The UK must get off of our knees

It has been some time since I blogged.  I have been somewhat distracted by Twitter and this has provided an outlet enabling responses to fast-moving events.  But…

Twitter can’t be used to convey my current thoughts on the EU “negotiations” and the state of play in UK politics.

Firstly, the EU “negotiations”.  I use inverted commas because it is difficult to truly call them negotiations.  What we see, in an admittedly, and almost universally, biased media, is Theresa May’s government offering concession after concession and getting nothing back in return. 

Most of us have been involved in low-level negotiations throughout our life – trying to avoid a parking ticket, getting excused for delivering homework late, asking for a pay rise or a price reduction.  We know that throughout these low-scale negotiations – the very essence was give and take. A kindly Traffic Warden could maybe just let a harassed mother, with screaming kids in the car, off of a ticket, with a ‘please don’t do it again’.  A store worker might allow a discount for a display model etc. 

We also know that trying to negotiate with a ‘jobsworth’ traffic warden is futile. They simply won’t be moved by any consideration of human understanding.

Right now, the EU is that ‘jobsworth’ Traffic Warden.  They are not negotiating with the UK.  The EU want to punish the UK ,and its people, for having the temerity to vote to leave the organisation and, just as importantly, for failing to have another referendum to get the ‘right’ result as has always happened in other EU countries.  The UK has offered concession after concession and is now in the very dangerous position where the very union that unites the UK, seems to be being offered-up to placate the unplacatable EU.  

The pro-Brexit lobby are gung-ho about the EU needing easy access to UK markets more than the UK needing reciprocal rights in the other direction.  Certainly, the very clear trade imbalance, in favour of EU countries, supports this.  Also, if World Trade Organisation tariffs were used, then the result would be a duty level more than sufficient to fully subsidise UK exports, should that be needed.  That is, WTO rules would be cash-positive for the UK and cash-negative for the EU.   In a real negotiation, this would be a very strong driver for compromise from the EU but that isn’t the case, here.  The impetus here comes not from what is palpably best for the peoples and economies of the EU but from the drive for ever-closer union. 

So, the way forward.

Given that the EU don’t want to negotiate, recognise that and act accordingly.  Apart from anything else, this will restore some dignity to the UK’s standing in the world.  Instead of offering concession after to concession, to the EU, David Davis and the British negotiating team can get off of their knees, stand-up for the UK and then, simply walk-away. 

We can stand by our offer to EU nationals living in the UK, that those currently here, can remain.  Though, they must be subject to UK laws and not, as a concession, to European Court of Justice laws.  That’s how things work in other sovereign countries.  Hopefully, EU countries will reciprocate for UK nationals living within their borders – if they don’t well, frankly, we cannot allow the needs and clearly expressed wishes of the people residing in the UK, to be ignored or damaged by a small minority of people who have chosen to leave the UK.  Two points – the Referendum majority margin exceeds the number of UK people that are living in other EU countries, and, these EU dwellers have made a choice to live in the EU but more importantly, the British people have made their choice.

We will continue to fund the EU until we leave on March 31, 2019.  Then we leave the ‘club’ and we stop paying our dues.  For those UK persons, eligible for an EU pension, then arrangements need to be made and the UK should pay those.  Though I would suggest that they be more in line with UK standards rather than the over-generous, gravy-train EU rates.

As for the border with Ireland, well obviously we will need some arrangement to be put in place.  This can be achieved without resorting to physical barriers. 

Vehicle Number Plate recognition technology is very advanced – if I drive over the Dartford Crossing, near London, or speed on a motorway, then this is known to authorities.  This, plus the fact that much customs clearance is already being done, in advance, shows that a solution is out there. 

The Common Travel Agreement has existed since 1923.  This could continue.

Of course, if the Republic of Ireland followed my advice, then none of this would be necessary. See here.   http://bit.ly/2nfzwvk    

So, end the “negotiations”, get off of our knees and go forward into the free world as a sovereign nation and fulfil our destiny to remain the greatest country on earth!

Now my second gripe.

What’s wrong with the Conservatives?  If you’re a Labour supporter or so-called ‘Social Justice Warrior’ I am not talking to you.  Rather just Conservatives.

The Conservatives have a great message to shout about – so why aren’t they?

I know that some Remainer MPs are obsessed about Brexit but all Conservatives should be driving home the message of what Britain has achieved, under the Conservatives, since 2010.

• ·      Unemployment down by 76% to lowest levels for more than 40 years
• 
  
• ·      Employment up to 75% and this at a time when immigration has also continued to increase.
• 
  
• ·      Employment, at 75% of workforce amongst highest in leading economies and those in the EU
• 
  
• ·      Deficit reduced by 2/3rds
• 
  
• ·      Tax allowance for lowest paid increased by more than 77%
• 
  
• ·      Millions lifted out of income tax, altogether.
• 
  
• ·      National Living Wage introduced

Every time a Conservative MP appears on television or radio or speaks in the House of Commons or elsewhere, they should repeat one or all of these achievements.  Right now, Labour is being allowed to get away with its lies and in suggesting that the UK is an economic basket-case in need of a dose of Venezuela-style socialism.  This has to stop.  Conservatives and fellow libertarians cannot allow the very dangerous McDonnell and Corbyn and the rest of their economic illiterates into power nor to control the message with their lies.

