EU Law again

As a follow-up to my earlier piece, http://bit.ly/10eEC8Q regarding the state-theft of deposits in Cyprus, the BBC is now finally starting to focus on the victims of the theft of deposits and, lo and behold, they are not all Russians evading tax or the law in their homeland.

The victims include the Junior and Senior school of Nicosia, which teaches the British Curriculum to 900 children.  They apparently charge fees in advance and have these deposited in Laiki Bank.  Since they have more than €100K on deposit they will lose upto 60% of this!  So, teacher's salaries won't be paid and children will maybe go without an education.

In possibly the greatest irony, one university has €6 million in grants, locked into a bank and so will lose 60%.  The irony?  This is a grant from the EU!!

And all the while it seems, local politicians and other 'leaders' have had their loans from the affected banks, written-off in recent years. 

Truly, one rule for them and another for the rest of us.

We used to look at the communist-bloc countries and pity the people who suffered under them.  The people of Cyprus, Greece and Spain, that are now suffering under the statist EU, might wonder what the demolition of the Berlin Wall, really meant and exactly how 'winning the Cold War' has provided them with any benefit.

 

With friends like this

Returning once more to the subject of the 'marriage' of homosexuals.  If only to get the illiberal off to a good Easter!

Former Archbishop of Canterbury, Lord George Carey (an Arsenal supporter by the way) has castigated (or attacked, depending upon your view) the Prime Minister, David Cameron.

Lord Carey is quoted, on the BBC as saying

"I like David Cameron and believe he is genuinely sincere in his desire to make Britain a generous nation where we care for one another and where people of faith may exercise their beliefs fully.
but it was a bit rich to hear that the prime minister has told religious leaders that they should 'stand up and oppose aggressive secularisation' when it seems that his government is aiding and abetting this aggression every step of the way.

At his pre-Easter Downing Street reception for faith leaders, he said that he supported Christians' right to practise their faith. Yet many Christians doubt his sincerity."
Lord Carey also that said a recent ComRes poll suggested "more than two-thirds of Christians feel that they are part of a 'persecuted minority'".
"Their fears may be exaggerated because few in the UK are actually persecuted, but the prime minister has done more than any other recent political leader to feed these anxieties."
He said that Mr Cameron "seems to have forgotten in spite of his oft-repeated support for the right of Christians to wear the cross, that lawyers acting for the coalition argued only months ago in the Strasbourg court that those sacked for wearing a cross against their employer's wishes should simply get another job".
'Profound contribution' And Lord Carey spoke of being "very suspicious" that behind plans for gay marriage "there lurks an aggressive secularist and relativist approach towards an institution that has glued society". The danger I believe that the government is courting with its approach both to marriage and religious freedom is the alienation of a large minority of people who, only a few years ago, would have been considered pillars of society."

Lord Carey neatly captures the lie that is at the very heart of the Coalition policy.  On the one hand the Conservatives push themselves forward as the party of the family and of protecting traditional values and all the while they promote policies that devalue the family and undermine the values that made Britain what it was and were once the founding principles of the Conservative party.

Instead, the Conservatives push minority policies which are for the purpose of trying to be hip and cool and maybe gather some 'floating voters' from the metropolitan elite and leave their traditional constituency wondering, if the Conservatives are not for us, who are they for and who then, is for us?

Christian?  Can you really say that the Conservatives are for you?
Married? How do you feel about this meaning nothing anymore?
Children? Make sure you aren't married or you will be economically disadvantaged.

Get the picture?

If you do, tell your MP, enough is enough.  Real action not rhetoric.

Assange and Labour

I have posted on Julian Assange, here, http://bit.ly/YlGHld and here http://bit.ly/13Fv3Ww but it really didn't connect at the double standards that are in play.  More on that in a moment.

The Assange issue - doesn't quite have the same ring or depth of L'affaire Dreyfuss  - is back in the news because the Labour had a meeting with the Ecuadorean embassy, and, during this, the Ecuadoreans 'unexpectedly' raised the issue.  Unexpectedly?  Really? 

