Darlings tax dodge

This is the economics of the mad house.

First the Chancellor says that under, what effectively is a mini budget, the people will now receive benefit to make up for the tax loss. No one has said yet what the administrative cost to the country of taking the money and giving it back to people is. Does strike me as rather ludicrous.

But to compound it, the Chancellor says he will borrow money to pay for what is in effect the weekly shopping bill. Given he is committing to do this year on year, that is a lot of borrowing to pay for the weekly bills. I always though you only borrowed when you were investing in something tangible.

Clearly under Labours new economics, not so.

Sleepwalking into the European Nightmare

The EU treaty is "substantially equivalent" to the EU Constitution thrown out by Dutch and French voters in 2005, UK MPs have said.

The committee criticised the "essentially secret" drafting of the document, which is due to be signed by EU heads of government in Portugal after an Intergovernmental Committee (IGC) later this month (October 07). Indeed, their report on the European Reform Treaty questions, perhaps even undermines, just about all the government’s main claims for that controversial text.

At any rate, it’s rare for a Labour-dominated committee (nine out of 16 members) to produce a report quite so unhelpful to the government.

The headline is that the MPs of the European Scrutiny Committee find that the European Treaty is "substantially equivalent" to the constitution.

They say they understand why the government wants to distance itself from the old constitution but add, "We would wish to explore the reality and significance," of this approach, adding that it could be "misleading". They say it is up to the government to prove that the new treaty is "significantly different" from the old constitution, adding that despite the British opt-outs "we are not convinced". They demand that the government spells out what battles it has won to make the treaty so different for the UK.

It doesn’t stop there. They question the worth of Britain’s opt-outs and clarifications. They say they are “concerned” that the treaty will mean changes that will increase the EU’s powers over national law and so national governments. They want our government to state what safeguards it has against this.

They then go on to be "concerned" that European courts will gain greater rights over UK law. They pick two examples and suggest that Britain might face tougher laws on the length of the working week and on discrimination (they seem to assume that this would be a bad thing) and want “concrete evidence” that this won’t happen

All this is quite remarkable in a week when the Prime Minister is trying to regain some sort of credibility. It seems that New Labour will happily spin an election promise when it suits them; they break it when it suits them.

If a cross party parliamentary committee says it’s the same, does this mean Brown can’t see the truth? Quite possibly.

In his Statement on Iraq in the Commons earlier this week Brown seemed to be assuming the mantle of Gladstone. An amazing thought. But is the Prime Minister aware that it was said of Mr. Gladstone that he could convince most people of most things and himself of almost anything? It seems Brown can convince himself that the EU constitution is not a Constitution when any sane person says it is virtually the same document. Don’t believe me?

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/europe/6914468.stm It’s interesting to note both the people in this link are in virtual agreement as to what will happen if the treaty is signed. They just take different stances as to whether it’s good for the UK. Me? Sorry, the Constitution is not for me.

When the people of Europe realise what their leaders have done it will all end in tears. Or war.

One rule for you, one rule for me

It seems that you can accuse others of hate crimes these days but happily go about them yourself. You may not speak ill of anyone who may be of a different religious, sexual, political or any other persuasion. But when it comes to race, well, the USA administration clearly puts that in another category all together.

So it was perhaps no surprise what some British MPs visiting the Pentagon to discuss America's stance on Iran and Iraq told they heard one of the USA’s most powerful women say. Debra Cagan, Deputy Assistant Secretary for Coalition Affairs to Defence Secretary Robert Gates told the group: "I hate all Iranians."

The six MPs were taken aback by the hard-line approach of the Pentagon and in particular Ms Cagan, one of Mr Bush's foreign policy advisers.

Tory Stuart Graham, who was on the ten-day trip, would not discuss Ms Cagan but said: "It was very sobering to hear from the horse's mouth how the US sees the situation."

Of course the Pentagon subsequently denied Ms Cagan said she "hated" Iranians.

http://video.google.co.uk/videoplay?docid=554201962695917482&q=rageh+in+iran gives a balanced view Ms Cagan should have a look at.

So, again its one rule for you, one rule for me.

Who unlocks the doors

I was sitting there packing up my papers after a school board meeting. Head teacher, parents, representatives of the local community like me, we all had enjoyed an evening learning of the successes of the school.