Conservatives, wake-up - our country is at risk and petty infighting and jockeying for position for a post-May leadership is not in the interests of the UK. 

Put bluntly – do your job!

Might have just lost the 2^nd Test but I feel better for getting the above, off of my chest!

Negotiating Brexit - the basics

Firstly, some health advice.  Everyone just calm down.  We have had a referendum. We, as the people of the United Kingdom, made a choice and we will live with it.

Also, let's be very clear.  The United Kingdom is still a full and functioning member of the European Union.  We are still subject to all of the rules that membership imposes.  All those people who are accusing the Leave campaign of not fulfilling campaign promises need to understand that no substantive changes can occur while we remain a member of the EU.  Politicians and media commentators already know this and should think very carefully before they, for presumably personal gain, push and publish statements to the contrary.

And think back to last Friday.  Did the sun come up?  Did you go to work and do the same things that you did on Thursday and Wednesday? Was the price to fill-up you car or shopping trolley, the same as the previous time? Has the government suddenly declared we are on a war-footing?  Did Germany stop exporting cars to us and the French, wine?

Wasn't there an old WW2 poster about Keep Calm and Carry On ?

OK, so may as well address the elephant in the room, at the outset.

Nigel Farage should almost certainly take no public part in the negotiation with our (still current) EU partners.  None.  He is far too divisive and incapable of not gloating.

These negotiations are the responsibility of the UK government.  That government is formed by the Conservative Party and currently led by David Cameron.  Cameron has made it clear that he wants someone else to lead his party and the negotiations and so any team-forming must await the outcome of the Tory leadership campaign.  That might frustrate the likes of Jean-Claude Juncker but that's just tough.

I said, at the outset, that Farage should take no part.  Of course that is down to the new Conservative leader but I see no reason for Farage to be a member of the team.  The Conservative Party have a large number of very capable MPs who could participate and anyway, the bulk of the work needs to be carried out by the Civil Service, once they have been given their very clear, marching orders.   The latter point is critical, the Civil Service need to be told, in no uncertain terms that they are to broker a deal that is in the UK's interest and that matches the democratic decision of the people of the UK - a departure (Leave if you will) from all of the institutions of the European Union.

Fundamentally though, it is the Conservative Party that must shoulder the bulk of the work.  They may bring in and take advice from non-Conservative Party advisers but it is the role of the Conservative government to lead and get the job done.

As regular readers would expect, I have a few opinions on the whole process.  Here goes.

Assuming that he isn't chosen as the leader of the Conservative Party, I would propose David Davis, the MP for Haltemprice and Howden, as the leader of these negotiations.  Davis has been a long-time Euro-sceptic but is not so hide-bound that he cannot build bridges across the political spectrum - he was elevated in many people's opinion with his principled opposition to increased detention periods.  He also has a good 'back-story' and has repeatedly shown that he is 'no one's fool' and is not easily brow-beaten.  I would certainly trust him to represent Britain's interests but to do so in a British manner - not rubbing the EU's nose in it.

I believe that the negotiating team would benefit from cross-party participation - Kate Hoey and especially Gisela Stuart were very impressive during the campaign.  Jim Sellars from Scotland and Arlene Foster from Northern Ireland would also be great contributors.  As would Dan Hannan, who could bring his considerable inside knowledge to bear.  Douglas Carswell would also be a sound contributor as would be Suzanne Evans.

As you will note, all are Brexiteers.  It makes little to no sense to have people that passionately believed in Remain, sitting in the team and possibly thwarting the wishes and aims of the people of the UK.

The issues on which we need resolution are clear, and given the febrile atmosphere, now and here isn't the place. to discuss them.

That said, one thing needs to be made crystal clear.  EU migrants, that are now in the UK, should be immediately reassured that there residence is not in jeopardy.  They must be allowed the comfort of knowing we welcomed them before and welcome them now.  This is something that David Cameron can and must state, immediately.

More to follow but for now, let us all remain calm and a British sense of perspective.

We chose, we choose

This post is mainly aimed at the people of the UK and the leaders of EU countries.

Firstly though, I have to say wow, just wow!  A referendum result that has made me very, very happy.  Even more happier than the result of the Scottish Independence Referendum.  Of course there will be  some challenges ahead but we are British, we have overcome challenges before and will do so again.

David Cameron, before he resigned (quit?) said that we are not a nation of quitters and we aren't.  We stick with the right path rather than just taking the easy one.

Anyway...

The people of the UK chose to leave the European Union.  More than 33.5 million of us registered a vote and chose, by a margin of 52:48 to leave.  The majority chose to ignore the merchants of fear and chose to decouple us from the failed European Union project.  We never chose to sign-up to ever political union, we originally chose to join a Common Market but the corporatists and socialists of certain European countries want to become submerged in a political union.  That's their choice - though in typical EU fashion,  their people aren't being asked - but we have chosen a different course.  We wish them well.