Frankly it beggars belief that the Labour Shadow Foreign Secretary, Kerry McCarthy, didn't expect that to come up.  Ask yourself, in the last 12 months, how many times have you heard mention of Ecuador and Assange's name not immediately following in the same sentence?  Go into Google and type Ecuador and UK  and what do you think pops up?  Bi-lateral Trade?  Environmental matters?

This, Kerry McCarthy is the person who thinks she might be HM Foreign & Commonwealth Secretary in a couple of years and she was surprised?!? Maybe she should try having some red meat and then she might better understand something of the real world! - Cue personal attack from the 'vegan community'.

But back to Assange and indeed Wikileaks.

What, in this era of Leveson, would be the position of Wikileaks and those that published the leaked data?

Firstly, this data is private, indeed, some say secret.  What is the difference between illegally obtaining it - that is, without the owners permission - and obtaining access to an individual's phone records or transcripts of conversations?

Then, what is the position of those that publish this data?  How is that different from those that published stories, that were gained from phone hacking, about the sexual antics of minor celebrities, . 

What would happen to both, in the Royal Charter era? 

Those on the Left, who have pilloried The Sun, The Mail and such, need to understand that investigative journalism is at risk from the Royal Charter and they need to join others and vigorously oppose the tri-partite 'stitch-up' of our free press. 

And before I am accused of hypocrisy, I draw a very thick line between the puerile rubbish about the 'celebs' and the consequences of exposing their self-serving lies and that of the diplomatic and military communications that were 'exposed' by Assange and Wikileaks.  The latter put lives at risk, the former, maybe a career (though that would be offset by the subsequent book deal).

By the way - don't be surprised if the 'workers daily' AKA the Daily Mirror ends getting caught-up in the phone hacking scandal.  They are not exactly novices in the field of news manipulation - ask Piers Morgan!

Does anyone know if the Assange bail providers have paid-up? 

EU and the rule of law

So where do you think that the recent shenanigans in Europe, leave David Cameron and the possibility of the UK re-negotiating the terms of membership of the EU?

In my view, the Cyprus fiasco shows that any re-negotiation is meaningless.  The EU, and that includes all of its institutions such as the European Central Bank (ECB) and the Commission, have no respect for people, property ownership or the rule of law.  It will be seen as somewhat ironic to those nations that come a-begging to the EU for aid or reasonable trade terms, that these basic tenets of the 'Western style' of democracy can be so easily cast aside for the European Master Race but are an absolute must have for the rest of the world.  Oh, and those Americans that are reading this and smuggly thinking, that couldn't happen in the good old US of A, read on

Consider.  From the troika that was negotiating with Cyprus, the ECB, IMF and the EU Commission, we are told that the IMF made it a condition that whatever solution was arrived at, must not require to be put to the Cypriot parliament!  The IMF remember, gets lots of funding from the US - How would the founding fathers and all those who died in the pursuit of democracy feel about that?


We are told that the biggest losers will be those Russians that have flooded into Cyprus and deposited their money.  The strong suggestion is that this money has somehow been stolen by those depositors or is in some other way ill-gotten.  The inference is that the theft of this money, by the EU and Cypriot government, by applying a 'hair-cut' of 40% to 100% is therefore somehow not really theft.  This is moral hazard at its most dubious and odious.  The EU and Cypriot government are assuming, when they steal people's money, that all deposits over  €100,000 are illegal and that because the main-stream media pushes this story, they will get away with it.  It is to the shame of the media, though not sites such as blogs and Twitter (@zerohedge  @witchking1974 and @Old_Holborn particularly good), that they continue to push this message.

I can't help feel that if the following was carried out by the Conservatives, the spin would be different.

Many British people chose to retire to Cyprus.  They sold the house that they had purchased and paid for, in the UK and took their legally earned money to Cyprus.  Let's say they sold-up for £500,000 - not such a great sum for someone with complete equity in a house located in the South East of England.  Let's go further and say that when they went to Cyprus, they down-sized and managed to buy their next property, outright for £250,000.  SO now they have £250,000 in the bank.  They live modestly and don't eat-in to their capital.  Then, along comes the EU, IMF and the other governmental thieves and takes £100,000 of their money - overnight and without anyone listening to them or saying what it is that they did wrong!

