Miliband's numbers

Charitably speaking, it must have been the fear. 

There was Ed Miliband sitting in his suite in Brighton, preparing his 'leader's' speech.  He knew he had successfully overcome the Neil Kinnock moment.  He had managed to successfully walk on the beach, while being photographed and hadn't fallen over!  But............

He also knew that Damian McBride, was publishing and promoting his memoirs.  If these were to be full and candid, what tales of complicity might they tell?   How might Rasputin's henchman implicate him.  Ed knows it doesn't have to be true, just said or whispered.  What a worry.

How is the Leader to plan for the post-2015 election turnip harvest, which will be a record, he already knows, if he is being bothered about these kind of things?

So, in pops a speechwriter with the latest draft.  The speech-writing aide is also worried.  Putting the knife into brother David's back, seemed the best thing at the time and certainly Len and the other big money-guys all supported it but look at the polls!  It's not as if becoming a writer for the Guardian is an option.  They are suffering losses, especially now that all that government jobs advertising revenue has dried-up!

So between them, they come up with a wheeze.  Let's promise to freeze energy prices!  At a stroke, Labour's ratings will soar and with them, Ed's.  For how long will we freeze them, someone asks.  4Ever, aide Owen, stridently says.  "This is just the start, food prices have been rising as well, so let's freeze them, too!  And let's be balanced, so abandon the fascist Tory freeze on council tax rises, after all, we don't want to frighten the vicar!"

In a resurgence of fratricidal-like vigor, Ed says No!  We will freeze for 22 months!  I have it on good authority that within 22 months of the establishment of our Socialist utopia, we will be able to produce sufficient quantities of both left and right foot clogs for the masses to wear.  This will keep them happy, when the freeze ends!

Perhaps it didn't happen quite like this but ...............

Miliband knows better than most that the more significant part of average energy bills is represented by environmental taxes - more than 10% of the cost.  Then there is VAT at around 6%.  The profit element comes in at less than 5% (and don't forget that this profit has also been taxed and any subsequent dividends paid, will be taxed!).

Miliband knows because it was he, as the minister at the Department of Energy and Climate Change, during the last Labour mis-government, that brought in the legislation that imposes such punitive (and futile) green taxes. 

I guess you can take the minister out of power but you can't take the spin and mendacity out of the minister?

Oh, and related to the above and before anyone bothers to question the futility of these green taxes.  Tell me, how can scientists be 95% certain that global warming is man-made? 

Firstly, their own evidence (embarrassingly) doesn't actually show any sustained warming unless they slice-up the data to fit the required answer - so from June 22nd 2013 through July 5th 2013, temperatures rose at an alarming rate and the freezer at Blackpool's Iceland store was unable to cope and the internal ice-caps started to melt - ergo man-made global warming!

Secondly, what kind of science is it that is 95% certain?  Can you be 95% dead?  95% pregnant?  Can we be 95% certain that the tensile strength of an object is X?  How was this 95% figure derived?  Using some kind of probability analysis, maybe?  Given that the data used by the IPCC and their fellow green-gravy-train travelers, has been found to be almost completely flawed, wrong and sometimes just plain manufactured, one would have to take any such analysis with mountains of salt!

I am not a scientist but recall from my schooldays that scientific experimentation was about proving something with a 100% degree of certainty.  Simply put, if I construct a compound of X% of this chemical and Y% of that one, I can expect to always see the same results and can prove and replicate my experiment.  Has science changed?  If I put a little bit less than X% or Y% into the compound and got different results would it be okay so long as they were 95% right?







 

  

Cameron's Conference speech leaked - Exclusive!

What follows is a copy of the speech (including notes)  that David Cameron will give to the Conservative Party conference, next week.  How it was obtained, only Snowden knows!

Conference, thank you for that rousing welcome!  It is always good to visit Manchester (note to self, ask Grant why we are meeting in Manchester, other than Gid's do we have any seats up here?)

Well what a year it has been, since we last met.  Andy Murray won Wimbledon (pause for applause) and in spite of Alex Salmond's buffoonish behaviour with the Saltire,  didn't come out in favour of Independence for Scotland, the British Lions, the epitome of the Union at its best, plus the Irish , of course, beat the Aussies, down under and England won the Ashes - Hope that doesn't sound like Aussie bashing!  After all Australia has just elected a solidly Conservative party, led by Tony Abbot.

