

The immediate question is again "What has Argentina got to offer now to the Falkland Island inhabitants that they did not have in 1982 ?" Anything new or just the same old problems ?

Supposing the UN accedes to the Argentine requests. Does or would that mean that Mexico or the USA could lay claim to Caribbean countries ?

A more realistic claim would be if Argentina looked in the other direction and claimed the strip of coastal land which is at present occupied by Spanish speaking people in Chili !!! Should Argentina not have a bigger and more direct access to the Pacific coast ? And what about that blob of land called Uruguay ?

Thursday, 18 February 2010


Expense "records" are perhaps "stolen property" but the question to-day is whether in his capacity as British Immigration Minister Phil Woolas has ever met Eric Besson, his opposite number and who is the French Immigration Minister ? What do the "records" (minutes) of their last meeting reveal ? Were they published ? What action did they decide was necessary ? What has been done since ?

Have they ever discussed the problem of refugees in Calais, who have no visas or identification papers, who are in fact simply Illegal Immigrants into France ? Has Phil Woolas ever made it clear to Eric Besson that Britain does not want former Illegal Immigrants who have entered France furtively, to enter Britain ? Have they decided what action needs to be undertaken to solve this problem once and forever ?

If so, what is the date of these discussions and what do the minutes (or records) of these discussions reveal? Where can they be consulted ?

All these questions are asked to-day, 18 February 2010, in the light of the current context, the ongoing or new Calais/Sangatte II or III.

Monday, 15 February 2010


Patrick Balkany, plus de 40 ans après avoir rencontré une star du cinema français, a éprouvé le besoin de le raconter et ainsi d'en profiter pour pimenter son livre, sans doute pour mieux le vendre.

Cela relève-t-il d'un vieux fantasme, ou d'une histoire réelle qui a marqué l'un, mais que l'autre a oubliée ? Doit-il alors s'en vanter ?

Quoi qu'il en soit l'attitude de Monsieur Balkany est fort inélegante !!!

Thursday, 11 February 2010


The only thing that the Socialists have got right in the last 13 years of rule in Britain, is not to abandon the British Pound Sterling, and therefore not to adopt the Euro !!! In my opinion, a country which does not have control of its money, does not have the control of its destiny !!!

To give control of monetary policy to European Burocrats would have been a first class disaster, not only for Britain but also the Commonwealth and for the London financial market.

However, Gordon Brown, who a year ago was presenting himself as the Saviour of the Financial World which was faced with a Global Banking Crisis, now seems to think that billions of British pounds could save Greece and the Euro !!!

Does he realise that there are other bankrupt countries, like Britain for example, who have also wildly overspent in recent years !!! They are waiting in the wings; they are watching how the Greek problem is resolved before they ask for aid !!!

During the coming weeks, what is Gordon Brown going to promise to the electorate, that he has in his secret reserves, to finance the recovery of the British economy after the coming elections ? Just more promises or ideas ?

No !!! The answer is clear and obvious: 5 years of hard Labour by a Conservative Government and its electors  !!!

Wednesday, 10 February 2010


Faced by the banking crisis President Obama quite rightly said that Banks are too big. Other leaders like President Sarkozy or Prime Minister Gordon Brown want to limit excessive bonus payments to Bank Directors or to traders, or alternatively tax abusive profits with "windfall taxes".

Politicians are just nibbling at the problem without identifying the root cause of the current problems. The simple fact is that International Banking Groups are too big !!! They cannot be conveniently controled by the Central Bank of a Sovereign State in which they operate. These international banks are in fact often Inter-Continental, which simply multiplies their independence with respect to the Sovereign States in which they operate !!! They operate in their own world !!!

To solve this problem, rules concerning the size of banks must be adopted world-wide. It would seem that what is required is a new type of bank, to be simple, The National Bank, which has no foreign subsidiaries, is quoted on the national stock exchange and has no foreign shareholders !!! Each country could and would probably have several such "National Banks", all quoted on the national stock exchange.

Only "National" banks should have access to low interest "Tap" loans and credits from their Central Bank. Private Banks and International Banks must be excluded !!! This could permit and ensure that countries, governments and their central banks recover the control of their money markets.

