Anglican bishops

Twenty-seven Anglican bishops and various dissenting clergy have written a letter to the Daily Mirror criticising government policy on welfare payments:  http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/27-bishops-slam-david-camerons-3164033

The Reverend Giles Fraser appeared on the Today programme complaining about the extreme poverty he is witnessing in Kennington, and laying responsibility for this at the government's door.

These holy clerics seem to be obsessing about the speck in someone else's eye while ignoring the beams in their own.

Do they not pause to ask themselves why there is such competition for scarce resources?  Does it not occur to them that the National Insurance system, the cornerstone of the welfare state, has broken down because of the inward flow of millions of people into the United Kingdom who have been given automatic access (over decades) to the emergency reserves paid for by others?  Are they as supporters (very vocal supporters) of this open-door let-us-welcome-the-stranger-in-our-midst policy not partly responsible for the resulting shortage of housing, employment, even food?

Anglican bishops your duty is clear.

If there are hungry people in your parishes you must feed them, not meddle in party politics.

Do not worry about the resources for feeding the hungry - the Scriptures tell you "ask and it shall be given".

Only when you have feed the hungry and clothed the naked and (most important of all) preached the Gospel should you think about lecturing others about how much tax they need to be paying and where the tax receipts should be allocated.

Was the Hutton Inquiry into the death of Dr David Kelly a scam?

Let's get this straight, was the Hutton Inquiry into the death of Dr David Kelly a scam?

Because it is increasingly beginning to look that way.

http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2014/feb/19/tony-blair-rebekah-brooks-phone-hacking

There will have to be another inquiry if the Hutton Inquiry turns out to be tainted.

Riots in Ukraine

The riots in Ukraine were reported on the Today programme this morning (it was the lead item after 8 o'clock).

One of the protestors (rebels?  trouble-makers?) said:  "...there is nothing for us to lose, there is nowhere for us to go".

Can we be quite clear on the second part of that phrase "nowhere for us to go".

Because what usually happens when a country dissolves into rioting and violence is a wave of refugees starts clamouring to go to "the west" and the pro-immigrant lobby starts agitating for them to be given access to the United Kingdom.

Ukrainians, there is NOWHERE FOR YOU TO GO.

If you mess up your country through social breakdown and communal violence you must live with the consequences.

You are not welcome here.

Musical interludes

And also on the subject of the Today programme, there were three musical interludes this morning (in an item on youth unemployment; in an item on the dull Brit Awards; in an item on Spotify) - all of them tripe.

If I wanted to listen to pop music I would turn to Heart FM.

When music is an integral part of a Today programme item is it not possible for the Today personnel to describe the music in words?  Challenging I know, and possibly beyond any media studies graduates the BBC employs.  But speech radio is meant to be focussed on words, not ten second blasts of Queen every twenty minutes or so.

Did a presenter on the Today programme this morning really say she did not know what a peacock butterfly looked like?

How many townies are there in the BBC?

The intervention of Vincent Nichols is special pleading

The intervention in the welfare reform debate of the (Roman Catholic) Archbishop of Westminster, Vincent Nichols, is not as disinterested and impartial as it might seem.

There are of course several old families in England which are Roman Catholic, and there are many English people who have converted to the Church of Rome.

But the vast majority of Roman Catholics in England come from the Irish or Polish immigrant communities, and as immigrants (and their descendants and dependents) take an unreasonable interest in the National Insurance welfare state built up over generations by genuinely English people.

Currently these Irish and Polish communities are experiencing an unprecedented influx of new immigrants as the Irish Republic and Poland are unable to provide adequately for their populations.

Therefore is it not the case that the intervention of Vincent Nichols is special pleading on behalf of Roman Catholic immigrants who in any case have arrived in this country against the wishes of the majority.

Perhaps I might be allowed to talk directly to the (Roman Catholic) Archbishop of Westminster and say:  you and your church are interlopers.  It was not so long ago that your Irish parishioners were setting off bombs in English cities (and if you think all that is forgotten and brushed under the carpet you are very much mistaken).  You need to curb your arrogance and sense of entitlement and stop politically intervening in a society that at its most basic level does not belong to you.

The Lie by Helen Dunmore

Have just finished reading The Lie by Helen Dunmore.

The combination of a renowned author (Helen Dunmore is a Fellow of the Royal Society of Literature) writing on the theme of the First World War seemed irresistible.

Actually Helen Dunmore is writing about the aftermath of the war, and the way soldiers were treated when they returned home.  The narrator is a young ex-soldier who goes back to the rural community he was born into and finding that he does not fit in.  His close friend (heavy hints that that were more than close friends, although on a platonic level) had died in horrific circumstances in No Man's Land, and appears to him as a ghost/tangible memory.

Lots of ideas are explored in the novel:  the persistent nature of grief; the experience of people living on the margins (literally on the margin in this case, scraping a living from a tiny patch of land); the moral right of same sex partners to inherit money and position; the tension between doing what is right (in terms of a dying woman's last wishes) and doing what the law obliges; the intolerance of small communities; the impossibility of bringing the past back to life.