Go back to the start of the last paragraph.  The people of the UK chose to leave the European Union.  This was a question put to the whole of the UK and a decision reached by the whole of the UK.  The talk of a second Scottish Independence Referendum, coming from Nicola Sturgeon is anti-democratic and is pure mischief making from her.  I really believe that if she was in a party of three or more enjoying a dinner out and one of the party said 'red or white wine'  and she was in the minority, she would immediately call for her democratic rights be respected and for a new Scottish Independence Referendum to be called.  Opportunist doesn't even come close.

Sturgeon is mischief making.  She knows full well that Foreign Affairs is not a devolved responsibility.  This is a power reserved to the Westminster parliament.  All this talk about asking Brussels to consider an application, from a constituent part of the UK, to join the EU is absolute rubbish.  Typical froth from Bute House.  Sturgeon and her minority devolved government should do what they were elected to do - manage the devolved affairs of Scotland.  They have done a very poor job of that so far - hence why they are now a minority government - but that is what they are there for.  Now is the time for Nicola to shut-up and do her job.

She also knows that the EU will have its hands full in the coming time, trying to make sure that the departure of the UK is achieved in a manner that is mutually acceptable and, perhaps much or most of their focus will be on making sure that no other member country dares to let their population make a choice.  Can't let the democratic will of the people get in the way of the EU project!  

Does anyone seriously think that Spain would let the EU consider, for even a single nano-second, allowing a constituent part of a member country to negotiate its own terms of membership of the EU, while it is still part of its home country?

So we in the UK chose to leave the European Union.  The leaders of the other members states now need to realise that we will also choose, when we leave.  We will invoke Article 50 of the Lisbon Treaty (never voted for by the British people, by the way), when we choose to do so.  We will act in the interests of the British people (all of them, Nicola).  That may not sound very communitaire but there you are.  We chose to regain our long-held freedoms and we will choose the timing for when we get these back.

Jean-Claude Juncker, President of the European Commission can huff and puff all he wants.  One of the first things he needs to learn, post June 23, 2016, is that we chose to no longer pay any heed to his demands.  We will choose, we will not be ordered to do anything by an unelected foreigner.  We had the choice and we chose, freedom from such tyranny.  Angela Merkel, Francois Hollande and Co. please take note.

David Cameron was elected as a member of the mother of parliaments and the Conservative Party chose him to lead it and therefore to be our  Prime Minister.  His first act, after the June 23 result, was to decide that on behalf of the people of the UK, he chose to delay invoking Article 50, until after his successor has been elected, because he believes that this is the best course of action he can choose for our country.

Some of my fellow-countrymen and women are now complaining about the result of the referendum. They say that younger people voted predominately for Remain while older people voted in similar numbers for Leave.  The argument seems to be that somehow the votes of these younger people should count for me because they will have to live with the consequences longer.  The latter point is true.  Though since they will enjoy the benefits of our regained freedom, I don't really see their point. Anyway a decision was requested and an answer was given.  As a nation (listening Nicola??) we chose to Leave. That's it.  No need for further referendums - I know that this is how the EU has solved its inconvenient referendum results, in the past but we are British and we understand democracy.  We have been at it longer than any other nation and so perhaps that's why we know how it works.

To all those that chose to Leave and to put their well-founded faith in the British people, I say a heart-felt thanks.   We have chosen freedom and our path will now diverge from our European friends.  We wish them bonne chance and gutes reise but we are off somewhere else.

After the referendum?

This post is mainly addressed to elected MPs of the Conservative persuasion.

Whatever the outcome of the EU Referendum, I really think that David Cameron is peddling pure fantasy if he thinks that things can go back to 'normal'.

The party line is that after the vote, Conservatives will come together , sing a couple of verses of Kumbaya and return to governing the country.  That those people who have been peddling lies, half-truths and highly selective use of statistics will gather around the Cabinet room table, with their colleagues from the Brexit camp, and just 'get along'.

Further that the 150+ Conservative MPs, who support Brexit will become quiescent and follow the Tory party whip.  That these MPs will ignore the distrust that Cameron and Osborne have sewn with their attempts to fix the outcome of the EU referendum.

As said above, I think this is pure fantasy and I think that David Cameron and George Osborne know this.

I posit that Cameron and Osborne are actually planning an exit strategy that has them, and 'their' Remain MPs joining with those Labour Remainers, that are disaffected with the ineffectual and frankly disastrous  Jeremy Corbyn leadership, and forming a new political organisation.

Some will say it is unlikely that Yvette Cooper and Andy Burnham would be prepared to break bread with Cameron and Osborne.  I am not one of them.  Consider, Labour has made lots of noise about 'austerity' and what they call swingeing cuts but they know the reality is that Osborne continues to spend and borrow like the 'reddest' of Labour Chancellors.  Austerity has been a stick to beat each other with but this has been a feebly deployed weapon by both sides.  Don't believe me?  Then explain how the Tories have been 'savagely cutting public expenditure' for the last 6 years and yet the National Debt has more than doubled to £1.6 Trillion.

This all may sound far-fetched but the Tories have a small majority, 12 , I believe and if Cameron cannot govern with an 'unruly' bunch of Brexiteers, then maybe he and Osborne would consider it best to break things up.  Of course it would be dressed-up as them 'not leaving the Conservative Party but the Conservative Party having left them' but the result would be a split.