It is quite clear that to attain this objective would require a great number of share transactions. That is the cost of undoing monopolistic positions. Big Multinational, Inter-Continental, Banks are just too big to handle as President Obama quite rightly said !!! They must be reduced in size and importance. They have usurped the role of governments and have created the problem the world is facing now and will continue to face in the future if nothing is done.

This is not the time or the place to enter into the detail of additional changes that will be required. If the foregoing or a similar basic structural "National Bank" system is adopted, or not adopted, other changes will have to be considered anyway. The following subjects will necessarily need to be considered;

- should banks not respect liquidity ratios ? Speculative banks seem to ignore old rules and favour modern ratios that tend not to recognise honestly the impact of the possible consequences of speculative situations !!!

- footnotes to balance sheets should be clear and explicit. Should Bankers not supply money values of current "off balance sheet" situations ?

- should banks be allowed to hide behind "secrecy conventions" ? Should Bankers' secrecy rights not be defined by legislation ?

- should the same rules and standards not be applied by all banks in their published accounts and interim reports ?

- should the official auditors of National Banks not be rotated every two or three years in order to ensure that the spirit of basic reporting standards is observed by all banks in a given country ?

A lot of work needs to be done before one can realistically start talking about controlling bonus payments, controlling hedge funds, tax havens or other such things.

To get big profits, risks are taken; where there are big profits, there is greed !!! That is why legislation is urgently needed !!! And there are many other reasons as everyone knows full well !!!

Monday, 8 February 2010


Gordon Brown admits to a secret pact with Tony Blair. Alastair Campbell, a former Blair aide but now a Brown advisor, was close to tears on T V about his involvement, but says that Tony Blair is a compassionate man and will remember the deaths of soldiers in Iraq.

The public will form their own opinions about the smiling Mr Blair, the multimillionaire with a good job, but who still needs taxpayers' help to police his properties in Britain !!!

What appears even more stunning is the simple fact that Labour politicians are not expressing or publishing any comments about the forthcoming election, which at the latest must take place early May 2010.

There is a kind of "cat and mouse" atmosphere !!! There seem to be a lot of people waiting in the wings, or the shadows, with daggers hidden, waiting for others to make the first move, the first blunder !!! It is true the Chilcot Inquiry awaits the testimony of Gordon Brown, this in itself being, perhaps, the reason for these hesitations.

Could a "Lord" Mandelson be coveting an important job in the "Commons" ? For him, as for others, it is a question of timing. Should one jump before or after the General Election ? Most candidates will only ever get this one chance !!! Such personal considerations are much more important than risking blunders in an election campaign !!!

David Cameron and everyone in the Shadow Cabinet must sharpen their knives now !!! The enemy must be destroyed when he is weak !!! If the Conservatives dither now, this will be seized on by the Socialists later.

The Socialists will promise everything a voter wants to hear !!! Blair set the example. What will the Conservatives promise ?

Friday, 5 February 2010


There are MP's in the "Expenses Scandle" who consider themselves above the law !!! This is simply because the expenses of politicians are governed by the in-house rules of the Commons. Sobeit !!!

Many MP's have realised that they have been lax and have admitted mistakes, and they have reimbursed controversial expense claims.

There are, however, certain MP's identified by Sir Thomas Clegg who maintain stubbornly that they contest the amounts claimed !!! Their stubborness in fact brings into question the integrity of Sir Thomas Clegg.

The context is that these are House of Commons rules and that Sir Thomas Clegg cannot accuse MP's of theft, nor punish them, if they refuse to repay claims of unjustified expenses. These MP's, whether they are from the right, the left or the centre of the political spectrum, must be stopped in their tracts.

In fact, criminals are not allowed to present themselves for election to Parliament !!! The theory is that they do not enshrine the qualities needed to represent the electorate !!!

Should Gordon Brown not fast-track in-house rules, and legal rules as well, that would prevent these greedy MP's from presenting themselves for any election for a given period ? A period of seven years would give these MP's time to think things over !!!

Thursday, 4 February 2010


When he spoke recently, President Obama hit the nail right on the head !!! Banks are too big !!! That in itself is an understatement. Banks are in fact "much too big" !!!