Shouty television

Daisy Wyatt writes in the Independent about two "debates" shown on television yesterday - one about welfare benefits, the other about immigraton:  http://www.independent.co.uk/arts-entertainment/tv/news/benefits-street-live-debate-v-the-big-british-immigration-row-9136038.html

This form of shouty television, where emotion and sensation replace rationality, is a format that has made Fox News one of the most successful channels in America.

In the United Kingdom its adoption would be a wrong path to take.

Given the attack made by House of Commons "Speaker" (dubious election) John Bercow on "yobbery and twittishness" at Prime Minister's Questions, perhaps it would be useful for someone to trawl through past recordings of PMQs and find examples of his yobbishness when a backbench MP.

Climate change is related to population growth

Staggering hypocrisy from Ed Miliband in warning about climate change without mentioning population growth:  http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/feb/15/uk-floods-climate-change-disaster-ed-miliband

All nations have a responsibility to aim for a broadly static population, but because of Labour's pro-immigration policies the United Kingdom's population has rocketed out of control.

Climate change is related to population growth, and to deny this is the worst form of climate change denial.

And Yasmin Alibhai-Brown joins in this onslaught of ignorance and dishonesty:  http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/comment/the-floods-may-have-finally-shocked-rightwingers-into-taking-climate-change-seriously-9132315.html

No mention from Ms Alibhai-Brown that the open-door immigration she advocates is a major contributor to climate change in the United Kingdom - leading to house building on flood plains, millions more consumers (of useless possessions), increased demand for industrially-processed food etc.

I am able to entirely suit myself - the past week at work

Monday

Work on the presentation I am to give tomorrow.  In the past I would have been quite limited on what I could say.  But with the present lack of leadership at the Institute I am able to entirely suit myself.

Tuesday

I hate rushing to get a train.

For the first part of the journey I looked out of the window.  Lots of pheasants in the fields.  Through many little village stations without stopping.

Eventually, after changing trains twice, I arrived in Birmingham.  I thought how shabby the centre of the city looked as I walked to the Institute's Birmingham office - asian legal aid, cheap takeaways, homeless people in various doorways including in what looked like a drinking club.  Cold day so that I was glad to get indoors.

Through security, along corridors, up flights of stairs.

Welcomed by Ashish Sharma, who as usual seemed very pleased with himself.

A buffet lunch, substantial but not good quality.  Then I delivered my presentation, talking for an hour and a half, eleven people ranged in a half circle.  It was well received with many questions.

Back to New Street Station.  The train was late.  I felt cold standing on the platform among hundreds of commuters.

Wednesday

Most of the day I spent drafting an article.  It will need to be revised, but the basics are there.  Often I looked out of the window at the huge clouds moving quickly across the sky.

Thursday

A day spent at home working on the confidential project.

Friday

I finished the article I had drafted on Wednesday and sent it off. 

The storm in the afternoon and evening was alarming - the noise of the wind was tremendous, even inside the office.

Sign this petition to end cruelty to pigs:

http://action.ciwf.org.uk/ea-action/action?ea.client.id=119&ea.campaign.id=20836&ea.tracking.id=e699aa1c&utm_campaign=pigs&utm_source=paidtweet&utm_medium=twitter

I am bored with all the news reports on the weather.

I am also bored more than you can imagine with Question Time.  I didn't even bother with it yesterday.  I watched the first part of Newsnight then switched the television off.

Wythenshaw and Sale East

All those gloating UKIP supporters need to realise that there are no prizes for coming second.

And the turnout in Wythenshaw and Sale East was only 28%, which makes Labour's boasting sound hollow.

Brutalist

In this article for the Guardian Jonathan Meades is surely mistaken in saying that brutalist architectural designs feature in the film Blade Runner:  http://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/2014/feb/13/jonathan-meades-brutalism-a-z

The Ziggurat of the Tyrell Corporation is unmistakably post-modernist.

And the assertion of "the artist's right to impose his vision without consultation" is only valid when the artist is spending his or her own money.  When they are spending public money they must submit their designs for public approval.  Van Eyck was not an artist imposing his vision without consultation, Van Eyck was an artist doing what his paymaster told him to do and using his artistic brilliance within the conventions of the time.

Stuart Hall, who died a few days ago, had the following to say about Powellism:

It was said about the 1960s and early 70s that, after all, Mr. Powell lost. This is true only if the shape of a whole conjuncture is to be measured by the career of a single individual. In another sense, there is an argument that "Powellism" won: not only because his official eclipse was followed by legislating into effect much of what he proposed, but because of the magical connections and short-circuits which Powellism was able to establish between the themes of race and immigration control and the images of the nation, the British people and the destruction of "our culture, our way of life".

http://www.hegemonics.co.uk/docs/Great-Moving-Right-Show.pdf

It is irresponsible for Rachel Sylvester to use her column to call for the end of stop and search

Rachel Sylvester in her article on stop and search in the Times today emphasises that only a small percentage of stop and searches result in anything criminal being found.

However she overlooks the deterrent value of stop and search in particular communities and among particular target audiences.

Young men in inner London are deterred from carrying knives because of the high liklihood that they will be targetted for stop and search.

It is irresponsible for Rachel Sylvester to use her column to call for the end of stop and search.

If there is a rise in knief crime as a result, then I am afraid she will have to accept some degree of responsibility for the casualties.