As we discussed the date of our next meeting it became clear that the Head teacher was trying to fit us around a date when others were also going to be in the school building. It didn’t really suit many of our diaries but we acquiesced.

But on enquiring more why such was a preferred date our Head told us that it would save over-time costs for the Janitor. Why, I enquired, did the Janitor have to be there, at taxpayer’s expense, to unlock one school door and then wait for two hours to lock it again when the Head and six parents would be the only ones in the school? Could the Head teacher not open and close the school for us? Apparently not. Her years of training clearly have not trained her for such a task.

I multiply that by the factor 12 for a meeting a month of our Board. And multiply that by the number of schools in Scotland. You come up with a figure that, while not enormous, is certainly enough to employ a lot more teachers. I reckon at least 3 more in my own local authority area.
Just another area of inefficient waste that Labour is unwilling or unable to tackle. So why are we allowing it to happen?

Answers and angry comments on a post card to your local Councillor.

A world away

Malta is a lovely country. Or State as we now have to call it now it’s joined the EU. Funny how names change without you really noticing. I think we all know what a State is. The USA has 50 of them I believe. We all know what a State is not. A country. So its goodbye Malta, the independent country that fought so valiantly in the 2nd World War.

I’ve just been there. One of the most amazing things is the low level of crime and disorder. Apart from the areas they have specially set aside for people from the UK where they go and do all the things they think will amuse the local population. Not realising they are being looked at with scorn and pity. For the islands that make up Malta don’t know crime the way we do. A car break in was reported in banner headlines in the Malta Times.

So why are they so crime free? A few observations. Families eat together. On the balcony, the street. Even the beach is covered in the dusk with extended families all enjoying time together. Almost every night. Now, I know local climatic conditions make that possible. Their TV out-put doesn’t inspire staying to watch it either. But is there some secret there. Here, in the UK, it’s all TV dinners in front of mega plasma screens with food bought out the supermarket, probably processed.

One of the fears of the Maltese I talked to is that many of the bad traits that exist in Europe will steadily creep into Malta. Open borders and single currency may have their benefits. But they bring a whole new set of problems. They think they are seeing the first signs of it already. Hopefully joining the EC will not be the beginning of the end for a little bit of this world that lives on common sense, a strong sense of family ties and values and has little crime to write home about.

Red phone box

Earlier this year while on holiday in Cornwall I took a trip to Boscastle. Which brings me to question one. Name Boscastle ring any bells? Ah yes the place that was nearly washed away in floods a few years back. I remember the coverage. Wall to wall. Screen to screen. Paper to paper.

Now, question two. What famous telephone box nearly got washed away in a mud slide caused by torrential rain? If you were listening to the news on BBC Radio Four or indeed viewing it on any of the news outlets south of the border you probably haven’t a clue what I’m on about. Pennan is a beautiful little village up on the north east coast of Scotland. The telephone box was the one in the wonderful film “Local Hero”. Both nearly ended up in the sea after the afore mentioned mud slide.

It also happens to be 600 miles from London. Which is probably why no one south of the border knows about it. Which is a shame. Because if they are operating in the spirit of impartiality, we won’t be getting the wall to wall coverage we recently had again of flooding in parts of England next time they happen. Sad that.

Give us this day our daily bread

I’m not sure if it is one of these great urban myths or not, but the story of the school child when asked where milk comes from answers with out hesitation, Tesco, is well known. Well, technically they were correct of course. Or you could have said Asda, Co-op, your local corner shop or where ever. But it does belie a certain lack of understanding as to where our food comes from.

This ignorance was highlighted during this weekend when the dreaded foot and mouth disease reared its ugly head again.

One person that was described as an economic expert noted that farming in the UK accounted for less than 5% of GDP and therefore as they were not a dominant player in the over all scheme of things, who cared if a bunch of them went out of business.

In a way, this expert was as devoid of intellectual understanding as the child.

Sitting at breakfast, corn flakes with milk, toast, butter and jam. Then lunch, gammon steaks, potatoes, vegetables. Then supper. Light snack of cold cooked meats and cheese.

Clothes, wool jacket and trousers, leather shoes. And the list goes on. There are very few essentials in life that do not come from agriculture.