Sporting triumphs aside, we have also seen progress on the home front.

Our Conservative Chancellor, George Osborne has managed to get the economy stoked-up enough so that we are seeing a growing economy (not to self, don't ad lib about green shoots, in fact don't mention horticulture, at all!).  He has managed to do this without making the so called 'savage cuts' that our opponents in the Welfare Party accused us of.   Make no mistake though, we have turned a corner but there is still a long way to go. 

We do need to do a lot more to roll back the state;

Iain Duncan-Smith is pushing forwards with reforms to Welfare which will mean that those in work are better-off than those out of work.  Also, as recently announced, that those out of work, will now have to work for their welfare handouts (pause for applause) - I know, many of you and much of the country think - about time!  But you know we now have to contend not just with the opposition Welfare Party, but also with our Coalition partners and now the United Nations. 

Yes, Conference it seems that the United Nations, the organisation that did such a great job in Rwanda and Srebrencia feels compelled to lecture the UK government on our welfare policies.  The same organisation that appointed Gaddafi as a member of the UN Human Rights Council, now thinks it knows enough about the UK to pronounce on our democratically approved policies!  (Pause for applause).  Well, Grant Shapps told them where to get off, didn't he!  (Pause for applause)

 We haven't been inactive on the home front either. 

Theresa May persevered and succeeded where countless Labour ministers failed and finally got Abu Qatada extradited to Jordan.  (Pause for applause).  We need to ensure that people like him are never allowed to abuse our judicial systems in the future.  So, our next election manifesto will include a commitment to repeal all of the Human Rights legislation that has so hampered our country.  Our people have said Enough is Enough! 

We have heard the people and we will act accordingly! (Pause for applause).

A former Prime Minister once talked of being 'tough on crime and tough on the causes of crime'.  Well we know where that led.  Decent, honest people afraid to walk the streets because of anti-social yobs, our town centres made no-go areas and overrun with drunken mobs on weekends and killers and rapists getting light sentences and being let out to re-offend.  Well Conference, this must and will stop! Our election manifesto will include policies designed to appropriately punish these people and protect you and the millions of others who are fed-up to the back teeth with a softly softly approach. 

We have heard the people and we will act accordingly! (Pause for applause).

Thinking of that former Prime Minister and  his successor, I must say that I now understand why we inherited such an economic shambles!  Reading all of the various diaries and memoirs, it was clear that these tribunes of the Welfare Party were much more concerned about stabbing each other in the back and smearing and leaking against themselves, than in running the country!   (Pause for applause). 

And they had the cheek to call us the nasty party! (Pause for applause).  Well no more!  The great people of Britain, know that it is the  Conservative Party and its economic policies that have pulled the country back from the brink of economic ruin - a minister in the last Labour government thought it a joke to leave us a note saying 'there's no money left'.

How can it ever be funny that you have fairy-tale policies and unsustainable economics that bring your country to the edge of the precipice?   The British people didn't see it as a joke!  We have all had to 'tighten our belts' over the last few years and let's not pretend it was easy.  It wasn't!  Many good, decent, hardworking people have had to scrimp and save and stretch the family budget just to get by. 

They know, as do we, that the country is now on the path to recovery.  I have no doubt that some of our people have been hurt in this period and for now, they may blame the Coalition but the overwhelming majority of people understand that the Conservatives had to do what needed doing, hard as that was.  The great British people know that truth and hard facts, however unpalatable are always better than spin and lies and taking money from A to give to B and then giving A tax credits and such. 

We have heard the people and we will act accordingly! (Pause for applause).

One of the people helping me put this speech together said ' Well Prime Minister, I suppose you can't get away without mentioning Europe'  (Pause for laughter?)

Of course I want to talk about Europe.  The Conservative Party is the ONLY party, yes the ONLY party to offer a referendum to the great British people.  I have said, and I do stand by my commitments, that if re-elected, the Conservative Party will engage with the EU and seek a re-negotiation of our terms of membership and then we will put the results of the deal, to a vote by the people of Great Britain.  People tell my ministers, MPs and I of their concerns about the EU, so I think I have a good idea of what it is we need to get from these talks - I suppose the over-arching theme is for Britain to regain control over many areas of our lives and to act like the sovereign nation which we are.

We have heard the people and we will act accordingly! (Pause for applause).  And we are the ONLY ones who will do so!