And no mention in her piece of the support in inner London communities for stop and search - it is often the local communities who are demanding that the police take action against young men.

http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/opinion/columnists/article4001790.ece

The simple way for the government to respond to the flood crisis is to set up a state-backed insurance scheme to cover flooding.

That way householders who are flooded (and there are not all that many of them, despite the sensationalist reporting) can be whisked away to hotels while their properties are sorted out.

Government ministers can pose as benevolent benefactors.

And the total cost will not be all that great.

Come to think of it, we already have a National Insurance scheme - all the government has to do is announce that this will now also cover flood damage due to rain or tides.

Nudge

Interesting article on the Independent on Nudge theory and practice:  http://www.independent.co.uk/news/people/profiles/the-nudge-team-started-outas-a-sort-of-mission-impossible-how-the-governments-successful-behaviour-insights-team-has-had-a-profound-effect-on-whitehall-9117793.html

An example of nudge theory in action is surely the dissuading of the Romanians and Bulgarians.

The government told them not to come here.

And they did not come here.

Chris Smith

In an article for the Guardian Chris Smith (Labour gombeen man given a sinecure position as head of the Environment Agency) complains "In a lifetime in public life, I've never seen the same sort of storm of background briefing, personal sniping and media frenzy getting in the way of decent people doing a valiant job..."

Er, this is someone who worked for many years with both Alastair Campbell and Peter Mandelson.

He would have seen in that period a tsunami of background briefing, personal sniping and media frenzy.

Not least the background briefing, personal sniping and media frenzy that affected Dr David Kelly so profoundly, as well as many of his Labour colleagues.

Therefore he sounds ridiculous to make the statement he has in today's Guardian.

http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2014/feb/09/floods-environment-agency-chris-smith-hits-back

Ravelstein by Saul Bellow

Have just finished Ravelstein by Saul Bellow.

This is a glorious book, ostensibly the disjointed memories of an ageing writer for his academic friend.

It is also a book about ideas, the nature of ideas, and the pursuit of knowledge (especially self-knowledge).

"...there was no important subject I hadn't thought about."

Ravelstein is a monster, but on the whole a lovable monster.

Rachel Reeves, Shadow Secretary of State for Work and Pensions, said on the Andrew Marr programme this morning "demand is massively outstripping supply" (referring to the housing crisis and the way rents are increasing).

And yet she said not a word about why demand is rising.

Demand is rising because the population is rising.

The population is rising because of Labour's open-door immigration policy over thirteen years.

She must think people are stupid and that they cannot make this connection.

At least she made a grudging reference to a British homes for British people policy in the future.

But who would trust that crowd?

During the newspaper review on the Andrew Marr programme this morning attention was drawn to checks by immigration staff on LGBT asylum seekers.

Those on the left agitating for LGBT people to be given asylum would have more credibility if their condemnation of homophobic nations was more consistent.

Oh yes, they condemn Russia.  And they condemn Uganda.  But they do not say a word about Jamaica, which has been identified by more than one commentator as the most homophobic nation in the world.

This is because the Jamaican community is a reliable bloc vote for the Labour party.

Indeed, there are grounds for suspecting that Lady Lawrence, newly ennobled for her services in the cause of equality rights, is herself a homophobe who will not condemn persecution of LGBT people in Jamaican society.

Stinking hypocrisy is it not?

The vote in Switzerland to curb unrestricted immigration is very significant.

Is the United Kingdom to be denied the democratic options granted to the Swiss?

Whatever happens to the Institute my job is safe - the past week at work

Monday

At the request of Alec Nussbaum we have to itemise our time in weekly time sheets.  Lots of muttering that this is to see who can be dispensed with.  Looking at my timesheet at the end of the week I was surprised at how much of my time was wasted (of course I realise there is an art to completing timesheets and will reword this week's before sending it off to Head Office).

The rain fell noisily on the roof, and also on the window next to my desk.

In the afternoon I did some work on a policy paper.  And I pushed various other projects along a little.  But I was glad when five o'clock arrived and I could go home.

Tuesday

Most of the morning spent talking about communications to the new Campaigns manager.  A tubby grey-haired man, with a low voice so that he almost whispers.  He is to work from home in Dorset.

The server was down again, which meant nothing could be done.

When I went to lunch the sun was shining and the winds had dropped - but this didn't last.

Wednesday

One day each week I spend on the confidential project.

This makes me fairly confident that whatever happens to the Institute my job is safe.

The confidential project is to last over a year.

Thursday

At my desk this morning I assessed the day's tasks.

I sent e-mails to Media Relations at Head Office complaining about their lack of action.

The afternoon spent preparing a presentation I am to give to the Birmingham office next week.

Friday

In the office there was an odd sort of atmosphere.  Many managers away, and so the junior staff became noisy and lazy.  I could have intervened but decided not to get involved.

German receptionist Jutta leaving her partner, so seemed preoccupied with a sort of suppressed angst.  She is supposed to be having an affair with Reading Room assistant Matthew.  He stood at the reception desk giving her a pedestrian sort of support.

Again I worked on the Powerpoint presentation for the Birmingham office.

Talking to the new Campaign Manager, he is writing a book on architect Sebastian Comper.

How honourably Mark Harper has behaved.

Unlike that disgraceful cur and Labour placeman Chris Smith, refusing to resign despite manifest incompetence.