So I would like that expert to go away and do without any agricultural produce for just one day. I suspect even after 24 hours he would realise what 2/3 of the world already know. With out agriculture you starve. They may be only 5% of GDP. But they are 100% necessary for our survival.

Boris for Mayor. Or Ken. Who cares!!!

It looks like it may actually be an election that makes us laugh, smile, cry or cheer. The race for The Mayoral seat in London has begin, all be it as a trailer for the real thing. Opinion polls, these wonderfully reliable gauges of public opinion actually had Boris ahead in one. How exciting is that! A blip? A trend? Who knows. In a sense, who cares because ultimately only one vote will count. What we lovingly call democracy will have its way and one candidate will rise above the rest to be duly elected. Democracy, the suppressing of the minority by the majority. Oh how cynical of me.

But not half as cynical as Dawn Butler and Diane Abbott, Labour MPs for Brent South and Hackney North respectively. They already have played the “race” card. And all because Boris, in his inimitable fashion, used some rather quaint phrases. By no stretch of the imagination could they be called racist phrases. That is unless you see racism in every corner. (Just don’t ask for black tea!)

I recall not so long ago sitting on a Government committee on ethnic businesses and the need to integrate them into the “main stream”. On the evidence presented to us, one of the key issues for the particular community we were looking at was the lack of ability to speak English by a fair number of the business owners.

Now, if you are like me, you seek solutions to problems. The logical solution to me was to get the Home Office to fund a pilot programme to give intensive support to these businesses in the form of English language courses, all paid for by us the tax payer. It would at one stroke have given the poor English speakers an open door to the whole UK economy.

Sensible? Oh no it wasn’t! One chap nearly jumped over the table at me and shouted in my face that I was “a racist”! “They”, (he was referring to the largely European business community that existed in that particular part of town), “have to come to us and understand us”. Incidentally, it was at that series of meetings that I first realised the extent of the “race” industry. On many fronts, it wasn’t about getting equality. It was about getting separate development. Openly talked about were different accounting systems, different legal systems for businesses, different education systems for the children, different banking laws. I think in South Africa they called that apartheid. And there was me thinking that the UK was becoming a melting pot for all cultures and creeds. It was revealed to be far from it and getting further from it as the years go by. What different worlds we lived in.

So Butler and Abbot may, like my friend on the committee who introduced his own rather objectionable defination of what racisim is, be in danger of themselves introducing racism in to the debate by effectively saying that they are the judges of what language is racist and what is not.

Frankly, I think the people of London are too sensible to listen to such strident nonsense from these two.

1+1 = 3

With the UK Budget just around the corner, it’s good to remind ourselves of the kind logic that is used in preparing the nations finances by New Labour.

In his pre-budget statement at the end of last year, Gordon Brown, UK Chancellor of the Exchequer, announced his plan to double the duty on flights from 1st February 2007– even if you bought your ticket months before.

Aware no doubt of the dubious legality of such a move, one that is being challenged in the courts, the government tried to dampen any opposition by describing the duty as a tax on airlines, not passengers.

Right, I get it. Tax the Airlines and the passengers don’t suffer. So, where does the money come from to pay for the taxation? The profits from the airlines. Where do the airline profits come from? Er, passenger revenues.

It is good to know that we have a man in charge of the UK’s finances, the man who wants to be prime minister, who is so in tune with the realties of the real world.

Staying nuclear with Trident

The votes are cast in the lobbies at the Palace of Westminster. New Labour, the party once implacably opposed to anything nuclear, has had its way with the people of the United Kingdom. Not so much led them astray. More take them behind the bike shed, done its worst with the people and told them that they should enjoy it 'cause it’s good for them.

So much for Blair going out as a world statesman. More like a discredited wolf in sheep’s clothing. The rhetoric, the charm, the vacuous words. And no more so that on nuclear weapons. From a point of principle when a member of CND, to a point of acquiescence to USA policy when in government. So against them when we faced the very real and present threat and might of the former Soviet Union: so in favour of them when we face the might of, er, North Korea.