And frankly,  I can see this happening, whatever the outcome of the vote.

That is, if (hopefully, when) a vote for Brexit is achieved, they and the Remainers would seek to frustrate the negotiations surrounding the Brexit so as to, in some perverted way, bring about the fulfillment of some of their wild referendum campaign claims and to seek a new referendum, where the environment/argument would then be 'we told you so'.

If, heaven forbid, there is a vote to 'remain' then Cameron can expect a leadership challenge and clearly Osborne's chance of succeeding him have evaporated so, why wouldn't they want to get ahead of the field and leave?  For the Labour 'deserters' they will point to the next-to-non-existent referendum campaigning  from Corbyn and his less than whole-hearted support for a clear Labour policy.  They might even call it a National Coalition Party and a coming together to 'heal the wounds and deep divisions that the referendum has created', etc..  With the huge amounts of money that the government spends on 'Special Advisers' (SPADs) you can expect these to come up with all sorts of rational-sounding reasons why it is the 'extremist right wing' of the Conservatives and other 'swivel-eyed loonies' that are at fault and so on.  These people will be called racists, 'little Englanders' etc..

So my advice to the Brexiteers is to get your retaliation in, first.  Disturb the 'peace' of the Conservative Party by initiating a vote of confidence  and a leadership challenge, now - don't wait for the outcome of the referendum.  Distract Cameron and Osborne from their lie-peddling and give them a new focus - their own survival.  Throw them off-balance and change the battleground.

In my view, the future of the Conservative Party, and indeed, Conservative policies, is at stake and the time for a pre-emptive challenge is now.

From Osborne, we have repeatedly seen how when someone pushes back, he folds - look at his tax credit policy, as a prime example.  Same really applies to Cameron - child refugees, anyone?.  Use these weaknesses and, in the process, save Britain.  Cameron and Osborne have adopted the bully boy tactics favoured by the Eurocrats and anti-democrats in Brussels but like all bullies they only attack those who do not defend themselves.  Like all liars and half-truth peddlers, they change the subject when faced with facts or the demand for evidence of their claims.

If Remain wins, it will only be because Cameron has repeatedly lied and stacked the deck against Brexit and has gotten into bed with Socialists and terrorist sympathisers and has called in favours from around the world from members of the 'Elite Club' who see democracy as something to be overcome and cheated against, rather than complied with

Business as usual , after June 23rd?  I don't think so.

EU half-truths

Have you received the propaganda leaflet from the UK government yet?  What did you do with it?  Straight in the bin? Read it?  I tore mine up and sent it back to the Conservative party at their FreePost address.  That way, Cameron’s party can pay 70p for the privilege of getting my response to their one-sided  and factually dubious document.

If you do bother to read this, you will immediately notice the innuendo and half-truths that run throughout.

The document states that 3 million jobs depend on the EU.  That is simply not true.  It has been estimated that 3 million jobs are dependent upon trade with the EU.  The fear that this so called ‘fact’ seeks to generate is that these jobs will disappear if Britons vote to leave the EU.  This is complete poppycock, utter rubbish, totally false – choose your own understanding.  As stated, these jobs are based on trade with the EU.  They are not dependent on membership of the EU.  The EU nations who trade with the UK do so on the basis of merit not charity.  They buy goods and services from the UK because those goods and services are offered at an acceptable level of quality and price.  If you read this leaflet you won’t find that in there.  You will just find the hint that these jobs will suddenly disappear if you vote leave.  This is shoddy and unbecoming a UK government.

The UK has attracted £540 billion of foreign direct investment over the last 10 years.  This  investment came about because of the UK’s pro-business policies not because of the EU. Policies that encourage businesses and allow for things like ‘zero hour’ contracts.  Policies that have led to a diminishing of union power, such that strikes are now a rarity, most obviously within the private sector.  Policies that allow for a reasonable relationship between employer and employee.  In certain EU countries, an employer doesn’t so much employ a worker as adopt them – it can be next to impossible to terminate employees when times get hard.   The UK is also moving towards a low company tax position, which also helps investment, though, meddling with other ‘taxes’ might erode this plus point.

The leaflet suggests that on balance and on the judgment of the UK government, the UK gets a good deal from the EU.  Consider, the UK contributes £350 million each week to the EU budget.  Of this, something less than half returns as grants and subsidies.  That means that around £175 million stays in the EU.  This pays for the fat cat tax free salaries and very generous pensions of the Eurocrats in Brussels.  It also subsidises certain EU industries, particularly otherwise inefficient ones, such as agriculture.  Irony alert.  The EU subsidises EU agriculture and puts trade barriers in the way of imports from developing countries.  Then because these countries, in Africa, for example, cannot export to the EU, their farmers suffer and so the EU then gives them aid.  Lewis Carroll couldn’t have dreamt up such idiocy!

Suppose that this £175 million was instead spent in the UK.  Or rather used to pay down the UK National Debt.  This currently stands at £1.6 trillion.  In a year, the UK could reduce this by £9.1 billion – not a huge amount but a start.  Further reductions could be made, because NHS spending and spending on schools and housing and welfare, would not need to be an increasing spiral to meet the demands of a rapidly rising immigrant influx.  This surely is the best way to secure the future for our children and grand children.  Far, far better a solution than shackling our country to the EU where, in countries such as Spain and Greece, youth unemployment is in excess of 50% - is that the future we want?  The EU is failing the old, failing the taxpayers and failing the youth and future generations.