The evil spell has been broken

Well here's a thing.

For the second day running an article on the Labour-supporting website Progress has referenced Enoch Powell in the opening paragraph:  http://www.progressonline.org.uk/2014/02/07/we-risk-a-race-to-the-bottom/

For many decades anyone trying to discuss the ideas of Enoch Powell was screamed at by the left and subjected to intimidation and abuse.

Now the evil spell has been broken, and even the left has grudgingly accepted that it is not racist to talk about immigration.

I always knew the moment would come when Enoch Powell was restored to his full intellectual stature.

It is the totality of his philosophy that is so impressive.  He had original things to say on every area of public policy.  His influence on the Conservative party has been immense (although shamefully unacknowledged).

British medals at Sochi

The Winter Olympics formally open today at Sochi in Russia.

Let us cast our minds back to the Summer Olympics of 2012 and the claim by Sunder Katwala (director of the British Future think tank) that:  "At least a third of Britain's 65 medals reflected the positive contribution of immigration and integration to Britain over the last three generations."

It will be interesting to see whether Mr Katwala's boast will be confirmed by one third of British medals in the Winter Olympics being achieved by individuals who have an immigrant background (to three generations according to British Future's arbitrary benchmark).

Of course, there is the view that the immigrant tally in the 2012 Olympics was artificially created by politically motivated and discriminatory channeling of funding for elite athletes, with those from BME backgrounds being given priority (channeling justified and effected by the "Equality Duty" of all organisations receiving public money).

Great though the British Olympic achievement was in 2012, would it not have been greater if the funding had been allocated entirely on merit?

But back to Sochi.

Will we see the Katawala thesis vindicated with at least one third of British medals at Sochi going to immigrants?

Or will we conclude that Sunder Katwala is just another lying toad among the many lying toads seeking to bounce the United Kingdom into accepting ever greater numbers of immigrants.

http://afroml.blogspot.co.uk/2012/09/difficult-but-necessary-question.html

Editorial on the Labour-supporting website Progress begins with a quote from Enoch Powell:  http://www.progressonline.org.uk/2014/02/04/sleeping-not-dead/

So much for Sunder Katwala's claim that Enoch Powell is just an historical figure with no relevance to today.

And so they leave

Independent article that refers to the Conservative & Unionist majorities in Scotland in the 1950s:  http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/comment/owen-jones-what-a-fairer-scotland-would-look-like-9109887.html

If Owen Jones wants to know where the Scottish Tories have gone the answer is simple - by and large they have left.

If you want to know where they are now look around you.

They are living in London and the South East.

There comes a point when the hostility and aggression and negativity of the left makes an environment intolerable for anyone who does not conform.

And so they leave.

Labour and the SNP between them are well on the way to making Scotland a failed economic state.

Exactly what Labour did in Liverpool and other great cities of the north.

Of course, in their eyes no Tories means exultant high fives and cries of "result".

But it also means no enterprise, no investment, and a debilitating dependency on the state and the public sector.

Oh how smug the Labour party is over it's record on women in Parliament:  http://www.newstatesman.com/politics/2014/02/pmqs-review-miliband-pounces-tories-women-problem

Oh how clothed in white raiment are the Labour panjandrums. 

Oh how self-satisfied they are that there is no problem over female representation in the Labour party. 

Oh how they flaunt their record on giving women opportunities (indeed, is the parliamentary Labour Party not fifty per cent women?  do we not see women at all the commanding heights of the Labour movement?  do people not realise that Ed Miliband himself is a woman? - in the same way of course that Bill Clinton was black).

It must be wonderful to be so perfect in terms of gender equality.

Helen Warrell is a lying toad

Mendacious article by Helen Warrell, Public Policy Correspondent for the Financial Times, claiming that an independent Scotland would be pro-immigration:  http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/de6029c8-8dac-11e3-ba55-00144feab7de.html?siteedition=uk#axzz2sRYGQS7w

Public opinion in Scotland is even more hostile to immigration than it is in England and Wales.

Helen Warrell is a lying toad (no other description is adequate) to claim otherwise.

I am glad Kevin Pietersen has gone.

On the whole I want all England sports teams to adopt the Yorkshire convention - you have to be born in England before you qualify.

Being English surely implies a broad loyalty to the English people.

And in a key moment of his career Kevin Pietersen was not loyal.  He removed himself from the English team and made 'phone calls to the foreign opposing team disaparaging his English team-mates.  Of course, he has since laughed this off, but some people do remember it.

Jonathan Meades is to present a two-part series on brutalism on BBC4 16th and 23rd February.

I hope he mentions that Goldfinger's Trellick Tower, completed 1972, appears in the 1972 feature film Steptoe & Son in a scene when Harold Steptoe is experiencing feelings of exhaustion, alienation and hopelessness - as soon as it was constructed the building became a metaphor for comical cack-handed architectural ineptitude.

Shailesh Vara MP tells that the government review into allowing humanist weddings in England will be released by the end of the year.

Presumably the humanists will be agitating to be married in parish churches.

The Falkirk scandal is by any standards shocking:  http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/feb/03/falkirk-voting-irregularities-inquiry-labour

It shows a contempt by Labour activists for the democratic process.

How many other constituencies have been corrupted in this way?

