Who'd be French? Not me!

Who’d be French? 

A beautiful and diverse country producing goodish wines, certainly, however, consider the negatives.

Think about the last 18 months.  130+ people killed and mutilated at the Bataclan, 84 innocents murdered while celebrating Bastille Day, in Nice.  A priest murdered and beheaded while celebrating mass.  A policeman and his wife killed in their own home, journalists killed while carrying out their daily work, in their police-guarded offices, in the capital of France.  These and other horrors have been visited upon France in this period. 

The French Prime Minister, Manuel Valls  has essentially told the French people that they should get used to it.  That they must learn to live with such terror. 

Many older British people will not be surprised at such comments.  They will recall the French defeatism during 1940, when the French nation, largely, capitulated to the Nazis in a matter of days.  One cannot help wonder what it will take for a modern day resistance to form to defeat the enemy that is now very clearly, within.

People say that the upcoming Presidential election, in 2017, will be the catalyst for change.  That the platform of the Right – Republicans or Front National and that of the Left – Socialists, will reflect the populist disquiet with the internal threat - the concern about the no-go areas in many French cities, where migrants congregate and provide a safe haven for their co-religionists, the concern about the lack of integration by certain groups – let’s not beat around the bush – the lack of integration by Muslim immigrants and 2^nd and sometimes 3^rd generation immigrants. 

I doubt it though. 

France is an economic basket case.  It’s not just the recent spasm of rampant socialism, under President Hollande, damaging as that has been.  No, France has been on the slide for years.  Hollande’s predecessor, form 2007 to 2012, President Sarkozy, who is now seeking a return to power, was elected to shake things up and take on the deeply entrenched and very powerful trade unions.  He did somewhere next to zero.  Indeed, I would suggest that his abject failure emboldened the unions and continued the decline of the French economy.

The Front National will make Islam and migration a key election issue and right now, they are leading in the essentially three-horse race.  However, we can expect the Republicans and the Socialists to try and steer clear of any meaningful discussion about this subject. 

Indeed, we are seeing this already.

I opened by asking ‘Who’d be French?’ because were I saddled with such, rather than being blessed by being British, I would be so shamed. 

All of those atrocities mentioned earlier and then the focus of current French political debate?  The burkini! 

Now I do find this dress somewhat offensive but honestly, I think it’s a matter of personal choice.  If Muslim women want to show evident signs of their subjugation by and subservience to, their male ‘overlords’, then that’s their business.   I don’t really think it’s the business of government, local or national, to legislate on what people wear on the beach. 

I could understand if these politicians had nothing else to occupy them.  You know, like terrorist atrocities on their streets, like a fifth column seeking the overthrow of French culture and law but – you know where this is heading.

I guess this falls into the ‘false flag’ category.  The big problem is Islam and its highly threatening position in the West but rather than face this, governments pick-up on trivial issues and try to make them seem significant so that they can deflect attention from their otherwise abject failure to deal with the substantive matter. 

France isn’t alone in this ‘head in the sand’ approach but given the recent terrorist atrocities and the mayhem visited upon its own people, it wouldn’t be unreasonable to expect some ‘steel’ in the French response.  Instead, France’s authorities mimic a poodle when faced with a Doberman or Rottweiler – they make whimpering noises and lay down.  And I am sure I don’t need to be too graphic and describe what else happens to the poodle.

So is France lost?  Sorry to say that things are certainly heading that way.  I write this blog not in support of the Front National, though they have trumpeted the issue for years, but in the hope, probably forlorn, that France’s politicians will awaken and defend their country and their culture.  There’s a lot at stake, make sure you do your bit to push the fight-back agenda.

Cameron's dodgy dossier

Fed-up with all of the contradictory forecasts and statements about the referendum on Britain's continued membership of the European Union?  You probably should look away.

I would like to see another forecast - I know, that suggests either some kind of a weird fantasy obsession or that maybe I am just sad but let me explain.

The UK Treasury have been burning the midnight oil and going into 'spreadsheet frenzy' to produce forecast after forecast that shows how much the UK economy would suffer if the UK electorate had the nerve/courage to vote for Brexit.  So I am not alone in wanting forecasts!  Maybe not even sad.