The international size of multinational Banks is such that they are bigger than the economies of many, if not most, smaller countries ! The very fact that they are multinational means that they can limit the effects of any unwanted local legislation in even bigger countries. In this sense they are above the law.

This is because Banks, by their international size and organisation have become monoplies. Is not the objective of monopolies in any area to avoid competition and in this way to ensure profits and outside interference ?

What is needed is an International Conference, properly prepared, not like the Copenhagen Conference on Climate Change where everyone was present but no one knew what had to be decided !!!

The ultimate conference of politicians from major countries and the preparatory meetings, should exclude the participation of anyone on the payroll of a bank !!! Bankers have already gone further than they should ever have been allowed to go !!!

Wednesday, 3 February 2010


Former Minister Clare Short admits, but she is like many others including Gordon Brown and the whole of the electorate, to having been misled by Tony Blair !!!

Alas this on-going saga has not yet stopped !!!

The reality of the situation has always been that Tony Blair does not lie !!! Never !!! His trick is that whenever he talks he only tells half the truth, the part that suits his case !!! That, together with his smile, has always been his style !!!

It is afterwards that his listeners realise, like Clare Short, that they have been completely "conned" !!!

Monday, 1 February 2010


"Celui là, il a une tronche pas très catholique". A propos de cette remarque de Georges Frèche sur Laurent Fabius, chacun y va de son commentaire indigné. Propos antisémite ou pas?

Cette vieille expression française est pourtant bien connue. N'est "pas très catholique" ce qui n'est pas conforme à la règle, à la morale, ce qui est douteux. Savez vous qu'aux Etats-Unis, l'expression se traduit par "not kosher" (pas casher) ? Les chrétiens des Etats-Unis se sentent ils insultés?

Faudra-t-il bientôt, au nom du "politiquement correct" bannir de notre langage de vieilles expressions telles que "filer à l'anglaise", "avare comme un écossais", "saoul comme un polonais", "arriver comme les carabiniers", "être la tête de turc"... ?


David Cameron says burglars leave their human rights outside once they break into properties !!! He is dead right !!!

Alas, Burglars are but a small part of this problem !!! What about Muggers and Rapists and Murderers and Terrorists and Violent Criminals in general ? Do they retain the right to plead they have Human Rights protection ?

Yes, they do have the right to a fair trial !!! They do have the right to a lawyer and to plead. But that is the limit of their Human Rights !!!

When we talk about Human Rights in general this normally concerns underdeveloped, emerging third-world countries !!! It does not, in this context, normally concern developed western countries.

In the United Kingdom there is however, an additional brake or impediment, which prevents the application of normal justice; it is the simple fact that the lack of prison space in Britain does not permit the incarceration or punishment of criminals as the law prescribes !!!

This simple fact means that the spirit of the law is not at present applied. This is all part of the malaise in Britain today. This, in fact, is all part of what a future Conservative Government will have to contend with and correct.

Friday, 29 January 2010


Every day one reads in the newspapers that different sections of society are turning to drink. Whether it is under age schoolchildren, teenagers, unmarried youngsters, young parents even, middle-class people, working class people, executives both young and older, retired people, whether it is a woman or a man, every section of society seems to be drinking too much !!!

All the articles express astonishment at this situation, but none tries to understand why this is happening. Why are all these sections of society drinking too much ? People used to go down to the pub for a drink and a social chat with other regulars from the neighbourhood. Now, it would seem, people go out anywhere to get stoned.

So why do people want to get stoned with drink ? Finding the right single word is not easy, but it has to do with "unhappiness", "insecurity" and "hopelessness". People can see little that will make them happy in the near future.

What do people in fact want ? One sure answer is the security of a job. They want a job which will make them ambitious, which drives them when they become part of a larger project. In this way they will become proud of whatever they are doing.

People want to be occupied, not to be obliged to live off handouts from the state or elsewhere. They do not want jobs which are below their capability. They do not want to do just anything just to earn a few bob or pocket money.

So what is so wrong with Britain at present ? I will hazard just a few guesses but you may well have identified others which are more important !!!