Engineering graduates

James Dyson writes an article in the Financial Times about the shortage of engineering graduates in the United Kingdom and arguing we need immigration to fill the gap:  http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/34226450-8a76-11e3-9c29-00144feab7de.html?siteedition=uk#axzz2sFwn7A2z

There is no need for immigration.

We spend billions of pounds on the education system and yet it is failing to produce qualified graduates, even with high youth unemployment and a serious demand for engineering graduates.  This suggests that the wrong managers are in charge of the education process and they need to be sacked and replaced with more competent managers.  What on earth is going wrong with vocational education in this country?

And what is wrong with James Dyson's companies paying for their own engineers?  Perhaps sponsoring them through university.  Or does James Dyson secretly prefer immigrants because they are a lot cheaper and less demanding as employees?

Also I would take issue with the James Dyson claim that "Foreign engineering students are clearly anglophiles".  Ukrainian student Pavlo Lapshyn, who planted bombs outside British mosques last year, was an engineering student.  So I would caution Mr Dyson against sweeping hagiographification of immigrants - they are not the answer to this country's problems.

"The Chinese"



Why is the Labour party stirring up ethnic discontent?  If they are saying "the Chinese" as an ethnic bloc should vote Labour, presumably they are also saying "the Chinese" should not vote Liberal Democrat or Conservative.  Why?

What are the reasons that the ethnic Chinese should vote Labour?

Is the Labour party saying vote for us and we will let in more Chinese?  Vote for us and we will give Chinese people priority in housing and welfare handouts?  Vote for us and British foreign policy will be tailored to your interests?

What on earth is going on here?

Is it not disgraceful that this ethnic gerrymandering is going on?

Can we please have ZERO admission of any further ethnic Chinese immigrants until we understand what the Labour party is up to?

The new Sam Wanamaker Playhouse in London is a reproduction of a Jacobean theatre.

I would like to see Love In A Tub (George Etherege) there.

http://www.shakespearesglobe.com/theatre/whats-on/sam-wanamaker-playhouse

The new world powers

Chart of countries taking Syrian refugees:  https://twitter.com/UNHCRUK/status/428910562224111616/photo/1/large

Very noticable China isn't listed.  Nor is India.  Nor is Russia and Brazil.

So much for the new world powers.

Have not been well, and basically have been sleeping since Thursday.

But I was awake for Dateline London earlier today to hear Gavin Esler refer to Ed Miliband as "David".

Oh he quickly corrected himself.

But when someone as experienced and informed as Gavin Esler is making this mistake one fears that Ed Miliband has failed to establish his identity sufficiently.

I thought Nick Robinson was scraping the barrel on the PM programme (BBC Radio 4) when he talked about the Conservative party being divided.

The issue is over speed of travel, not the direction we are going in.

Anyway, has he forgotten the Labour leadership crisis, which was only months ago?  They are still saddled with a lacklustre leader who is failing to register any impact with the electorate.  And has now capitulated to the unions.

Has he forgotten UKIP which is barely keeping the lid on a maelstrom of er... distinctive views which are likely to overboil when they win the Euro elections (as I am sure they will).

Has he forgotten the LibDems with their massive gulf between the leaders and the members.

No Mr Robinson, you cannot say we are divided.  I would probably place myself on the right of the party, and I have complete confidence in David Cameron.  Hung parliaments are very rare in the United Kingdom, and I am sure we shall have a Conservative majority in 2015.

We fight on, we fight to win (as they say).

I'm just thinking aloud here, but will rioters (born abroad and subsequently acquired British citizenship) have their citizenship revoked?

Foreigners who have acquired British citizenship can have it taken away

Excellent news that foreigners who have acquired British citizenship can have it taken away if they fail to behave themselves.

"...would not have to have been convicted of a particular offence" the Home Secretary has just said in the House of Commons.

This is exactly what we need.

Once the principle has been established it can be extended to a whole range of anti-British activities.

Ms Alibhai-Brown needs to watch her step.

Helen Lewis (New Statesman) repeats the rather naive question:  "The 7% problem: why do the private school minority dominate public life?"

Because the Labour party destroyed all state competition in pursuit of an ideological objective that had no relevance to education.

https://twitter.com/hendopolis/status/428540823618482176/photo/1

The Refugee Council has no business making statements of this kind

Katy Long (Lecturer in International Development at the University of Edinburgh) tells us:

A press release from the Refugee Council has just landed in my inbox, telling me that ‘Britain has a proud tradition of protecting and welcoming refugees and we will continue to lead the way in offering refuge to people in their greatest hour of need’.

The Refugee Council has no business making statements of this kind.

A more truthful statement might be:

Whatever sympathy the United Kingdom may once have had for refugees has been entirely undermined due to a combination of political gerrymandering (encouraging the migration of groups of people who will vote Labour), lies about the overall levels of foreigners allowed into the United Kingdom, and a ridiculous amount of bogus asylum claims.  There is now no sympathy for the idea that yet more foreigners should be given access to the United Kingdom.  You are welcome to use British aid money to rebuild your lives in your own regional homes, but you are not welcome in the United Kingdom.

http://katylong.blogspot.co.uk/2014/01/500.html

http://www.refugeecouncil.org.uk/

The northern cities

Is it not obvious that northern cities are lagging behind London because they are dominated by Labour councils and Labour MPs who are antithetically opposed to enterprise, entrepreneurialism and the idea of making profit.