The latest forecasts suggests a 12% decline in the value of Sterling, an increase in unemployment of up to 820,000, house price declines of 10-18% and a deep recession as a result of the shock to the economy, from a Brexit.

Now, these Treasury economists are supposed to be smart and I suppose that the reason that they are getting the same 'results' as other forecasting bodies is because they are all using the same economic model.   So rather than being independent verification, as is being touted, we instead have a reiteration of the same result because the 'domesday' data input and the model used is largely the same.  The surprise would be if they came out with a different result.

I would like to see a forecast that looks at the impact of a Brexit, not on the UK economy but rather on the economy of the remaining EU countries.

The doomsayers include in their forecasts projections that immediately a Brexit vote is achieved the four horsemen of the apocalypse will descend.  We will have Pestilence, Famine, Death and of course War.  Additionally, overnight or close to it, the strongest growing economy in the EU will dive into recession.

But...

What about the effect on Germany?  Or on France or the Netherlands?

In 2015, the Germans exported US $100 billion of their excellent cars and other goods and services to the UK.  They then imported just US $46.5 billion from the UK and so enjoyed a surplus of US$ 53.5 billion.

In the same year, France exported US$41.5 billion and imported $27 billion, so having a US$ 14.5 billion trade surplus.  The position for the Netherlands was exports to the UK of US$50.7 billion and imports of $34.2 billion, so a trade surplus of $34.2 billion.  I am not sure if that Netherlands import figure includes items that are 'imported' as part of a trans-shipment process through the Rotterdam super-port but you get the drift.

Now - still with me?- If the Sterling exchange rate did fall by 12% (why not 10% or 15%?) then this would make UK exports cheaper and if proper WTO duty rates, of around 4%,  were used, rather than the extremely high rates used in the Treasury model, then the falling exchange rate would completely eliminate the effect of any duties and would still provide an export boost.

Problem is though, that this 12% fall is one-sided.  It supposes that the other global economies would be okay and stable and only the UK would suffer from a Brexit.  Consider though the effect of the UK retaliating against Germany, France and the Netherlands, if they and the rest of the EU imposed  onerous customs duties on the UK.  If the UK did exactly the same and applied the same rates of customs duties, the economies of these countries would undoubtedly suffer and this would ripple on and impact the Euro exchange rate.   So maybe that 12% decline in Sterling's value is incorrect.

Let's suppose that the USA also followed the EU lead and imposed similar level duties.  Then the US economy and the US $ exchange rate would also suffer as they have a small trade surplus with the UK. Albeit not too much but the impact would not be benign.

We all know D'Israeli's saying about 'lies, damn lies and statistics' however, what we are being presented with are one-sided forecasts that simply serve the UK government's position.  In none of these 'forecasts' do we hear the impact of Britain's reduced contribution to the EU.  This is variously estimated at £55 million per day! Again, this would positively impact Britain and negatively impact the EU.  Those particular coins, unsurprisingly have two sides.  Nor is any of the positive effect of reducing the mountains of 'red tape' that strangle UK and EU business, shown.

Also consider that a fall in house prices would be a boon for all those young people trying to get on the housing ladder.  Yes it would negatively impact those people who speculate in the housing market - foreign flight capital, members of Parliament, etc., but overall, the effect would be positive.

In the past, UK Prime Minister, David Cameron spoke of presenting the case around the referendum to the British people and letting them decide.  Instead of doing this, he and his Chancellor, George Osborne are becoming ever more outrageous in the claims and use of data.  Indeed, they are starting to make Tony Blair's 'dodgy dossier' look like a respectable, sober and credible document!


George Osborne, speaking when he established the Office of Budget Responsibility, said that the need for this organisation, independent of the the government, was because in the past, HM Treasury forecasts were found to be biased and dubious because of the political interference.  So when we see the drivel now emanating from Osborne's Treasury we know that we need to filter any forecasts through the prism of number manipulation so as to achieve a pre-determined outcome.  In other words, don't trust or set any store by what they say - they say what their master - George Osborne - wants them to say.

To close, another forecast.