Because the above is happening but is being perpetrated by the EU and IMF, the media is complicit by its silence.  Going back to my previous post, for a moment, maybe the media don't need censoring, they do a good enough job, censoring themselves.   http://bit.ly/164hrBE

Even if all the account balances above €100,000 are illegal, since when did two wrongs make a right?
I would have thought that Germany, above all others, would recognize that following 'the ends justify the means' school of philosophy, was a very flawed approach.  Has economic purity replaced racial purity?

Turning to the rule of law.  It is a fundamental part of the EU 'schtick' that there is free movement of goods, people and capital within member states.  You don't believe me?  Look through statement after statement from UK ministers who say that they cannot control immigration from other EU states because of EU law!   Now look at what has happened regarding the imposition of Capital Controls.  In their efforts to rescue the Euro, the EU and Cyprus have ignored the basic principles of the EU and put us in a position where a Cypriot Euro is now worth less than a German Euro.

So, back to the start.  What would be the point of re-negotiation?  Any agreement reached wouldn't be worth the paper that it is printed on.  The only discussions should be on the terms of trade and such, post the UK exit from the EU.  That's it.  We need to understand and accept that we simply cannot treat or trust with the corrupt EU.

Blowjob cost

This summary is not available. Please click here to view the post.

Message for Obama and other Americans

I return to the subject of gun control in America, that I previously wrote about here http://bit.ly/ZKx2Rq

The Obama administration is pushing for tighter controls on guns and bullying people to support this, sickeningly using the poor dead children of Newtown as a bargaining chip.  Who could oppose such legislation?  Who could oppose laws that would mean young ones are not put in such danger again?

Thankfully, a very significant number of Americans are resisting the moral blackmail that Obama and his control freak colleagues are using.

It occurred to me though, that the real killer of children in America isn't the gun but obesity.   We hear some words from Obama but no real action.  How many children have died, during Obama's time in office from gunfire and how many from obesity related illnesses?  How many have, in his time, acquired the diseases that will mar and shorten their adult lives?  Surely, if Obama really cared about America's children, he would be out doing something, every single day.
 
I wonder though if the reason he isn't, is political?

Has he perhaps calculated that the only way to tackle this obesity problem is to take on the largest constituency in America - that is - Parents!

Because, at the end of the day, it is the abdication of responsibility by America's parents, that is a far bigger killer than that Lanza boy in Newtown.

So Mr President, don't go after the NRA and law-abiding citizens.  Don't bother pushing a Medicare or Obamacare package, down the throats of America.  Instead, do the right thing and as aggressively, push America's parents to take responsibility for their children's health and lifestyle.   Don't bother about same-sex marriage, focus on an agenda that puts the health of America's children at its heart.  Since the Democrats are so keen on taxes, tax sugar, tax fat!  Put a large federal sales tax on soda drinks and candy bars and fast food and high sugar cereals etc.  It won't balance your budget but it will likely save more lives than your and Joe Biden's gun legislation.

Short and sweet for Osborne

Often posts are too long to keep the attention of politicians, so here is a brief pre-Budget message for George Osborne

• Cut the basic rate of income tax and include future planned and timed cuts
• Cut the National Insurance Tax rate for employers and employees for under 25's
• Increase tax thresholds and commit to doing so, progressively for next 5 years
• Cut government spending, across the board - all departments 10% less this coming year and include future planned and timed cuts - less government is better government.
• End the Green Taxes, with immediate effect.
• Tax MPs expenses - treat MPs the same as the people they represent.
• Cut Local Government expenditure or rather the portion provided by Central Government.
• Allow bodies to go bankrupt if they can't afford or re-negotiate PFI

George,
The fuller version is here.   http://bit.ly/VWgyug
 

There is no alternative

David Cameron has just used the phrase made famous by Lady Thatcher - there is no alternative or TINA.  I must say though, the context in which it is used is somewhat insulting to those of the Thatcherite persuassion.

Most Thatcherites would expect this phrase to be used to explain why reduced public services are a necessity, why it is essential that we, as a nation, start to live within our means, that the credit card is 'maxed out' and the bank manager won't grant us any further overdraft.