It is not so much that London is sucking in all the entrepreneurs.

It is more the case that the northern cities are driving them out by creating a sterile climate in which profit is regarded as something to be ashamed of.

The way for the northern cities to change this is simple - vote more Conservatives into power.

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/danhodges/100257207/london-drives-the-nations-economy-if-you-dont-like-our-recovery-feel-free-to-make-your-own/

Crocodile tears by Yvette Cooper

Given the huge amount of money the United Kingdom is spending on aid to the Syrian refugees I do not see why it is not possible to use a few million pounds of this money to build state of the art hospitals and clinics, and also to construct safe compounds protected by armed security guards reporting to the United Nations.

That way many tens of thousands of vulnerable refugees can be given vital aid and protection - far far more than the pathetic token of allowing a few hundred refugees into the United Kingdom for such treatment.

The clinics and hospitals would remain in the border countries as a permanent asset for the local populations, after the emergency is over.

Of course this will not suit the left.

They see immigration as the answer to everything.

They are not interested in "vulnerable" refugees - that is just crocodile tears by Yvette Cooper.

They want another bloc community they can bribe and manipulate into voting Labour.

We have seen this trick played before and we should not tolerate it.

An enemy of the people

I am staggered at the affrontery of former senior civil servant Gus O'Donnell in proposing "leadership" over the subject of immigration:  http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/54f4c760-8812-11e3-8afa-00144feab7de.html?siteedition=uk#axzz2rmL86thQ

By leadership he means ignoring what the people want, and (by that sneaky way civil servants have) allowing immigration covertly (in millions during the time Gus O'Donnell was Cabinet Secretary) and then saying nothing can be done about it.

We do not want politicians and civil servants showing "leadership".

We have had enough of their "leadership" over immigration and wars in the middle east and signing European treaties without consent etc.

We do not want politicians and civil servants to show "leadership" we want them to bloody well do as they are told (and if they are not sure what the people are telling them they need to seek the endorsement of an election or referendum).

Gus O'Donnell is now in the House of Lords for heaven's sake.

He should not have been ennobled.

I have no hesitation in saying that Gus O'Donnell is an enemy of the people.

Perhaps he should be subject to a citizen's arrest and arraigned before a citizen's court.

I don't often get the chance to see the Daily Politics, but working at home I managed to see today's programme.

Very surprised to see a largish part of the programme used by Peter Hain MP to promote his new book about his sainted parents.

And was this the same sainted mother who he finessed onto the public payroll (at the age of 80!) on a Commons salary of £5,400 a year?

Curious that Jo Coburn did not ask him about it, but just let him blather on about what good people his parents were.

Economic growth has only returned since immigration has been cut by a third

All those apologists who insist that immigration is good for economic growth.

And yet economic growth has only returned since immigration has been cut by a third.

Do not underestimate the rise in morale among ordinary working class communities now they realise the invasion is beginning to be curbed.

On the whole I like Aiden Burley.

I especially enjoyed the "multi-cultural crap" verdict.

Far too many politicans are bland yes-men and yes-women.

We need more MPs who voice what the ordinary people are saying.

Superb start this evening to Jeremy Paxman's documentary series on the Great War.

Several times I felt it was very moving.

The Owen Jones manifesto

Owen Jones has produced his own manifesto:  http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/comment/owen-joness-agenda-for-hope-we-want-a-fairer-society--and-heres-how-we-can-achieve-it-9086440.html
 

1) A statutory living wage, with immediate effect, for large businesses and the  public sector, and phased  in for small and medium  businesses over a five-year Parliament. 
When has an incomes policy ever worked?  The simple way to increase pay for the lowest paid is to stop immigration and incomes must rise as labour becomes scarce.  But as we know, the Labour party is addicted to immigration.
 

2) Resolve the housing crisis by regulating private rents...
Another policy from the 1970s that has been discredited - if landlords cannot make a profit from letting they will simply take their properties off the market (the goal of most of them is capital appreciation rather than rental income).
 

and lifting the cap on councils to let them build hundreds of thousands of houses...
With what?  Higher Council tax?  Or are we going to trust splurging lefty councils to run up municipal debts until their administrations crash (Neil Kinnock voice:  "A Labour council, a LABOUR council scuttling around in taxis handing out redundancy notices...").

3) A 50 per cent tax on all earnings above £100,000 – or the top 2 per cent of earners...
Yes, let's tax the rich until the pips squeak, after all it worked for Denis Healey (didn't it?).
 

4) An all-out campaign to recoup the £25bn worth of tax avoided by the wealthiest each year...
Yeah, as if no-one has ever tried to stop tax avoidance before.  What is wrong with the public sector employees in HM Revenue & Customs that they cannot get on top of this.  Why does even Owen Jones have to criticise the public sector employees who are letting £25 billion slip through their fingers?
 

5) Publicly run, accountable local banks. 
Nationalise the banks and let the public sector run them.  The public sector has a track record of success right?  Or better still let's have co-operative banks with the cronies of the Reverend Flowers on the board.
 