David Cameron has said today, that the cost of Brexit could add £230 to the cost of a holiday in Europe, for a family of 4.  Of this is a 'could' rather than a 'would' and of course this figure is 'supported' by the usual dodgy statistics and calculations from the widely discredited forecasts publishers.  However, let's say that this time, the number is right, does £57.50 a head sound a high price to pay for the restoration of Britain's long-held democratic traditions?  Britain has paid a far, far higher price to defend its democracy, in the past.  A price in blood and lives, not in £ sterling.

Jean-Claude Juncker, the unelected 'President' of the European Commission, who hails from Luxembourg, has threatened the UK by saying that 'deserters' can expect no assistance from the EU.   Well Mr Juncker, I suggest that you hit the history books.  Go back to the history of the second World War.  In 1940, after the fall of EU members France, Belgium and Netherlands, at the hands of the Nazi hordes, Britain, aided by its colonies and Commonwealth allies, stood alone against the Nazis.  Britain didn't desert Europe's people in 1940 and we won't desert them now or in the future.  Brexit will provide a liberating example for those Europeans now trapped within an anti-democratic EU.  Brexit will allow those countries that suffered under post-war Soviet domination, to experience true freedom and democracy, when the inevitable collapse of the EU occurs.

£57.50 a head for freedom - bargain of the century - where do I send my money?

Vote Brexit, shake off the yoke of anti-democracy which is weighing us down and restore Britain's freedom

If not Assad

It is clear that we are moving towards a change in approach to the Syrian civil war.

Putin's Russia has always been clear that he supports the regime of President Assad.  We can sense though, that some European leaders are also moving in that direction.  The problem for the Europeans is that they have been very publicly strident in their condemnation of Assad.  They have repeatedly said, that Assad must go and they wouldn't talk to him.

Finally, however, these leaders are recognising that Assad has to play a part in the process.  This dawning of reality, however odious it might seem (and do listen out for the knee-jerk shrieks of horror from the liberal media), also finally moves the focus very strongly onto how to eliminate Daesh (ISIS).

Russia is calling for coordination of the military effort and, if only to avoid a potential clash between East and West forces, this really has to happen.  France has now commenced air operations against Daesh, in Syria - having earlier said that such actions would be illegal!  Seems like President Hollande is putting socialist rhetoric behind realpolitik in the pecking order.  UK Prime Minister, David Cameron, is expected to bring a motion before parliament, within the coming weeks, seeking parliamentary approval for the UK to join in the bombing of Daesh targets in Syria.  If Germany can pull itself away from the silly Volkswagen matter, then they too might participate.

This coalescing towards a coordinated and focused attack on Daesh can have a number of positive effects.

Firstly, this should allow for the creation of a series of safe zones within Syria, protected by the air power available.

Secondly, this will then provide a reason to halt the flood of migrants that have been leaving Syria.  For this, real assistance, rather than just score settling with Turkish Kurds, will be need to be demanded from Turkey.  Demanded because Turkey has, throughout the whole sorry story, served only its own interests.  Indeed, it is clear that Turkey, led by the strongly Islamic Erdogan, has allowed for a significant destabilisation of its neighbours and the EU.

Thirdly, this will take the fight to Daesh.  It is clear that the Syrians do not have the capability to eliminate them.  It is equally clear that the Iraqi army does not have the stomach for a fight against Daesh.  They have very little to no support amongst Sunni Iraqis.  Their Shia militias are simply lawless and, not too different from Daesh in how they subjugate the areas they occupy.  Their Iranian allies, seem more interested in colonizing the south of Iraq than in taking on Daesh.  The Kurdish Peshmerga can, and do, hold the line against Daesh but they are poorly armed and, due to Turkish, Iraqi and Iranian pressure, the West have produced very feeble support and materiel, so the Peshmerga are being under-used.

The issue of who succeeds Assad needn't concern us, at this point.  He is very weakened and whatever the outcome, cannot survive in the medium term.  This does not mean that Syria, free  of Daesh, will become a democracy post-Assad.  One has to question whether or not, the imposition of Western style democracy is suited for some countries, including Syria.  The Syrian civil war was a direct outcome of the so called Arab Spring.  This 'flowering' of people power has led to absolute chaos in Libya, an effective military dictatorship in Egypt (no realm change there!) and a loosening of control in Tunisia, following the ousting of long-term President Ben Ali, such that Islamic terror can stalk their tourist resorts, killing at will.