Much is made by the UK government and various international organisations and of course the world’s former darling, President Obama, of the risk to the world economy from a ‘leave’ vote.  Inflation in the UK is threatened because of the instability.  At other times and when not discussing the EU vote, inflation is being positively encouraged by economists and world leaders as a cure to the stagflation that is facing world economies.  Go figure!

As per the leaflet, supposedly losing the UK’s full access to the EU’s Single Market would make exports to Europe ‘harder and would increase costs’.  Note the conflation of Europe and the EU.  The EU is not Europe it just contains a number of European countries, not all of them.  Note also the certainty.  Not might make exports hard but definitely would.   How on earth can anyone say that?  No discussions on a post-Brexit settlement have been undertaken so how can anyone say with such certainty that this would be the case?  Pure and simple, scare-mongering.

Then the leaflet claims that the rise of budget airlines and cheaper flights is down to the EU.  Even if it were true (and I seem to recall that the USA and Asia have such low-cost carriers without the aid of the EU), does anyone really believe that post-Brexit, airfares throughout Europe will suddenly increase and we would be back to the highly inefficient state-run monopoly airlines, of the past?

Now look at the benefits of the renegotiation that Cameron’s government ‘achieved’.

The UK now has a ‘special status’ in a reformed EU.  This special status means that we will not have to join the Euro.  We will not be part of further political integration, we will be able to impose ‘tough (their words, not mine) restrictions on welfare immigrants who have not contributed to the UK social security system and there is a commitment to reduce ‘red tape’.

When I read of the victories and major concessions I seethe.  That we have come to this.  The UK is allowed to not join the Euro or follow further political integration.  The UK is an independent sovereign nation.  The UK has been such an entity for hundreds of years before many of these countries existed!  But now we are to be allowed.  Excuse me if I sound less than grateful.  The UK doesn’t need to be allowed such concessions.  We have them by right.  They have been hard-won and paid for in blood through wars and struggle.  I hate to hark back to the second world war but the UK then stood alone in Europe, against the Nazis.  Without the UK and its allies from its colonies and dominions, Europe would have been under the Nazi boot, for ever.  No bureaucrat in Brussels or newly established democracy can give us these rights.  Nor can they take them away.

This document has cost something like £9.3 million to publish and distribute.  Cameron’s government spuriously claim that it is not unfair to publish this at taxpayer expense, because the ‘government has a view’ and wants to push that view.  Can you imagine the outcry there would be if, going into a General Election, which is a referendum on the governing party, the government of the day, published, at taxpayer expense, a defence of its policies and its future political programme?  Everyone would see it for what it is.  Government propaganda more usually associated with tin-pot dictators in banana republics.

This leaflet shames British democracy.   In a recent poll by YouGov, 53% of those people that expressed a definite opinion, said that the government’s actions were unfair.  Much is made of Cameron’s public school education (Eton) – well he doesn’t seem to have picked-up the sense of fair play that is supposed to epitomise such institutions.

I suppose, as an ever more committed ‘Brexiteer’, I should be happy.  This document and the secondment of government officials to bolster the ‘In’ campaign speak to the desperation of that campaign.  Lies aren’t working, unfair play isn’t working.  No matter how they bend the rules to try and achieve an ‘In’ vote, the people are stubbornly sticking to their guns.  At the moment, Brexit and In are neck and neck.  More immigration stories and such and the argument swings more and more in favour of the UK regaining control of our country, once more.

The only choice now, is Brexit.  Use your vote and use it correctly.

The English Vow

Immediately prior to voting commencing for the Scottish Referendum, UK political leaders issued a so called 'vow'.  This promised certain changes to the constitutional settlement, post vote, should a No vote be achieved.  Subsequently, the Smith Commission has convened and published a report on the devolution of further powers to the Edinburgh parliament.

What though of the English?  Where is the 'vow' for them?

It is clear that the Scottish Nationalists, who despite losing the referendum seem to be the party that is in a rampant ascendancy in Scotland,  intend to be very meddlesome in English and UK politics.  There is a certain irony in a party that wants no part of the UK being committed to becoming so heavily involved in those self-same politics.  However, this hypocrisy is then compounded when the SNP announce that they will, in the next parliament intend to participate very frequently in UK and English politics and will use their parliamentary right, to vote on purely English matters.   So for the SNP, they would not extend their 'Scottish votes for Scottish matters' to the English.

The SNP have already stated that they could not conceive of forming any kind of a coalition with the Conservatives, so that means they could only get into bed with Labour.  Irony heaps upon irony since the SNP are probably the second largest barrier to Labour achieving an outright majority at Westminster.  The biggest barrier is the Labour party itself - economically incompetent and very badly led are just two of the factors.

How about a new 'vow' ?  One signed-up to by the leaders of the Conservatives, Labour, Lib-Dems, UKIP and the Green parties?  One that guarantees, on a cross-party basis, that following the May 2015 General Election, an English equivalent of the Smith Commission would be convened to address the issue of English matters within the UK parliamentary system - perhaps looking at English Devolution.  I consider myself a Unionist but the reality is that right now, the constitutional settlement that is currently in play, is so biased against the English  and England that it should not continue.