So, it is galling to hear it muttered relative to the anemic 'cuts' that have taken place.  When money is being devalued by Quantitative Easing, when borrowings and the deficit and debt are increasing, when the future for our children and grandchildren is being mortgaged by feckless and gutless politicians.

David Cameron (and George Osborne, for that matter) need to understand that this far into the election cycle, what is needed is not words but actions.  Having wasted three years that must now be all the more bolder.

Of course it is just possible that David Cameron was floating the TINA phrase to warm us up for real spending and tax cuts in the upcoming budget.  Somehow though, I doubt it.  So long as the Lib Dems run the country - and let's not kid ourselves that it is the Conservatives that are really in charge. No, so long as Clegg, Cable and Alexander are calling the shots, we won't see any meaningful reductions in public spending, such as suggested here http://bit.ly/VWgyug  Nor any real cuts in taxation - these must be 'funded', is the latest excuse.  On what moral basis must a tax cut be funded?  The government, through HMRC, puts it's hand into the pocket's of  all taxpayers, without asking permission (and let's not fool ourselves that any of them have a real mandate) and then has the nerve to say that to take less, it needs justification! Imagine any other kind of thief doing that;  " I do apologise but I must take all of this because you haven't given me a reason not to"

The Conservatives have this last opportunity, prior to the 2015 election, to initiate the changes to the economic direction of this country and put us on the right path.  I sincerely hope that they have the courage to do the right thing, because for me, and I believe for the UK,  there is no alternative.

A curse on both their houses

So finally, we have managed to find a jury that understands some of the basic concepts of law - such as only convicting on the basis of evidence presented!

The re-trial of Vicky Pryce has ended in her conviction and, like her former husband, she will be sentenced in due course.

Here are my thoughts.

Based on all of the information available, they both deserve the guilty verdicts. 

Vicky Pryce's defence of marital coercion could never really hold water when one considers her somewhat glittering career.  She was hardly some timid mouse who was going to be cowed by her husband, into committing an illegal act.  

Chris Huhne plead guilty and so we were spared the expense of a trial (and he, further embarrassment).

While I can understand the judge not wanting to pass sentence on Huhne, while Pryce's trial was underway, I have to question why Huhne wasn't recalled to court yesterday and both given their sentences, there and then.  The judge seems to have clearly (and rightly, in my view)  indicated that they will be sent to jail, so why not get on with it?  They have enjoyed extended periods of bail and have had ample time to prepare for this.  I suppose that some of those rioters that were (again rightly) sentenced to prison following the August 2011 riots would have liked more time to 'arrange their affairs' but instead they got swift justice and straight to jail.  Unlike Huhne they didn't get the chance to pass Go and collect £200 or in his case many £££s as redundancy payment from Parliament!

Some will say, this was only about who took speeding points.  I disagree.  This is about people conspiring to pervert the course of justice.  And not just any 'people'.  These are people who see themselves as being 'above' us.  People who would rule over us.  We are right to expect the highest standards from them.  We shouldn't though be too surprised!  Remember the anger and disgust we all felt as the Daily Telegraph published detailed accounts of excess and often downright theft committed by MPs?  I would say that many MPs are now viewed as self-serving, low-lifes not even fit enough to be in the same category as Estate Agents and second-hand car salesmen!   It isn't just the stealing, the lying and the greed, it is the two-facedness of it all.  Do as I say, not as I do.  

And never expect me to apologise!  I am a politician - the new master race.  We can do no wrong.  When you, the public, bring up inconvenient truths like the Mid Staffordshire Hospitals scandal, we will divert you with a scam story about horsey beef-burgers.  And yes, in case you haven't heard, Andy Burnham is still a member of parliament and a Shadow Cabinet minister and Sir David Nicholson is still a knight!!

Oh, and never forget, when you hear of some old person dying of hypothermia, because they couldn't afford to heat their house, that the male prisoner, serving a sentence for perverting the course of justice, was a big proponent of the green taxes that so unnecessarily burden people and which have created a whole new class of poverty - fuel poverty!