So change is coming to the Syria conflict and this will create some strange bed-fellows but the West, if Obama and Kerry's naivete  can be sidelined, has an opportunity to eliminate Daesh and then to eliminate Al Qaeda in Syria (though doing the latter might just create a vacuum for Hezbollah to fill). Now therefore, is the time for Cameron and Hollande to show backbone and stand-up to this lame-duck US President and his court-jester Secretary of State.  Who knows, they might even get some trade-off, from Russia, relative to Ukraine.

The Swarm

David Cameron is being abused by ignorant people in the media and rent-a-quote talking heads.  The reason is that he used the word swarm to describe the people that are camped in Calais, France and are seeking to illegally enter the UK.

First the word.  Most people accept that the Oxford English Dictionary is the worldwide respected source on the definition of words in the English language.  The OED defines swarm as :

1A large or dense group of flying insects:a swarm of locusts

MORE EXAMPLE SENTENCES

1.1A large number of honeybees that leave a hive en masse with a newly fertilized queen in order to establish a new colony.

EXAMPLE SENTENCESSYNONYMS

1.2(a swarm/swarms of) A large number of people or things:a swarm of journalists
So according to the arbiter of the definition of words in the English language, it is clear that Cameron is correctly using the word.
Now moving on to the correctly labeled swarm, what to do?
Firstly, I believe that we need to recognize the cause of the current crisis.  Yes, it is the illegal immigrants, mostly from Africa, that are the underlying cause however, the inaction of the French authorities is exacerbating the problem.  Simply put, the French need to clean out these illegal immigrant camps.  Don't forget, these illegals are illegally in France as well.  There is a strong suspicion that the French are content for these people to move on to the UK as it relieves the French of a problem, on their doorstep.
So what is needed is very strong words to the French government and a statement that absent appropriate action from the French then the UK will cease all payments to the EU.   A 24 hour notice period should be ample time for the French to mobilise the appropriate security personnel.  This monetary threat to the EU should bring other nations into the fray and to bring pressure to bear on the French to act more responsibly.
Secondly, at the UK end,  deploy either the military to protect the tunnel or provide the police with appropriate weapons.  These could include Boris Johnson's idle water cannons.  We could maybe even offer these to the French to assist in the quarantine  of  the lorry loading areas, at Calais.
To get the bleeding hearts and BBC followers  out of the way, don't bother me with tripe about human rights and such.  These illegal immigrants are seeking to invade the UK.  David Cameron and the UK government have a duty to protect the borders of this country.   Does anyone think, anyone, that if some of these illegals were shot and killed by British troops or police, we would continue to see the current flood?   At the moment, those that die while making the attempt to enter the UK, consider that it is a calculated gamble that they may be killed in the attempt but they do so, knowing that once they get onto the train, then they are home free and en route to the land of 'milk and honey'.  If they knew, and had examples to illustrate, that they would have a very high risk of being shot, then this would change the dynamic of that gamble.
I recently posted here, that illegal immigrants should be sent back to the country that they came from, France.  For those that survive, then that would still apply but the extreme  risk posed by the swarm of illegal immigrants at Calais, requires a much more robust response.
Oh and no twaddle please about other EU countries absorbing more illegal immigrants than the UK.  I don't care.  As sovereign nations, they can do what they want.  The government of the UK needs to do what is best for the UK and its people.  
As for the United Nations and their comments - to hell with them.  Who are they to tell a sovereign nation how to act?  That corrupt talking shop needs to butt out and keep quite.  indeed, I would favour the UK discontinuing funding of the UN and all of their corrupt programmes, with immediate effect.  The other day, the UN castigated the UK because we still allow parents to chastise their own children.    If you remember nothing else about the UN, remember this.  In 2003 Libya, then led by Colonel Gaddafi, was elected chairman of the UN Human Rights Commission.  If there is such a thing as parody squared, that is it.  This tells you all you need to know about the UN.    

Be afraid !

Reports from Tripoli, Libya state that eleven commercial airplanes have been stolen.  At any time, knowing of such a theft in what is effectively a failed state,  would be worrying, however, coming so close to the 9/11 anniversary, this must be considered very concerning.