When you think about it, the last days of Bush and Blair could have been a triumph for world peace. They have enough conventional weapons to blow up the planet between them. So why not quietly say to every other country that has nuclear weapons or aspiration to have them, “we are getting rid of our weapons of indiscriminate mass destruction and you have till the end of my presidency to get rid of yours or we will bomb your weapons and associated sites to bits with our conventional weaponry.” Nobel peace prize for ridding the world of nuclear weapons a cert! What a legacy that would be to cherish. Think the Bush Blair Axis will do it?

Stupid children?

So literacy and numeracy hit squads are on the loose in Glasgow.

But why, after 8 years of a Labour Government, enough time for children entering primary to be educated by the time the reach secondary school, are primary results still so appalling.

Well, let’s start of with what it is not the problem. It is not that “poor” children are stupid. That is an insult perpetrated daily in the media that people from poor back grounds will naturally do less well at school. Poor results are always talked about in terms of being from a deprived area. But are not all children are equal at birth?

So, if it’s not the fact they are poor and therefore inherently stupid, is it because of poor facilities? Er, no. Take Glasgow with some of the most modern primary schools in Scotland, and the poorest results according to the results published four weeks ago week. So it’s not the infrastructure.

What about the teachers? Well, given you can only teach if you qualify, and given, again in Glasgow that most of the teachers come from only two excellent academic institutions, I think we can safely say that teachers are not to blame. Indeed, they work harder and under more stress than I guess many of us ever will.

So everything inside the school gates is as it should be. So the problem must be out with the gates. And that can only mean one place. The home.

So let’s stop blaming children, teachers, poverty or facilities. The real problem is the total lack of involvement in the lives and education of children by their parents or guardians. And that is the problem Labour and others of their ilk will not or are too scared to tackle.

The Shires vs West Lothian Question

A few weeks ago in The Telegraph, Simon Heffer argued a good case in respect of the West Lothian Question. But there is one slight flaw in Simmon Heffers comments on the West Lothian Question and that is he only tackles half the problem. If he wants a truly representative settlement, then he needs to look wider.

For example, in the UK Cabinet, we have around the table all the Great Offices of state which are UK wide. And that is entirely correct.

But we also have England only offices such as Health and Education to name but two who sit at the UK table. Are we not all heartily sick of hearing Ruth Kelly being called the Education Secretary. She's not. She is the Education Secretary for England.

So as well as banning Scots voting on English issues, what we should do is not have these England only offices at the Cabinet table otherwise, quite rightly, Scots will ask why they are at UK cabinet given they do not represent the UK.

Instead, bring in an English Secretary of State to whom all these offices would report.

We had it that way in Scotland until Devolution. The whole of Scotland's interests were represented at Cabinet level by one person. And it worked. It was truly joined up government. And it saved a fortune in costs.

If it was good enough for us Scots for 100s of years, then it’s good enough for England now. That would bring a really fair settlement.

So a fair settlement with English MPs only on English issues and a Secretary of State for England who can sit along side other Secretaries of State for Scotland NI and Wales would be the perfect solution to the West Lothian Question

Nine things Councils don't want you to know about 'speed humps'

Have you noticed the new speed humps that have been appearing across the country? Small red square pyramid ones. Big Red ones stretching across a road. Massive big black ones. Perhaps the most aggressive ones I have come across are on Maxwell Avenue in Bearsden, near Glasgow. Try them. Just don’t sue me for the damage it may cause.

But I have to ask the question, why are they being installed? “To slow the traffic” I hear you say.

But do they work? And what are the consequences of installing them beyond the slowing of traffic.

On 3 July 2002 the UK Parliament debated them. Many voices were raised in concerns about them. But what came of that? Nothing.

So, let us take a look at them. Why are they so controversial?

The first point is, depending upon the vehicle and the hump design, going over a hump at a higher speed may cause less discomfort than a lower speed. Strange but true. This point was amazingly demonstrated by Sergeant Mike Peck, a Police officer from Humberside, who boasted that his new Subaru Impreza patrol car could 'skim' speed humps at 70 mph! And it did! So much for slowing traffic.