 Their is, rightly, sympathy for the children of the Huhne's.  Having the whole world know that your father wanted you aborted can't be a pleasant thing.  That he was a liar and a cheat as well, kind of pales into insignificance.  Having a mother who then wants to wash all of this very personal laundry in the most public of arenas? 

I applaud Vicky Price for seeking vengeance on Chris Huhne and for bringing him down.  She would have done a whole lot of good and saved herself and particularly her family, a whole lot of pain, if she had plead guilty, just after Huhne did.  That she didn't, speaks volumes for her sense of proportion.

Here is a test for you - try to name thirty (out of 635) MPs that you would consider as decent and principled.   Surely you can come up with 5%?  I think you will have difficulty but would welcome your suggestions.  Please though, don't bother suggesting Galloway!  He is beyond any pale!

Eastleigh's message for the Conservatives

This won't make pleasant reading for David Cameron or Grant Shapps

No doubt the spin doctors (yes, they are still around, they're not just employed by Labour) will be out and about today and proclaiming that their man/woman did really well, under the circumstances but the reality?  This is a disaster for the Conservatives.  Howsoever it is viewed, it is terrible.

Consider.  The Lib Dems are in free-fall in the national polls.  They have a sex-scandal and seemingly a cover-up at the highest levels of the party.  Their sitting MP resigned because he faces jail for perverting the course of justice.  And yet they won.

Consider also, UKIP came from almost nowhere and beat the Conservatives into third place.  They even had the opportunity to claim that they didn't win because the Conservatives split their vote!

Why has it come to pass that a sure fire seat, for the Conservatives, doesn't fall into their laps?  The type of seat that the Conservatives MUST win if they want to secure an absolute majority at the next election.

I suggest the following reasons.

The Conservatives have moved away from core Tory values.

They assiduously court the homosexual vote and alienate their natural supporters.  Why?  In the cold reality of politics, why move away from your core supporter to what at best is still a very small (though highly vocal) minority group?  If every homosexual voted Conservative, what impact would that make in terms of electoral success in every seat?  Who did the math and somehow calculated that the extra homosexual voters would easily out-pace the loss of core voters?

On the economy, the Conservatives have been intimidated into not taking the vitally necessary cuts to government spending , by their so-called Coalition partners - the Lib Dems.  Meanwhile the Labour Party and their allies in the left-leaning media and strongly biased and leftist BBC claim that 'swingeing cuts' are being made.  The deficit, government spending out-turns and mounting debt levels,  give the lie to this.  They message isn't getting through though.

Again on the economy, rather than stimulating the economy with tax cuts aimed at their core voters, they tinker with QE to fund the over-spending and so impoverish the nation's future.

Then to Europe, they throw a bone to Euro-sceptic MPs by promising a referendum, if the Conservatives win the next election.  However, terms are such that the false promise can be easily seen through.

Again on Europe, a minuscule cut in the EU budget is hailed as a victory.  The reality though is this.  MEPs will vote down the supposed victory and seek to restore the cuts.  The further reality is that UK contributions in money terms will actually increase!  Yes, that's right, a cut for the EU means the UK pays more.  I am not making this up!

The way forward?
How about 'growing a pair', to use the vernacular.

How about a budget that cuts taxes and spending?    See here.  http://bit.ly/VWgyug   The Conservatives are being blamed for non-existent cuts, so why not do what they are being accused of doing?  And, why not lock them into the future.  That's a Gordon Brown trick - write cheques for others to cash!

How about resurrecting the boundary change proposals and making the implementation an absolute requirement of Lib Dems support?  If the Lib Dems say no, then call an election or just kick them out of government.  They simply cannot act as if they are the senior party.  Totally unacceptable!  Nor can they pick and chose which policies they support and, in a fit of child-like pique abandon their partners.   I know they do this in their private lives but at the government level, we have to demand greater fidelity.

How about telling the EU and the MEPs that we will not increase our contribution.  That's it!  KISS - Keep It Simple Stupid!

Why not put before the Houses of Parliament an act to hold a referendum on a straight IN/OUT vote at the same time as the next General Election?  Use the interim to renegotiate the terms of out membership with a deadline for completion of November 1, 2014 (six months before the next election).  Again, KISS, should require a not too much debate.  This will flush out those MPs that trust the people and those that don't.