Of course the principal targets would likely be Western - so mainly US, UK or French interests but Egypt and Israel can't sleep easy, knowing of this theft, either.  Neither can Baghdad, Tehran or Jeddah be off their guard.  It is not known which of the multiple terror organisations or militias have taken these planes so the targets are unknown.  Given the random nature of the mindless violence that terrorists visit upon people, maybe knowing which group stole what plane might not even make any difference! 

There remains the possibility that these planes were stolen for the reasons usually given for thievery - I saw it there and thought I could steal it and sell it to feed my drug habit, or something like that - but I just don't see this as a crime of opportunity!  11 trained pilots and probably co-pilots and navigators just happen to be passing Tripoli airport during a battle between two factions and decide ' Hey, while all this is going on, why don't we steal those planes and then fence them, later on?  Yes, of course they are fueled and ready, let's go!

This issue is very worrying on two counts. 

The act itself leaves many of us and our loved ones, vulnerable to the actions of madmen who seem to think human life of little or no value.  People who would fly a plane into a building and not be worried about the ensuing death.

Equally concerning though, is the lack of any noise or activity from the media.  I know that the American MSM try to avoid all Libya stories because, whisper it very quietly, that is kind of, like, Benghazi territory and no one can speak of that, lest it tarnish the reputation of the sainted Obama and blessed Hillary!  But hey!  There are eleven commercial passenger planes missing and there is every likelihood that these are now in the hands of terrorists.  That should really concern us all and all of the posturing that is coming and to come from the NATO summit, will mean nothing if these planes are flown against civilian targets.

We face a more than usual uncertain future until this risk is eliminated.

HS2, NIMBYs and France

Given the Government's decision to go ahead with the HS2, would it be too much to ask that we follow the example of the French.

That is, we get the thing done as a national priority and not just through to Birmingham but on to Manchester and Leeds. 

One of the things I admire about the French is that once they decide, at a national level, on a grand projet, they get on with it.  According to reports, the legislation for the initial phase, through to Birmingham, won't come before parliament before 2014. 

Honestly!  It would be quicker to get a referendum on Scottish independence!

Wherever and whatever route is used, someone will be affected and so will someone's view.  Sorry (not really though) but that's the price of progress and I really think we do need to progress.

Some of the opposition to the proposal suggest that the current congestion on trains could be eased if more carriages were added to existing trains and platforms extended.  Well let's do that as well.  The indications or proposal suggests that the first phase won't be complete before 2026, anyway!

I am really not sure I understand why it will take 14 years to build a railway line and yet we got the whole London Olympics site built in less than 7 years!

Let's get this done and done now.

Cameron and Co need to put the national interest before party interest and tell the constituencies through which the line goes, this is the way it is!

One further point though.  It is my understanding that one reason the French manage to get their grand projet through is that they don't penny-pinch on compensation and they accommodate those that they effect - so build under-passes for farmers etc.  In other words they buy-off a lot of the moaners!

Breast Implant removals - who pays?

According to a report on the biased BBC:

A surgeon advising the UK government has called for a staged removal of faulty breast implants, following a health scare in France.

Tim Goodacre, part of a panel looking at products made by French company PIP, said the reported risk of rupture was "quite out of the ordinary."
The government said the failure rate was 1%, but a private clinic now believes it could be up to 7%.
"This is very much higher than anything we'd consider acceptable," he said.
Speaking on the BBC's The World at One, Mr Goodacre, who is president of the British Association of Plastic, Reconstructive and Aesthetic Surgeons (BAPRAS) said he did not think there was any risk of cancer as a result of the faulty implants, but he was still advising what he called removal on a "staged basis".
"If you believe a device is faulty in your car or any other object you buy you would want to have that replaced on a staged basis," he said.

The report goes on to talk about the near-bankrupt government of France, where the manufacturer of the potentially dodgy implants was based, is recommending the removal of implants at French government expense.  Will this largesse extend to those affected in the UK?  Don't hold your breath!


Also, the biased BBC reports:

Chairman of the Commons health select committee Stephen Dorrell said the cost of removing implants should be recovered from those who had provided "sub-standard products" in the first place.
"The first responsibility here would rest on those who were engaged in care that hasn't met proper standards, so the first responsibility rests on them," he said.
"Having said that, clearly if there is a health issue involved then ultimately the NHS exists to provide health assurance for all patients in the UK."