A second point is on the environmental impact. Accelerating after negotiating a hump generates more pollution than if the hump hadn't been there. And as humps are invariably near children, think of all the nice fumes they are enjoying. Research carried out in Austria on a mile long stretch of road with six humps and a 40kph speed limit showed that cars negotiating the humps emitted 10 times more nitrogen oxide, 3 times more poisonous carbon monoxide, and 25% more carbon dioxide, than vehicles maintaining a constant speed. And fuel consumption rose from 7.9 litres to nearly 10 litres per 100 km. And the UKs Transport Research Laboratory has conducted emissions tests on roads with a 75 metre hump spacing and found CO emissions increased by 70–80%, Hydro-carbons by 70–100%, and CO2 by 50–60%. . I didn’t know that! Did you? So have the Councils carried out an environmental audit?

Point three is noise. Speed humps actually increase noise levels. Have you heard a milk float in a residential areas at 5 o'clock in the morning going over bumps? And vehicles accelerating after a hump generate more noise than had they been travelling at a constant speed. Such is the impact of the noise generated by bumps that the issue is being tackled by the Noise Abatement Society

Fourthly, have you noticed how your car jolts as it goes over, even at a slow speed? Well, repeatedly traversing humps causes long-term damage to vehicle components, especially the suspension. This in turn has serious implications for safety and stopping distances. Shock absorbers are key in ensuring vehicles are able to stop effectively and safely - perhaps if a child ran in front of a car. And if you live in an area with humps, or use roads that are “humped”, do you notice how more frequently you are visiting HiQ or KwikFit? Speed humps are nothing more than inverted potholes. Whilst Councils readily admit that potholes are dangerous and cause damage to vehicles, they intentionally install speed humps which are just as dangerous, and then try to deny that they cause damage. I wonder if Councils knows that Fire Engines fitted with a water tank containing up to 2,250 litres may suffer structural damage so great that it puts the appliance off the road, and results in a massive repair bill? And someone always has to pay in the end. In Hastings in November 2002, taxi fares were increased by 10p during the day and 20p at night to pay for the increased cost of maintenance due to damage caused by traversing speed humps up to 200 times per day. In 2004, the Metropolitan Police told the London Assembly that 34 of its vehicles had been damaged by speed bumps in a three month period. Who paid the cost? Us, the taxpayer!

A fifth point is the impact of vehicles traversing a speed hump. It sends shock waves through the ground. And depending upon the nature of the soil, the proximity and construction of buildings, the weight of vehicles, and the frequency of traffic, these shock waves may cause structural damage to nearby properties. If you don't believe that, read the official UK regulations stating where humps can be installed - they specifically exclude anywhere within 25m of bridges, subways, or tunnels. But not your house.

Sixthly, take care at night on roads with bumps because they cause headlight beams to rise. Oncoming traffic may be dazzled. And if you live on a road with them I bet you are fed up with the headlights dancing though your curtains.

Are you sitting comfortably? Well, point seven is that humps cause unnecessary discomfort to drivers and passengers. It’s a real pain in the backside! Bus drivers operating Gatwick Airport's Shuttle Service are being signed off sick because they are having to drive over 1600 humps per day. And in November 2003, bus drivers in Sheffield forced the council to remove speed humps after threatening to withdraw several bus services, and take legal action, because the frequent jolt from the humps was causing back pains. And if you are disabled, tough! Humps discriminate against the severely disabled, elderly frail people, and those with serious back or neck problems.

And if you think that once you leave behind your earthly coil you are freed from all this, sorry. Point eight is that for funeral cortèges, speed humps cause distress to mourners. Trying to drive a funeral vehicle conveying a coffin over a speed hump with any degree of dignity is simply impossible.