It cannot be right that Scottish, Welsh and Northern Ireland MPs can vote on matters affecting the English NHS or English education etc., but cannot vote on those same matters within their own constituencies.

This isn't about a particular economic or environmental policy on which we could expect the parties to differ.  This is about making sure that the rights and views of those living within England are appropriately  represented and considered.  I suppose 'party politics' might intrude when the proposed commission looks at issues like the anti-English Barnett Formula are considered but the necessary review of this no-longer appropriate legislation would require a UK based approach rather than solely being an 'English' matter.

 So how about it David, Ed, Nick, Nigel and Natalie?  How about a pledge to the people of the largest country in the United Kingdom?  One that says that the views of the people from the largest constituent part of the United Kingdom, will no longer be ignored.

Yes for Scotland, No for England and Europe

Do you think that the Conservatives, or more accurately David Cameron and George Osborne have some kind of death wish?

I ask because I find it incomprehensible to understand the politics and policies of the Conservatives towards the Scottish, the English and the British.

On September 18, 2014, the voters in Scotland, in a high turn-out, voted No to Scottish independence by a margin of 55%:45%.  Not a resounding victory for the No campaign but enough to show a clear position.

The Conservative Party are poorly represented, in terms of MPs elected to the Westminster parliament, by Scotland.  Only one Tory MP being elected in the last three elections.  In the Scottish Parliament, the Conservatives have just over 10% of the seats and most of these coming arising from the proportional representation system, deployed in those elections.

Why therefore should the Conservatives be so concerned with Scotland?  I will come back to this in a moment but for now, think of it in cold electoral terms.  Scotland brings next to no electoral benefits to the Conservatives.  On the contrary, it elects a huge swathe of Labour opposition MPs.  Though this seems likely to change to Scottish Nationalist MPs at upcoming General Election, there is a very strong socialist and redistributive streak that runs through SNP policies, so there isn't that much difference between them.

So why are the Conservatives pushing for the devolution of further powers to Scotland's parliament?

Powers that will maybe allow Scotland to have all of the essential facets of nationhood, such as full tax raising and spending power, without the responsibilities that go with them.  The UK will still be the lender of last resort for Scotland and will be the backstop for its profligate spending plans.

As a brief aside, do you notice how quiet the Scottish Nationalists have become on the subject of oil revenues?  They were loud and proud when oil was north of $100 a barrel but we here nary a peep now that oil is south of $80 a barrel.  Is there any brave economist out there who could run the numbers and see what difference a >20% drop in the oil price would do to the SNP's already fanciful accounting?  I keep wondering if the Scots have learned from Darien, that it is always better to have someone to run to when the economic tides turn against you while the English are being led by fools who will allow such an imbalance of responsibilities.

These powers still will not address the fundamental 'West Lothian question'.  Scottish MPs will continue to be elected to Westminster, where they can vote on tax measures related to England, Northern Ireland and Wales and yet they will not be able to vote on matters relating to Scottish taxation.  If a minority Tory government, with a strong and overall English-seat majority wanted to propose tax reductions for middle and higher earners, such measures could be defeated by a coalition of English Labour MPs and their Scottish counter-parts and the SNP.  So the Scots have freedom but not the English.

In what world does this make any sense for the English or represent any notion of fair play?

I know that Conservatives will say that we are a United Kingdom and this is a legitimate response to widely-held Scottish opinion but when will they stop to ask the English?  The Scottish 'tail' is well and truly 'wagging' the English dog!

Then we come to Europe.  Here the Tories are losing ground to UKIP.  Here the Conservatives claim that they are unable to put a referendum before the British people until sometime within 2 1/2 years of the next election.

Think about that.  The Conservatives can push through parliament, in the space of a few months, legislation that fundamentally changes the fabric and constitutional settlement of the  United Kingdom and yet legislation related to the EU must wait.  Consider also, that there is no mandate from the British people, nor even the people of Scotland to push through the proposed changes.  Nothing was mentioned, about giving sweeping or indeed, any extra powers to Scotland, in any of the party manifestos, for the 2010 election.

In their haste, the Conservatives are supported by the Labour Party and the Lib Dems.  Both of these parties are pro-Europe and hope to reap some electoral rewards in Scotland as a result of this unjust settlement (though all opinion poll predictions are that both of these parties will go the way of the Tories in Scotland)

I believe that the British public know that all of the main parties want to stay in the European Union.  That all will campaign on that basis in any eventual referendum.  I also believe that the British people want to have a say in the matter.  It is perhaps a sign of the times that the people of Scotland can get a vote on issues like independence but the English cannot.  That Scotland can get local tax raising powers but the English cannot.  Perhaps it is a realisation that given the real powers that actually rest with the European Union, any such local powers, pale into insignificance.  What does it matter what taxes are raised in Scotland, England or the United Kingdom, if un-elected Eurocrats can simply decide that the UK must pay more funds to feed the EU beast?  And that there is nothing that can be done by the Scots, the English or the British to counter the position (and please do not try to use George Osborne's  decidedly dodgy accounting tricks concerning the £1.7Bn, that was recently demanded).