The Welfare Party met in Brighton last week.  I am not sure who to feel sorry for.  The smearers and back-stabbers that nominally lead the party?  How can all of this loathing of supposed colleagues be good for you?  It certainly wasn't good for Britain. 

Or should we all  feel sorry for Unite Union members?  They are led by Len McCluskey and he, having elected a leader that he chose - of course then the back-stabbing was even more brutal - your own brother, imagine -  had to take  all sorts of threats from this jumped-up party leader who had the temerity to question vote-rigging and such.  Fortunately Len was able to remind his party - well he does pay for so much of it, it is only fare to call it his party - that he holds the purse strings and is quite prepared to sit on his money if needed!  If he doesn't get his own way! 

To coin a phrase.  The Welfare Party has heard Len McCluskey and their other Union masters, and will act accordingly.

The big idea from the Welfare Party, other than spending money we don't have - and spending the same money multiple times, if their tax and spend policies are to be believed - well the big idea was a freeze on energy prices.

Now consider what that means.  We have already heard from the energy companies that this would stifle much needed investment (and the jobs that go with it) and could lead to black-outs and so on.

But leave that aside, for now.  Consider just how much profit is made by the energy companies.  The average home energy bill is around £1,200 a year.  Of this, around £50 is the company's profit, which is used to fund investments and dividends to shareholders - including pension funds!  Of the rest of the cost, more than £110 is so called Green Taxes.

These Green Taxes are a DIRECT result of the last Labour Government's legislation on Climate Change.  They put in place taxes that cause far more hardship for people than the profit that is made by energy companies.  AND, the policy doesn't work - these taxes penalise the British people and British companies by giving us higher energy costs and then make an infinitesimally  small contribution to reducing so called greenhouse gases, which is more than wiped out by the emissions from the economically emerging countries!

And so Conference, I can today announce that, as part of our next manifesto, we will include a commitment, to immediately repeal the punitive and tax affecting parts of the Climate Change Act.  This will have the immediate effect of PERMANENTLY abolishing the Green Taxes - not for twenty months - PERMANENTLY.

We have heard the people and we will act accordingly! (Pause for applause).

Staying with the environment and industry, we will scrap the HS2 and we will use the money saved to fund a tax cut for married people and to promote more and more Free Schools. 

The tax cut will be two fold - firstly to allow the sharing of unused tax allowances, between married couples and then to provide a specific deduction for married couples.  We, in the Conservative Party, recognise marriage as the bedrock of a stable society.

Free Schools?  Michael Gove has quietly led a revolution and people are seeing that we can have an education system that delivers quality teaching without the constraints of local control - local control that more often than not pays more attention to political correctness and the teaching unions than it does to parents.

We have heard the people and we will act accordingly! (Pause for applause).

Remember all those ads about the NHS isn't safe under the Conservatives?  History will judge whether they were right.  What we do know is that the PEOPLE using the NHS weren't safe under Labour.  People died, unnecessarily because the layer upon layer of management fostered a culture of hiding from the truth.  They were so focused on statistics and charts and status and their own compensation, that they forgot about the people they were hired to serve.  People died in appalling and shaming conditions.  That can never happen again, never!

Safe in their hands?  I don't think so and neither do the British people!

We have heard the people and we will act accordingly! (Pause for applause).

Finally Conference,  three things.

Firstly, I want to congratulate all of the Conservative members of the Coalition.  Listening to our Coalition Partner's recent conference, you might get the idea that THEY did everything either pushing this or that policy through parliament or stopping the Conservatives pushing a policy through but the fact is, that we have got on with doing the job.  Coalition isn't easy.  I won't pretend it isn't frustrating when changes to electoral boundaries are sacrificed in a petulant fit of pique but the great British people want us to get the country right, so we just have to suck it up and do the bigger job!

We have heard the people and we will act accordingly! (Pause for applause).

Secondly, I want to address the voters in Scotland.  You need to know that all of the people of Britain and at this  Conference passionately hope that you will vote No in next year's referendum.  Together we are better - better-off, better placed in the world and better able to enjoy our shared history and a prosperous future.

Thirdly, I want to talk about something that everyone says I shouldn't discuss - UKIP.  More specifically I want to talk to people that are considering supporting UKIP.  Simply put, I want you to think about which party can really give you a voice on Europe?  Which party can really address welfare abuse and has already introduced a benefits cap?  Which party can continue the curbs that the Conservatives have introduced on immigration?   Which party is most concerned about repatriating powers from Brussels?