1) Everyone gets good marks in the school leaving exams. In fact everyone is considered equally as capable as everyone else. Is this right ?

2) Apprenticeships are no longer valued as much as in former times. Is this a good thing ?

3) Too many unsuitable students are pushed into universities, and afterwards there are too many "drop outs" after the first year when they do not make the grade. Is this right ?

4) There is no national service now but this used to be a good way of forming the right attitudes of youngsters.

5) From statistics it appears that the State now employs more people than private industry but does the State create and run new companies and develope new industries ?

There are many other things which could be added to the above list of points but what is the underlying message ? The message is that people want to work and to achieve their personal objectives at whatever level they are. They would prefer to work rather than to be supported with social handouts. They want to be active members of society.

Introducing new stealth taxes, increasing taxes in general to fund the redistribution of wealth does not galvanise potential businessmen. Going into business is about undertaking risks, but taxing profits or exceptional earnings kills initiative. That is why the best brains now prefer to live and work elsewhere than in Britain.

The foregoing points tend to explain partly why Britons are driven to drink, but you the reader will certainly have other examples which could complete the picture.

Thursday, 28 January 2010


This important occasion in parliamentary life really is becoming more like a Punch & Judy show. Sometimes you see Gordon, sometimes you see Harriet, his lady-in waiting and if both are too busy on more important matters, there is always another Jack in the box ready to cover any absence !!!

This is "As You Like It" as the Bard would have said, where Gordon plays the role of the unwilling schoolboy winding his weary way to the Commons. This could be true if Gordon did not play truant so often !!!

Alas, this serious Parliamentary occasion should not be glibly treated as a sideshow. This occasion has been created to give the Opposition the chance to question the Prime Minister on current events which would not normally be debated in Parliament. Gordon Brown should normally be available and present each week !!!

It seems to me that basically the problem of the Prime Minister's absence from the weekly "Prime Minister's Question Time" debate stems from the timing of this debate.

Would it not be better to reschedule the debate for the Monday morning at 11am instead of on Wednesday as at present ?

This would enable Gordon Brown to work on his files on Saturday and Sunday, and then leak his best ideas to the Cabinet and the Press on the Monday morning before "Prime Minister's Question Time " at 11am to midday. He could then grab some sandwiches and be off on his next trip.

The advantage is quite clear. It would leave him four and a half days each week to travel without interruption instead of twice two days as at present.

Additionally, since all MPs now have a first or second home near Parliament, none should have a problem of clocking-on before 11am on Monday mornings to assist in the debate.

Wednesday, 27 January 2010


Gordon Brown spends taxpayer's money left, right and centre with a great deal of generosity, yet now refuses British heart patients a new heart drug which costs two pounds a day !!!

This new drug, Dronedarone, which is widely available in Europe, could replace many current drugs on the market. It could avoid strokes and heart attacks which are costly for the Health Service.

Making this drug available for 100 000 heart patients would cost about 73 million pounds per year. If one deducts the cost of less efficient drugs prescribed at present and which would not be prescribed in the future, and of course, lower hospitalization costs for heart patients, it makes one wonder why the authorities in Britain, and the Government in particular, will not accept the cost of this new drug !!! This new drug could even result in cost efficiency !!!

Gordon Brown knows that Haiti has problems, but he should realize that Britain also has big, big problems !!!

Monday, 25 January 2010


To introduce new Football Rules for the 2010 World Cup at this late stage would be a mistake and unacceptable. Players need time to adapt to changes, and football officials also. One should not change the rules of any sports competition once it has started.

Sepp Blatter is prudent and hesitant. He should be admired. However, there is a very big distinction between the rules of playing football, which should not change, and the means used to ensure that footballers who cheat when the referee is unsighted, are caught and if necessary, punished.

Nothing in the FIFA regulations precludes the use of modern technology like televisual aids. These aids already exist. They can be seen daily on television to highlight incidents in all walks of life, not only in football, rugby, tennis, etc, etc,...

It is not only when something happens in front of the goal that it would be helpful to have a video, they would also be helpful when there are incidents behind the referee's back, or when the referee is completely unsighted.