Point nine. I leave the most important point to last. The most serious of all is the delay which humps enforce on emergency vehicles.
Ambulances rushing an injured patient to hospital may have to slow to a ridiculously low speed to negotiate a hump; in cases of severe injury they may have to find an alternative route to avoid the hump altogether.
Karen Higginson of Avon Ambulance Service; reported in the Bath Chronicle in 2004 that "We already know from the London Ambulance Service that so-called 'traffic calming' causes over 500 deaths a year in London alone, and now the police have confirmed it affects their response times too. The evidence is clear — road humps are a menace which are endangering Londoners." If that doesn’t make you sit up and take notice, how about this from Brian Coleman, of the London Assembly. In 2003 he stated: "For every life saved through traffic calming, more are lost because of ambulance delays." It was a point echoed by Sigurd Reinton, Chairman, London Ambulance Service who noted in January 2003 that "They affect our attendance times. Each ramp delays our attendance by ten seconds. In fires, minutes can cost lives."
Talking of fires, you won’t be surprise to find that the Fire Brigade are not too keen either. Divisional Officer Dean Johns, London Fire Brigade; noted in October 2002. "We have certain standards to meet and we have to have vehicles at the scene of a Category A emergency within eight minutes. That's a life-or-death situation like a heart attack. Before road humps came in we used to be able to get from the station to the scene within the required time, but now it can take up to ten minutes."
So my advice is, don’t have a fire if there are speed bumps between you and the Fire Station.
Or the Ambulance Station. For according to Geoff Farnworth, divisional officer, North Yorkshire Ambulance Service; "Speed humps do slow our responses very much. These humps slow our vehicles to an absolute crawl, virtually having to come to a complete stop on some of them to avoid damaging our expensive vehicles. ... it would truly help our service to the citizens if we can get the truth out."

So, what benefits do speed bumps offer us in our towns and villages? They slow the traffic. Well, yes. But at what cost in life, in damage to our vehicles, in adding to the emission of noxious gassed from cars.

And know what? Most bizarrely, there is virtually no evidence speed humps have an impact on overall accident rates.

Surely our Councillors are not keeping the true facts of speed bumps from us?
So, how about instead we call for road safety initiatives to concentrate on better training that would make drivers realise the need to drive slowly in residential streets, and better police enforcement that would target those who do not act responsibly.
Then we all would be happy. And safe!

Olympic spirit

It has been reported that there is to be a “Muslim” quarter at the London Olympics.

Can we also expect quarters for Atheists, Jews, Hindus, Sikhs, Christians and every other religion that is in attendance?

I also assume these facilities will all be of equal size and expenditure in relation to the number of athletes of other faiths attending. If not, the organisers are in danger of being taken to the courts for discrimination.

And there was me thinking the Olympic ideal was for the games to be a melting pot of all cultures and creeds.

Iraq

From a different angle

It may be Christmas here in the UK, the time for the larger of the Christian calendar celebrations. But in Iraq, Christmas is not the Big One. For Iraq's 800,000 strong Christian population, Easter is the biggest festival of the year. They call it 'the Major Feast' (Christmas is 'the Minor Feast') and celebrate it with a special Passion play in churches across the country that is unique to Iraqi Christians.

It's one of the oldest Christian communities in the world having been already well established by the time of the first major schism in 431 A.D, and has survived the coming of Islam, the sacking of Genghis Khan and the Mongol hordes, and the vicissitudes of life in modern Iraq.

One monastery dates back to 363 A.D. when a pilgrim called Matthew arrived as a hermit and founded it. It housed 7,000 monks at its height. But after the 9th century it suffered from repeated attacks as different military rulers swept through the area and today the large complex houses only two monks and a bishop.

But this monastery is famous throughout Iraq. Saddam Hussein's late uncle, Adnan Khairallah, who was for many years defence minister, went there in 1979 and asked for his wife to bear a child. The family are Sunni Muslims, but it's quite common for people in the Middle East to visit shrines of different religions. Khairallah's wish was granted, he told Saddam about the monastery, and the President went on two visits in 1980 and 1981.

And Iraqi Christians - many of them from the city of Mosul an hour's drive away - flock there at the big Christian festivals like Easter.

Father Adda Khidr Ablahad Al-Qiss is a small, jovial man with twinkling eyes and an extremely public appreciation of the generosity of President Saddam Hussein to his cliff-hanging monastery. "He gave a large donation to the monastery and we are still benefiting from it. We have used it to rebuild and repair the monastery. He offered to put everything right inside the monastery and out - except for the most ancient parts, which he ordered should stay as they were so people could see how old they were," Father Adda said. "The monastery is open to all sects and religions. We pray that God will always keep President Saddam Hussein and preserve him.”

That was in April 2003.

Of course, Father Adda couldn't very well say anything else about Saddam even if he wanted. Everyone knew the penalties of public criticism in Iraq.

But it is now, Christmas 2005. And there are increasingly good reasons for thinking that Iraq's Christian minority might genuinely think their community's position may have been better under Saddam secular régime than it might be under a successor regime dominated by a collection of religious groupings who’s intent is a Muslim state.