6) An industrial strategy... based on an active state that intervenes in the economy...
Government can pick the winners!  We could even try growing ground nuts in East Africa.  And never mind if the ventures fail - the state has a million ways of covering up the evidence.

7) Publicly owned rail and energy, democratically run by consumers and workers. 
Public utilities run by workers' councils?  And what if the interests of consumers and workers do not match?  How soon before the bullying unions force them into compliance?

8) A new charter of workers’ rights fit for the 21st century. 
This sounds like James Callaghan's Social Compact (or Social Contract as it later became). 
 

9) A universal childcare system that would pay for itself...
If it can pay for itself why does the state need to get involved?

So much for the Owen Jones manifesto.

How depressing this all is.  Bankrupt of ideas, the left can only regurgitate the failed policies of the past.  As Enoch Powell would say, this is a dog returning to its vomit.

I thought the Prime Minister gave an excellent interview on the Today programme this morning.

The Watchers by Stephen Alford

Have just finished reading The Watchers by Stephen Alford (Professor of Early Modern British History at the University of Leeds).

It is an academic study of espionage in the reign of Elizabeth I.

It is a dense book, and written for an academic audience, but worth persisting with (I read it at a rate of ten pages a day, which was just enough to stop my head from spinning).

We are used to thinking of the first Elizabethan Age as a golden period of expansion, innovation and dazzling culture (literary, in the visual arts, architecture etc).

This book reveals how threatened the Elizabethan state was (by enemies within and without) and the necessity for constant vigilance to outwit the assassins, the seditions, the acts of terror.

"The weapons they used were espionage, relentless interrogation, surveillance, the suppression of dissent, robust treason law, torture and propaganda."

Which rather sounds like the situation we are in today (except for the torture bit - the British security forces are not involved in torture).

On BBC News Film Review Mark Kermode, when discussing Twelve Years A Slave, folded his arms defensively and touched his face (supposedly indicating he was not telling the truth).

Are critics afraid to criticise the film for fear of being called racist?

What is the point of employing Mark Kermode to review films if he is going to self-censor his remarks?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b03qv6jf/The_Film_Review_24_01_2014/ 

All through Dateline London earlier today Marc Roche (Le Monde) was compulsively bouncing his knee up and down.

He was obviously very nervous about what he was saying (all of it anti-British).

Perhaps he thought the rest of the panel would laugh at him.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b03t8pvp/Dateline_London_25_01_2014/

I struggled on - the past week at work

Monday

All of the week I had flu-like symptoms, without actually having flu.  So I had pains in my chest, but no cough.  Weak and tired all the time, but not so bad it was debilitating.  Deafness in my right ear that was intermittent.  Feeling giddy when walking.  Slightly nauseous at mealtimes.

But I struggled on.

Arriving at the office I felt tired and disorientated.

During the morning I worked on various projects but I also felt very subdued, a feeling that everything I was doing was pointless and purposeless.

I did a lot of work on the communications plan for the Birmingham office.

Tuesday

On the drive to work I saw the effects of the recent rain, with mini-lakes forming in the fields.

The arrival back of Galdys Y (as supervisor of the admin team) has created a sullen atmosphere, although that means nothing to me since I can keep aloof from all the bickering.

Alec Nussbaum (our de facto Director during the interregnum) in the office and briefed me on a confidential project that I will have to allocate one day per week towards.

More news of resignations and reorganisations at Head Office.

Wednesday

I am trying hard not to let the heap of paper on my desk grow to an unmanageable size.

The early part of the morning I spent researching databases for the Birmingham office.

Then a meeting with Campaign Manager Simon C to discuss his exhibitions programme and literature he might need.

Thursday

Train journey to Birmingham, having to change at Nottingham.

The air was cold as I walked along New Street.  Into Waterstones to look at novels.  Then up to Chamberlain Square and into the Art Gallery to look at the pre-Raphaelites (The Blind Girl, The Annunciation, various Moores).

A brisk walk down Hill Street and into Bristol Street and the Institute's Birmingham office, discreetly masked by 1970s shabbiness. 

I was still early so after greeting Ashish Sharma I sat at an empty desk and looked at my e-mails.  Then a three-hour meeting with Ashish Sharma.  It was very clear that he knew almost nothing about campaigning.

On the whole it was a positive meeting, but an enormous amount of work lies ahead.

A walk back to New Street and a crowded train to Nottingham where I had to wait for almost an hour.  I went into one of the platform cafes, the walls lined with Edwardian ceramic tiles.  A cup of coffee and a sandwich.

Friday

Work on the confidential project.

The problem for Ed Balls with his 50p tax rate for income over £150k is that he cannot make it tangible for ordinary people.

So why should they care whether the tax is 40p or 50p or 60p?

It's not as if he is going to give the money away, it's just going to reduce the deficit - which is so abstract it is meaningless.

A few people will say yes, let's attack rich people.

But the politics of envy only gets you so far.

Does this not make you feel uncomfortable?

Various media lefties (Brian Whelan, Daniel Trilling, Owen Jones etc) exchanging digital high-fives at the incarceration of former EDL leader Tommy Robinson for mortgage fraud:  http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-25862838

It is not for me to defend Tommy Robinson.

Still less do I condone mortgage fraud.

But eighteen months in gaol does seem harsh for a crime in which nothing was actually stolen (although of course the lender's money was put at risk).