It is a pity that Sepp Blatter thinks it is too late to implement this innovation for the 2010 World Cup !!! In spite of this, could he not surprise worldwide fans by announcing that videos will, for the first time, be used in the 2010 World Cup, but only for the Final ?

Thursday, 21 January 2010


Regularly football fans are obliged to watch matches where the spirit of the game is not observed. Obstruction, tackling from behind, barging without any intention of playing the ball, are a few examples but referees do not punish the culprits enough.

There are, however, two situations which in my opinion merit a fundamental but serious review by FIFA:

a) Body-checking by a player with the sole intention of stopping another player from touching the ball, when the player obviously has no intention at all of touching the ball himself. A revision of the rules that referees should apply appears to be very necessary.

b) Replacing players during the last few minutes of a game when they are not injured, just to "gain time" or just to "interrupt" the intensity of a game right at the end, is an abuse of the spirit of the game. Would it not be better and more in the spirit of the game if no replacements of players were to be permitted during the last ten minutes of a game ?

FIFA and Sepp Blatter, as well as UEFA and MIchel Platini, must lead the way to ensure that this beautiful game does not turn ugly and that its rules for referees are adequate.

Wednesday, 20 January 2010


FIFA have at last published their private findings into the problem of "The Hand of Henry". Quite rightly they reported that the current rules of FIFA could not reverse the decision of the referee. Of course, any other decision would have opened the doors to an enquiry into the "Hand of God " incident a few decades ago !!!

This decision simply highlights that FIFA rules, however FIFA is not perfect by a long chalk !!! This blog has clearly underlined before that FIFA has much to learn from the Rugby Union Organisations about introducing modern television techniques to help referees when they are unsighted at key moments.

Ardent spectators, wherever they are, want to be convinced that the ultimate decision is just !!! In fact they want to be part of the decision, to be able to discuss it afterwards. This is what enthuses spectatores. They do not want unclear laws, unconvincing decisions, with no real appeal possible !!!

Sepp Blatter, the President of FIFA, has dithered a long time, but he has a choice to make !!! Will he introduce modern televisual techniques in time for the 2010 World Cup ? Or will he opt for the soft approach and plead that it is too late ?

If Sepp Blatter does not perform in time his Epitaph will be: "Alas, Frightened of Modern Technology" Football will seek a new President, with a great deal of urgency and no regrets !!!

Tuesday, 12 January 2010


Monsieur Sarkozy, à l'époque Ministre de l'Intérieur, a fermé le camp à Sangatte en 2002. Ce camp hebergeait les immigrants non Européens, qui souhaitaient traverser clandestinement La Manche pour entrer illegalement en Angleterre et s'y installer.

La tentative, bien louable, a echoué. Les immigrants illégaux, toujours soutenus par les "passeurs", se sont ensuite petit à petit installés dans de nombreux endroits autour de Calais. Ils ont formé ce que l'on a appellé "La Jungle".

Monsieur Eric Besson, Ministre de l'Immigration en France, avait comme charge de fermer "Le Jungle". L'ayant fait, il s'est felicité encore trés recemment, que le probléme qu'on appelle "La Jungle", était résolu. Bravo !!!

Ce que Monsieur Besson ne veut pas admettre c'est qu'il y a maintenant des "Squats" connus qui remplacent "La Jungle" !!! La présence des passeurs est également connue. Il est tout à fait logique de conclure que le nombre des "Squats" va augmenter une fois que les passeurs se seront réorganisés.

Ce problème ne concerne pas uniquement La France, Calais et L'Angleterre. Monsieur Besson ne doit pas prétendre pouvoir régler ce problème tout seul. C'est le problème de L'Union Européenne.

Les frontières de notre Europe ne sont pas fermées d'une maniére étanche !!! Les étrangers qui viennent dans L'Union Européenne illégalement, devraient être refoulés à leur point d'entrée, mais ne le sont pas. D'oû la situation à Calais et sûrement ailleurs aussi.

L'Union Européenne ne semble pas vouloir s'occuper de ce problème. De ce fait Il est impératif que les Chefs d'Etats de L'Union se reunissent et s'expriment. Si on n'agit pas, le destin de l'Europe ne sera plus entre nos mains.