Ask yourselves these questions and you will know that it is only the Conservative Party that can and will deliver what you want.

Conference,
The great British people have made sacrifices and together we have turned back from the edge of economic ruin.  We have started to address welfare and make the great British tradition of honest and hard work pay again.  We make no apology for not wanting to reward fecklessness.  We will, just as the great British people have always done, continue to help those in need.  We will continue to put Britain's interests at the forefront of our international dealings and in the EU.

Why?

Because that is what we are about and that is what the great British people want us to be about.


We have heard the people and we will act accordingly! (Pause for applause).

Syria again

Following on from my recent post.

The British media seems dumbfounded that the House of Commons voted against British participation in any military intervention in Syria.

Let me help them understand.

Firstly, there are all those memories of Iraq and the sexed-up dossier.  Sadly, the UN weapons inspector, Dr David Kelly, wasn't the only person to lose his life over this.  100,000's of Iraqis lost their lives too.  As did UK, US and troops from other nations.  And still the heartache continues for the Iraqi people.

Linked to the above, the most oft-cited criticism of the 2003 invasion was the lack of any coherent plan for the next stage.  Everyone wanted rid of Saddam Hussein but no one gave thought to what or who would replace him.  The Iraqi people are still suffering the effects.

Ordinary people in the UK and US (overwhelmingly opposed to intervention, polls suggest) know, that without some kind of plan for the post-Assad era, then the current regional instability will only increase.  The business author/guru has one of his Seven Habits of Successful People as 'start with the end in mind'.  I can't believe that the aim here is just to remove Assad.

I suspect that the people of the UK also have two over-riding thoughts on Syria.

Yes the pictures and events are truly horrible but what is it to do with us?  Why should the UK get involved?  The US sets itself as the 'world's policeman' so let them stick their nose in, keep ours out!

Secondly, why should the UK spend money it doesn't have, interfering in another country? Such interference will only lead to negative consequences for the UK economy.  The UK simply cannot afford to intervene - financially so.  How can we spend millions on bombs and jet fuel while preaching the need for austerity at home?  If there are millions of £ to spare, how about putting that by and giving it back to taxpayers?  Or, since government simply chokes on the idea of reducing taxes, how about paying out to people suffering from fuel poverty as a result of idiotic green policies?

I think that it comes down to that.  I don't think that most people look to the regional instability that is now in play and the tremendous uncertainty that we all face, as a consequence.  Perhaps they do see Syria as the proxy war battleground between Saudi Arabia and Iran but the questions remain - what is this to do with the UK? 

There are of course humanitarian reasons to intervene but these reasons have prevailed in many other places and the West has closed its eyes.  I think though, that this time the scales have fallen from the eyes of the UK people and, fortunately from the eyes of UK parliamentarians.  

Oh and I won't be misled (and I suspect neither will the British public) by so called American intelligence reports.  These presumably come from the CIA?  The same CIA that couldn't protect the US Ambassador and three fellow Americans at Benghazi, Libya, last September 11? 

Ask yourself this.  Suppose that there is military intervention - we know this will only involve bombing or missiles - how will the interventionists ensure only the 'guilty' are targeted?  Then ask yourself, what's next?  I don't have the answer and I suspect that neither do our so called leaders.

Syria - The Vote! Questions for the Syrian opposition.

Well done to the UK Parliament! 

The opposition of the Labour Party to the UK Coalition government's motion was entirely predictable.  Though the performance of Labour's leader, Ed Miliband, lacked any passion and consisted of more froth than a bad latte! 

What was very encouraging, indeed heartening, was the 30 Tory MPs that voted against their own government.  And, to be fair,the 9 Lib Dem MPs who did the same.

Here is my 'take' on Syria and those chemical weapon attacks.

At best the House of Commons vote was premature.  The UN inspection team has not yet reported on the latest attacks but the UK and US government have both jumped-in and stated that they know this is the work of the Assad regime. 

Consider though, what did the Assad regime have to gain by such an action?  By most accounts, the regime were in the ascendancy in the civil war.  The fractious 'rebels' had been indulging in internecine squabbling and murder within the areas that they controlled and their lack of a serious 'government in waiting' (more in a moment on this) as well as seeming, at times, more focused on gaining localised advantages (see the stories about the attacks on Syria's non-Shiite people) rather than on regime change surely must put on the table the possibility that it was the 'rebels' that carried out the attacks. 