Only UKIP is offering an immediate referendum on EU membership and yet the likelihood of a UKIP parliamentary majority is very slim.  They can damage Conservatives and Labour but are highly unlikely to be the majority party nor to hold the balance of power.  My sense is that UKIP will damage the Tories on Europe and immigration and will damage Labour on immigration.  Labour's (pro) policy on the EU is not something that they really push, though I think that this will be under deeper scrutiny, in the coming months.

So a system of an united governance, for the United Kingdom, that took more than 300 years to develop, can be fundamentally changed in the space of a few months, without the say-so of the people of all of the United Kingdom and yet an alien system, and make no mistake,  the EU's definition of democracy - deals done behind the scenes by un-elected Eurocrats - is alien to British ideas of democracy, cannot be even discussed let alone changed until after years of wrangling.

Forget all the talk about fighting for Britain in Europe, that comes from the mouths of politicians.  That is at best just a soundbite and at worst an outright lie.  Britons fighting in Europe ended in 1945 and since then our democratic freedoms have continuously been whittled away with a rapid acceleration after 1975.

If David Cameron and George Osborne cared a fig for the United Kingdom or even just the Conservative Party, they would put legislation for an EU Referendum, before Parliament immediately.  This would take the wind out of the sails of UKIP and would force Labour and the Lib Dems to show their true colours.  Most importantly, it would give the people of Britain a voice on an issue of truly fundamental importance.

We don't need any fancy propositions or crazy and undemocratic notions - as for example spouted by Nicola Sturgeon, here - a simple Yes or No to continued membership will suffice.  If the result is a Yes, then the strength of the majority will settle things.  If a very strong Yes, then nothing more to be said, Britain succumbs to the EU Superstate.  If the Yes majority is more narrow - say 10% or less, then Britain seeks a re-negotiation of the terms of membership.  If the majority is for No, then we leave the EU, within 12-18 months.

I am not usually one to give out health tips but if you are hoping for a referendum on the EU, don't hold your breath.  Unless UKIP do really break the mould of British politics and achieve a significant breakthrough in 2015, we will see no change in British/EU relations until after the 2020 election and by then it may be too late.

Very depressing that we have come to this and especially so that it is at the hands of the Conservatives.

Osborne Statement leaked

Below is the transcript of the Autumn Statement that Chancellor George Osborne is to deliver to the House of Commons on December 3, 2014.  Given its content, we can expect that there will be changes made to water down many of these but see what you think.

Mr Speaker, fellow members of the Conservative Party and members of Parliament from other parties.  Today, following this speech, I will place in the House of Commons Library a copy of this statement and supporting documentation.

The supporting documentation includes a statement from the independent Office of Budget Responsibility (OBR) which comments on my statement.  As the House will know, the OBR was established by this government to act as an independent reviewer of the economic situation within the United Kingdom and of the government's responses to that situation.  Essentially, to ensure that there is independent scrutiny of government budgetary plans so that we avoid the multiple counting of expenditure and unfunded promises, which could not subsequently be kept, that were so prevalent under the previous government.  Also to comment on taxation and policies that would drag Britain further into debt.  The House will recall that Britain's spiraling debt increases were occurring even before the 2008 global economic crisis.

Before I get too far into this statement, I must declare an interest.

It is customary, in such circumstances that the Rt. Hon. Leader of the Opposition, will respond to this statement.  I declare therefore that though I have made a financial contribution to the 'Save Ed' campaign, I do not expect to receive any favours in return for such largesse.  My donation was in excess of the 2p that the Leader of the Opposition recently allegedly gave to a beggar in Manchester, but I consider my £1 money well spent, if it keeps him and the other Ed sitting opposite and continuing to peddle their Micawberish lines about 'needing to borrow ever more because something will turn-up to sort it out'.

I have news for them.  Something did turn up to sort it out.  It is the Conservative Party.

Before I digress too much a final comment regarding the party opposite.  A friend recently reminded me of the line from the film, Love Story and turned it around to make it relevant to Labour and their economic incompetence.  Labour means never having to say sorry, is how it goes!

So Honourable Members, when you read the statement and hear the comments from those opposite, remember that, Labour means never having to say sorry for how they left this country in 2010.  Labour means never having to say sorry for the deficit that they left the country, for the debt mountain that would grow bigger because of the financial black holes and unfunded spending that they left behind.  In fact the only time that Labour have said sorry, is when they left a note at the Treasury saying ' Sorry, there's no money left!'

Before I get to the statement, just a word about our Coalition partners, the Liberal Democrats.   Some members of that party have indicated that they do not support this statement and will vote against any measures arising from it.  My Right Honourable friend the Prime Minister has suggested that any such dissenting members, who hold ministerial office should consider their position and that is what they are now doing.

Thank you for your patience and now to the statement.

The UK economy is well on the way to recovery.  Indeed it is leading the way, in terms of all economic indicators, among the G7.  As with any patient that has had a serious illness, a relapse is possible, though given that the fundamental underlying economic health issues have been identified and the remedies are known, we can expect a full recovery, over time, so long as we stick to the medicine that has brought us back from the brink.