How about abandoning the so called 'green taxes' that are really hurting ordinary people and do nothing to combat emission levels?

The way forward?  Get back to Conservative values, the party doesn't need to chase voters, Tory policies will attract the aspirational people that Lady Thatcher identified and supported, who in turn, supported her through three election victories.  Become the Workers Party rather than the Shirkers Party - clear Blue water, anyone?



 

EU Banker's bonus cap and turnips

So the EU now thinks it is qualified to set limits on how much private businesses pay its workers?

The EU is proposing a cap be set on banker's bonuses.  This is to be at one times annual salary or two times if there is explicit shareholder approval.  While this is the typically fatuous nonsense that we have come to expect of the EU, this does betoken a worrying step into further interference in business and all that this means for the acceleration of Europe's economic decline.

These bankers are smart people - you may not like them, you may think that they are over-paid, but they are not dumb.  Imagine the scene at a meeting between a top FX trader and his banker boss during a future 'bonus season' meeting

Trader:  Well that was a great year - my department and I made the bank a ton of money and contributed more than 50% of the bank's profits.

Boss:  Yes, well done!  Now you know we cannot give you a bonus of more than one year's salary, so what we are going to do is this.  In two week's time, we will be paying out bonuses.  Today, I am tripling your base salary, for a two week period and at the end of that period it will revert to the current level.  This will allow us to recognize your contribution.  OK?

Trader:  Well I suppose that would work for my team, but I was thinking more like quadruple, for myself.

Boss:  OK agreed.  So now you can ditch your overtures to Rival Bank Co in Dubai, (or Zurich or Singapore) and get that new place in Gloucestershire, yes?

OK, so maybe the Trader wouldn't actually be that concerned about the bonuses for his/her team but I can imagine that this is how it would be played out.

Or, in the EU world.

Trader:  Well that was a great year - my department and I made the bank a ton of money and contributed more than 50% of the bank's profits.

Boss:  Yes, well done!  Now you know we cannot give you a bonus of more than one year's salary because of the cap on bonuses, so what we are going to do is this.  The turnip harvest is looking pretty poor this year but we have managed to secure a corner on production.  There was some problem with the latest Five Year Plan, when we over produced tractors but under-produced tractor engines - you know how these things work.  Anyway, we will pay you a bonus up to the maximum and then grant you options on the turnip harvest.  Come September, you will be making tons of money or before if you decide to cash them in early.   What do you think?

Trader:  Well I suppose that would work for my team, but I hear that the Executive Board are being offered options on sugar beet futures as well.  I was thinking some of them would sweeten the pot, for me.

Boss:  OK agreed.  I will inform the board and the EU Commissar.   By the way, a little birdy tells me that left foot shoes could be big next year.  Some glitch in the Plan has seen an over-production in right-foot shoes.  Keep it under your beret , though.

 So the above is a bit of fun but seriously, the EU setting caps on compensation?  Doesn't quite mark the end of private enterprise but it does put us on a slippery slope.

Here's an alternative idea.

• How about politicians  in the EU and in the UK, put a cap on their own compensation?  
• How about this is set at two times their respective country's average wage?  
• How about these same politicians get taxed on this, just like all of the people that they supposedly  represent?  
• How about 50% of the EU politician's salaries and those of the EU Commissioners and bureaucrats be withheld until such time as the EU publishes a set of audited accounts?
• How about parts of their salary being subject to claw-back when they make a mistake - there are lots of mistakes out there - failed IT systems on which governments waste billions or more than 1,200 people die at Mid Staffs, for example.

I know, One rule for them and one for the rest of us.

I fear that this proposal though, is a sign that it may be too late for Europe.  Unemployment is soaring, the people of the southern countries are truly suffering but rather than address these issues and examine at the rot causes, the EU decide to be populist and bash the UK, at the same time by targeting a small, in EU terms, sector of the economy.  OK, it's a successful one but that won't stop them.

Be afraid, first its banker's bonuses, then all bonuses and moves on to the Co-Op divi!