Just think about it!  They are losing.  They have heard the ever more foolish Obama speak of 'red lines', they have heard France's Hollande and Britain's Cameron and Hague talk of the need to stop the carnage caused by the Assad regime (the deaths caused by the 'rebels' somehow are always overlooked), so what to do?  How about finding a means to convince the world that the 'red lines' have been crossed?  A way to suck in the media obsessed Obama with shots of children, suffering hideously, on TV

In a dirty war such as Syria, no bets are off of the table.  And frankly, I would be very sceptical of any evidence produced by either side or the UN.  Everything is tainted. 

The 'rebels', heavily infiltrated by Al Qaeda, know the value of dragging-in the 'West', both in the short term by bolstering their own failing military efforts and in the medium/longer term in showing the 'infidel West' as forever interfering in the region and pursuing a pro-Israel policy etc.. 

The Assad regime is of course, beyond the Pale.  Their subjugation of their own people and inhumane treatment, has been going on for years though.  David Cameron alleges that this latest chemical attack was number eleven, by the Syrian government, on its own people.  So why did the previous ten  attacks not warrant action or comment? 

I don't have the 'answer' to Syria but I do believe that military intervention by the 'West' will be akin to pouring petrol onto a fire rather than water. 

The 'water' needed must come from the Russian inspired political process which seeks to get people talking rather than killing.  It is galling that the odious Putin is leading the right way for a resolution!  That though is one outcome of Syria.  Strange bed-fellows abound.  Just look at the Syrian 'rebels'.  This includes people and groups who have a long history of opposition to Assad and to his father, before him.  Then you have the allegedly religiously inspired jihadists who are happy to latch on to any cause that promotes their ideal of foment and religious cleansing as well as an anti-West agenda.  These groups include Al Qaeda and its affiliates.  However, this opposition is fractured and is struggling to come together to present a united front and to coalesce around an agreed negotiating team and policy.  Exactly what do the 'rebels' want?  Obviously, the overthrow of Assad but then?  

So Obama feeds those 'conspiracy nuts' by allying the US with a group that includes the people responsible for the 9/11 attacks!   Allowing the likes of the, surely certifiably mad, British MP George Galloway, to make mendacious statements which nevertheless have a patina of plausibility.  And all the time, Obama, the winner of the Nobel Peace Prize, is preparing for war - and make no mistake, the USA unilaterally attacking Syria, will be a declaration of war, there will be no cover of a UN resolution, no 'coalition of the willing', indeed, since Obama isn't even consulting the US Congress, no local democratic mandate.

I find it incredibly ironic that the Nobel Committee manages to give the Peace Prize to both Obama and later the European Union and both are increasingly belligerent as regards Syria.  To say the prize is devalued by such is to forget that Yasser Arafat was also a recipient!

So 'jaw jaw not war war' wins the day in the UK.  And, at a fundamental level, despite David Cameron's short term 'discomfort' (as it will be portrayed by the Labour Party and their media allies), democracy, in the UK is stronger today!

Well done to the Thirty and the Nine!

Incidentally, opinion polls suggested that public support for military intervention, in both the UK and USA was found to be 11%

Over to you, President Obama and the US Congress!

The new censors and the rule of law

Don't you feel at all troubled, these days?  Something bothering you?  Have you maybe read a news story or seen an item on TV that concerns you?

Well, keep quiet about it!  Shut up!  Stay silent, say nothing because if just maybe your view doesn't conform to the latest orthodoxy, then you will be pilloried.

Don't believe me?  Consider Yelena Isinbayeva.  The Russian Pole Vault champion was reported to have voiced support for the laws of her motherland or rather one law in particular.  The law that makes it a criminal offence to promote homosexuality to those less than 18 year's of age. 

Cue squeals of outrage from the pink mafia and their slavish followers.

Isinbayeva has now qualified her remarks to say that what she really meant to say, and maybe it got mangled in her use of the English language, was that all people should respect the laws of the country that they are in, at any given time.  So, if you are in Russia and they have a law that says what you can do and say about homosexuality, to an under 18, then follow that law.  She didn't go on to say that in Russia you must also not kill people or steal or set fire to buildings or other stuff but I suspect that she meant all of those laws should also be followed, as well.