Sticking with this medical theme, the UK economy was obese and suffering as a consequence.  In 2010, the Body Mass Index, or BMI was very unhealthy.  We were funding a financial/calorific intake that was far in excess of our needs and of what was good for us.  We were getting fatter on other people's money.

For the health of the patient, that had to stop!

Over the last 4 1/2 years, we have initiated policies which have begun the slimming down process.  Our economic BMI is still too high but now when we get on the scales we can see improvement and as a nation we know we cannot treat this like some kind of yo-yo diet where we now  backslide and start getting into debt again.  We need to stay the course.

Staying the course is  vital for any healthy diet.  However, a diet needn't be all doom and gloom, not all abstinence and restraint.  Sometime we also need the carrot of a little self-indulgence.

This statement looks to keeping Britain on that healthy diet.  We will slim down the State but will indulge our people along the way.

Firstly, the slimming regime.

In the Budget planned for April 2015, this government will propose removing the so called ring-fence from Education and Health spending.  At a time when all other sectors of the economy are learning that they need to slim down and lose weight, we cannot, as a nation have two vital services that are allowed to gorge while others are on reduced rations.  that is not the British way, that is not the Conservative way.

All government departments, will need to reduce year on year expenditure by 5% in the fiscal year 2015/2016 and a further 5% in each of the succeeding 4 years.

The NHS has been protected from the expenditure reductions that have been required at other government departments but it simply isn't fair that this continues.  I know that the party opposite will scream about the NHS not being safe in Tory hands and so on but the reality is that we are all in this together, we cannot slim-down the body and ignore any large part of that body, we must look at this as a whole.

My colleague the Minister for Health will be advising NHS Trusts on the planned spending budgets  for coming years in a short time.  This advice will include instructions that they should immediately undertake wholesale re-negotiations of all PFI contracts.  And, let us state here and now, we expect these PFI providers to fund the largest part of the reduction in NHS spending.  We will advise NHS Trusts that they will be allowed to go into receivership, bankruptcy, fold or call it what you will but we, the British taxpayer and the Conservative government, will not allow the people to be ripped-off by paying exorbitant fees to private finance organisations.

To be clear on this.  We know that most of these overly generous PFI contracts were signed under previous Labour governments and were considered a 'neat trick' to keep the public finances looking good.  This though isn't about political point scoring.  This party wants to see a healthy NHS not one that is having its very life-blood sucked out by onerous PFI contracts.

To those financiers listening to this, my advice is clear.  Get in touch with your NHS Trust partners and renegotiate the terms of your agreements as a priority.  This issue of overly generous contracts is now on the table and we know we can expect the full support of the 'banker bashing' brigade on the opposite benches, so it isn't going away.

Details on departmental budgets will be placed in the House of Commons Library following their announcement by the respective Ministers but the foregoing outlines the overall direction of where we are heading.

Turning now to taxation.

It will come as no surprise that this party is committed to reducing the tax burden on ordinary people.  The party opposite will bleat about tax cuts for the privileged few and so on, and they may, in their comments,  be yet joined by others.  The reality though, and they absolutely know this, is that government spending isn't funded by the privileged few, by the top earners.  If these people were taxed at 100% it still wouldn't be enough to fund spending.  And that is before we contemplate the huge increases in public spending that will be required to fund the extravagant promises made by the party opposite!  Why they would want to throw away the gains we, as a country, have made in the last 4 1/2 years is simply criminal.  We haven't come through a period of austerity, just so that we can go out on a Labour Party inspired binge!

At the recent Conservative Party conference, we proposed certain measures would be enacted if we were entrusted with power, by the British people, after the May 2015 General Election.  We now believe that we can accelerate some of these proposals.

The April 2015 Budget statement will include proposals to raise the income tax threshold to £12,500 with effect from April 2015 and increase by £500 increments each succeeding fiscal year until it reaches £15,000.  This will lift millions of people out of paying tax, altogether.


The April 2015 Budget statement will include proposals to raise the income tax threshold for the 40% rate from the current level of £41,865 to £45,000 from April 2015 and then by £1,000 increments each succeeding fiscal year until it reaches £50,000.  This will cut the tax bill for millions of so called 'middle earners' .  These people have contributed to putting the UK economy on the road to recovery and it is only right that they should get to keep more of the money that they earn and to be able to spend it as they like, not so that its spending is dictated by some bureaucrat in Westminster or the local town hall.

The April 2015 Budget statement will include proposals to completely lift the burden of so called 'green taxes' from our people and our businesses.  These taxes have crept stealth-like into the fabric of our country and sap the economy.  They force Old-Age Pensioners to sit in unheated homes because they cannot afford to pay high gas or electricity bills which are high because of these taxes that were brought in by the last Labour governments.  These killing taxes must go.

Linked to this, effective midnight, the fuel duty will be reduced by 10p a litre.  I have listened to representatives of the transport industry and of those from rural communities and know that this is the right change to make, to aid our people.

Honourable friends colleagues and Members, these are the headline changes that this Government will be putting before the House.  The full statement, including the comments of the OBR and the current position of the economy will now be placed in the House of Commons Library.

I commend this statement to the House.