Why on earth should the NHS, funded as it is by taxpayers, incur any cost for this?  Shame on Dorrell - a pro-European Conservative!  Obviously someone who thinks that personal responsibility shouldn't always be personal or responsible!

I find myself in the unusual position of partly supporting the Labour spokeman on this.

Shadow health secretary Andy Burnham said the government needed to issue clear guidelines to calm the fears of those affected by the issue.
"Mixed messages from the Department [of Health] have not helped and families affected are looking for a stronger response from the government," he said.
"As a minimum, it must include these three basic points - first, that all medical records will be provided on request without delay and without charge. It is unacceptable that some women are being asked to wait or even pay an 'admin fee' to see their records.
"Second, where there is evidence of a rupture, private providers must arrange for urgent removal at no expense to the individual and with any costs to the NHS reimbursed.
"Third, that all women given PIP implants must be offered an urgent, free consultation with a doctor once the results of the urgent review are known to discuss options."

 The actions required are that the individuals concerned can take whatever steps they want to against PIP or their UK based plastic surgeons.  End of story.  The NHS and the government and the Department of Health should remain as involved as they were when the breasts were first implanted - that is, not involved.

One proviso - if any of these implants were made under the NHS, following say a mastectomy, then and only then, should the NHS intervene.

EU Finger Pointing, Deficits and Projections

As 2011 draws to a close let's take a look at the EU financial situation.

The 17 EuroZone countries plus an unknown number of other EU countries, but not the UK, have agreed a new financial treaty.  Amongst other things this limits deficits and borrowings.  Worryingly, from a democracy perspective, EU bureaucrats will get sight of and review national budgets, of those that sign-up before the sovereign parliaments.

Yes, I know what you are thinking.  This borrowing limit was agreed to back at Maastricht when the same countries signed-up to the Stability and Growth Pact.  This was intended to keep the Germans on board as they gave up the Bundesbank control of their currency.

Guess who broke the rules first?  Yes, you're right - Germany!  Who else?  Everyone!  Though Spain broke the rules least, it is now suffering 20+% unemployment and a trade deficit of more than 4% and its labour costs are more 30% above what they were in 1999, when the Euro started!.  France's labour costs are 25% higher and Italy's on a par with Spain.

Good news though is that Germany labour costs have barely moved since 1999!  That contributes to a German trade surplus of close to 6%, while France and Italy all endure the consequences of 2-4% deficits, alongside Spain.

Very communitairre!

So 2012?
Maybe Germany needs to leave the Euro (Netherlands also?) so as to allow for a devaluation and reduce the labour costs in the other countries?

Other countries, outside the EuroZone,  will start to look at the recently agreed-to 'fiscal accord' and this will likely start to unravel.

If Germany doesn't exit the Euro, then look for Greece to do so maybe also Italy and/or Spain.

Germany, France and the European Central Bank will try for a managed devaluation of the Euro but the markets already scent blood and will be pushing for more and for faster.

Step in the credit rating agencies - and cherished gold-plated ratings are lost.  France will be mortified and loudly proclaim an Anglo-Saxon plot but won't look at their own precipitous growth in public and private debt, in the last ten years! 

The trigger (s)? 
Could be the weather - a cold snap forces people out of their unheated homes, onto the streets in protest.   A Greek default - there is only so much they can do and that isn't enough. 
Italian indigestion? - brought on by trying to take medicine from a technocrat.  

Oh, and a recession in case you thought you could ride-out all of the above.

Have a healthy 2012 - I would normally say prosperous but........

 

France and Turkey

So typically French!
French MPs are pushing a bill which would criminalise the denying of an alleged/disputed genocide of Armenians in 1915/16.

Ask yourself this.

If you were a French MP, what would be your top priority as you head into 2012?
Tackling the Euro Crisis?
Addressing the structural deficit in the French economy?
Wondering how to reduce French bank sovereign debt exposure 
Attacking the British?
Continuing to alienate a faithful ally like Turkey?

Okay, since you are pretending to be French, you can have two priorities.

If you are doing it right, neither of your priorities relate to the Euro crisis or the French economy.

If you didn't get it right, then in time-honoured EU tradition, you can have another vote and keep on doing so, until you get it right.  Bien? 

Fiddling while Rome burns comes to mind.