I guess it's kind of like when foreigners come to visit the UK, we have this tendency to require them to follow our laws , I understand the same applies in France, the USA and, come to think of it, the whole world over.  Imagine what it would be like to drive in the UK, if Americans could simply ignore the law and drive on the side of the road with which they are familiar.

Personally, I don't have a problem with what I understand of the new law in Russia.  However, if I did, I guess I wouldn't go to that country and if I were a Winter Olympics athlete and felt very strongly about it, I would boycott the Sochi games.  I don't think it would be right for me to expect my fellow athletes to follow me in a boycott, after all, maybe they have their own views which are not totally in synch with mine.  At the moment, people are still allowed to have their own opinions since the new censors haven't yet managed to get their control of 'group think' to be total.  Right now these new censors can only use their minor celebrity status and acolytes to push their views through a like-minded main stream media.

Problem is though, the new censors don't yet control Twitter and blogs like this.  They want to control it though.  Recently, in the UK, some people posted hateful messages on the sites of some women.  Now in respect of some of these messages, they would seem to have been hateful enough that they contravened laws.  In these cases then, the law should be enforced but the new censors want to go after Twitter, instead.  To me' it's a bit like prosecuting knife manufacturers because someone was stabbed or Toyota because a Corolla was involved in a fatal accident.

The real truth though is that these new censors go after Twitter simply because they cannot stand to allow people a medium that they do not control.  They control main stream media - the biased BBC
is riddled with a 'right-on' metropolitan elite that knows better than the people that pay their wages and simply don't process stories that don't fit their agenda.

So if you are at all concerned, either shut up or keep on pushing Twitter and other social media to stay censor free.  Other than the privacy of our own minds (even Big Brother couldn't really get inside Winston Smith's), we have few outlets where we can freely express ourselves.

Advice for visitors to Britain

I wouldn't normally give advice to visitors to Britain.  Preferring instead to let people find there way around and discover the beauties of our lovely and history-filled island. 

However, recent events lead me to warn people of the perils that they may come across. 

The thing is, you may see people in certain rural idylls mimicking ostriches.  Yes, that's right, you will see the rear ends (most will hopefully be clothed) of country dwellers with their heads buried in the sand. 

Many of these people reside in the southern counties of England and enjoy the natural beauty while at the same time commuting into London where they can earn the salaries that afford them and their families, this lifestyle.  These people are truly fortunate because they are able to manage this lifestyle and yet not need any hydro-carbon based energy to do so. 

How do I know this?  Well, it must be so.  It must be that these people travel by foot or pedal power and light and heat their houses using personal solar power panels.  All that lovely country food must get cooked on solar powered stoves or open wood-burning fires.  These fortunate  people must also be blessed with an absence of internet and TV interfering with their lives and those pesky mobile phones don't blight their life, either.  And of course, they never, ever holiday abroad!

This has to be so because otherwise they wouldn't be opposing onshore drilling.  They would understand that the 4x4s that they drive require hydro-carbons, that the electricity that is used comes mostly from gas-fired stations.  They would have read, in a carbon-environment newspaper, that the UK is facing a severe energy crisis and within 2 years the country will face power outages.  They will have heard and read stories about the high energy taxes that are causing the death of old people who simply cannot afford to heat their homes, in the winter.  

Knowing all this though, they oppose exploratory drilling which just might provide solutions to the country's energy needs.  To say nothing of the fiscal benefits which might accrue to the country!

Why do they oppose?  There is some that twaddle on about the drilling rigs being an eyesore.  In this they are supported by Greenpeace and Friends of the Earth.  All though are content to see wind turbines, despoil the countryside.  These wind turbines will be around for 25 years, unless they burn-up before (as some have already done so).  The drilling rigs will be there for a couple of months, at most,  and then they will be removed to be replaced, if the well is successful, with a low profile pumping system - think nodding donkey - that can be hidden by a stand of conifer hedges.  Don't believe me?  Go look in Lincolnshire around Welton, Nettleham and Keddington and see the extent of despoilation (and when you don't see any, you will know what I mean !).

A further fear relates to 'fracking'.  Understand first that the drilling activity that is currently being opposed, includes zero as in no, fracking activity.  None, nada, zilch!

If hydro-carbons are found, they are likely to be in gas form and will most likely require fracking to facilitate extraction.  So, what about fracking?  Based on the mendacious stories from Greenpeace and Friends of the Earth and the totally discredited Gasland movie from Josh Fox, you would expect aquifer pollution - the actual fact that these wells drill through and beyond the water-table and then 'case-off' the aquifer zone, isn't allowed to get in the way of the lie that pollution occurs - it doesn't pure and simple.  Don't take my word for it.  Do your own research on the USA's Environmental Protection Agency website.  See how many instances of groundwater pollution they have recorded, during the ongoing shale drilling boom, indeed since 'fracking' first started in the mid 1940s.  Oh and don't be concerned at the talk of secret chemical recipes being pumped into the ground.  Lots of companies have 'secret recipes'.  Ever heard of Coca Cola or KFC's coating mix?

Then, talking of booms we get to seismic activity - that is the accusation that fracking causes earthquakes to occur.  This will cause country churches to topple and houses to develop cracks, just prior to falling over and killing all of the inhabitants and, perish the thought, school roofs to fall and smother children.  Again, do your own research.  Find out how many homes and buildings have been devastated by fracking in America, where thousands of wells have been fracked.  Tip - you won't find any data because there isn't any but Greenpeace and FoE don't want facts or the truth to get in the way of driving us all back to a non-carbon environment where we can sit in un-heated homes and work just down the road from our hovel.

So dear traveler, don't be surprised by any sighting  of the 'lesser brained nimbyist'  These selfish animals, when not burying their head in the sand and chirping their 'not in my back yard' mating call can sometimes be found communing with their local, usually Conservative, MP.  This creature comes from the genus money-grubbing hypocratus and when not concerned with feathering its nest has the uncanny ability to talk out of its rear-end while moving its lips.  These MPs are characterised by self-interest and such short-termism that would make a City trader blush!

So dear traveler, come visit, close your ears to the whining and eco-lies and instead enjoy this green and pleasant land.  Visit those churches that have stood for hundreds of years and marvel at the landscape.  Try also to picture that landscape before parts of it were ruined by loony eco-policies that heavily subsidise the installation of wind turbines. 

A series of unpredictions and predictions

Here is something that won't happen.  England and other European nations will not refuse to participate in the 2022 Football World Cup.

They should do this of course, if the criminals, running and ruining football, at FIFA, go ahead and move the tournament to winter from the summer. But they won't.  They will huff and puff and then they will see the $$s, ££s and €€s and conclude that 'the game' benefits from being spread far and wide. 

They will ignore the fact that the game is already global.  They will ignore the fact that the driver of this is the televising of European leagues, particularly, the English Premier League and that all of these leagues operate during the northern hemisphere's winter.  They will ignore the lingering stench of corruption surrounding the bid.  They will continue to close their eyes at the democratic deficit that is FIFA. 

They won't even pause to consider why Middle Eastern businesses (Qatar Foundation, Emirates, etc.) sponsor European sporting teams and events - hint - it is because these teams get exposure.

Instead, they will wrap their obeisance to the unrepresentative FIFA, in a 'concern for the conditions in which fans will be watching the games'.  Total codswallop.  These people don't give a fig for the fans.  The only time fans feature in the equation is on the revenue side - as in how much can we fleece them!

It was surely always on the cards that there would be calls for the games to be moved to the slightly cooler Qatari winter.  However, it is like FIFA and their bid evaluation committee have just discovered that it gets a tad warm in the Qatari summer - as in typically 45-50C warm. 

Here is something else that won't happen but should.  England and other European nations should leave FIFA.  Abandon this corrupt organization and stick to UEFA.  Here is another prediction - they won't do that - compromise is the modus operandi of the national associations - even with a history of what disasters follow appeasement.  Consider though, who really has the commercial clout?  UEFA or FIFA?  I would be willing to pay to watch Germany, Spain, Italy or England, play football or would watch on TV and endure being bombarded with advertising.  I definitely don't see myself watching a Turks and Caicos Islands versus Indonesia or Qatar or any other smaller footballing nation.  It just doesn't appeal and I am sure I am not alone - go into any sports bar in Vietnam or Malaysia or Qatar and see which leagues are being televised!

To those in control of the English Premier League, I implore you to do the right thing.  Leave the English football season as it is.  Consider, just for once, the people who follow your clubs, the people that won't be able or want, to travel to Qatar for the World Cup - they will be the overwhelming majority.

To football fans, get on social media and club sites and make your views known.  Not a prediction but.... they may just listen.