And one cannot help thinking of Peter Mandelson who also committed mortgage fraud, had to resign from the government and then "ping" was back in the government again, and "ping" became Deputy Prime Minister, and "ping" is now in the House of Lords.

If Tommy Robinson deserves eighteen months in gaol then Peter Mandelson needs to be in the same cell with him.

Which is why I feel uncomfortable about this case.

The gloating of the left, the severity of the sentence, the fact that others committing the same crime get off scot free.

Does this not suggest that Tommy Robinson is being punished for reasons other than white collar fiddling?

I know people will say "It's only Tommy Robinson".

But does this not make you feel uncomfortable?

Does this not allow his supporters to say he is a political prisoner?

Most people saw their income rise over the last financial year

Howls from the left this morning at statistics indicating that most people saw their income rise over the last financial year.

"Nonsense" they scream (insofar as one can scream on Twitter - what I mean is that the haikuised 140 character texts have an edge of hysteria deliniated by a combination of terse abuse and assumption that everyone must know what they are talking about).

Of course, if it had been nonsense no-one would be much bothered.  They would just sit back and let the nonsense manifest itself.  The fact that so many on the left are not doing this suggests they are seriously rattled.

Of course, we have yet to hear from that prince of statistical lies Jonathan Portes.

Like the magician in Night of the Demon he can summon up stormclouds on a sunny day and frighten the children with thunderclaps.

Standing tall

Nick Clegg talking at Davos:  "The UK cannot stand tall in the modern world if it doesn't stand tall in its own backyard."

What on earth does he mean by standing tall?

What has standing tall got to do with the everyday lives of ordinary people?

Is "standing tall" like "punching above our weight"?

Is it all about politicians bigging themselves up and striding about the world thinking they are important (when most people would spit on them if they met them in the street)?

Deputy Prime Minister John Prescott

This is a sad, rather pathetic "tweet" from former Deputy Prime Minister John Prescott:


"If you count up the weeks I covered for Tony in Downing Street over 10 years, I technically ran the country longer than Alec Douglas-Home".  

Is this what he is reduced to in his post-government years?  Obsessing over his time in power and trying to prove to himself it wasn't all a complete failure.  And he seems unaware of the irony of comparing himself to Alec Douglas-Hume - one turkey referencing another.

Whether Syrian refugees should be allowed into the United Kingdom

In any consideration of whether Syrian refugees should be allowed into the United Kingdom we should bear the following in mind:

1  The United Kingdom is already providing very significant support to refugees in locations close to Syria, and this is by far the best policy - allowing the refugees to remain in cultures they are familiar with and with a good likelihood they will one day be able to return home.  By all means increase the funding we provide.  Double it if necessary.

2  Entry of previous groups of refugees has not been a success.  The unnecessary creation in the United Kingdom of a Somali community has been a disaster.  Entry of thousands of Syrians will increase the risk of violence to the United Kingdom population.

3  The United Kingdom is no longer an imperial nation and the political class needs to get over this.  There is no requirement for us to go about the world lecturing and interfering.  What is happening in Syria is a civil war and there is no right side or wrong side or good side or bad side - tragic though the situation is, they need to resolve things themselves.

These people have no shame

Disgraced.

Found guilty by a court.

Sent to gaol.

Released and then "ping" she is back in the elite running our affairs.

These people have no shame.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-politics-25844091

You should not do what you love.

You should do your duty (no matter how difficult it may seem).

http://www.slate.com/articles/technology/technology/2014/01/do_what_you_love_love_what_you_do_an_omnipresent_mantra_that_s_bad_for_work.html

Shadow Immigration Minister David Hanson

Interesting article on Labour List by Shadow Immigration Minister David Hanson:  http://labourlist.org/2014/01/labour-will-act-on-immigration-heres-how/

Obviously his attacks on the government are just playing to the gallery and should be ignored.

But the proposals are sound - so far as they go.

Taking real action to enforce the minimum wage; doubling the maximum fine for those paying below the NMW to £50,000 and giving local councils the power to enforce the minimum wage;
A reasonable aspiration, but possibly unenforceable (perhaps prison sentences might concentrate the mind?).  I live in a rural area where the minimum wage is routinely flouted.  When there is a surfeit of cheap labour the minimum wage is always going to come under pressure.

We will extend the scope of the Gangmasters’ Licensing Authority
What does this mean in practical terms?

We will strengthening the law so that recruitment agencies aren’t able to discriminate against UK workers from applying for jobs
Discrimination is already illegal - enforce the law.

We will ensure Labour’s housing laws are enforced to stop migrant workers being exploited and crammed into ‘beds in sheds’ and undercutting local workers’;
Difficult to see how this can be done.  Why not require everyone coming into the country to have a sponsor who will be legally responsible for guaranteeing their housing and employment conditions.  Also the sponsor can be financially responsible for the immigrant if they fall ill, become unemployed or otherwise make claims on the state.

And crucially we would make sure we give people here the skills they need for the future by ensuring that large companies bringing in workers from outside the EU also have to offer an apprenticeship for a local worker.
Hmm.  What level of skills will be on offer?  Why not make the existing Education system (which costs billions) ensure that school and college leavers all have high skills in the first place.

Weasel words from Nick Clegg

More weasel words from Nick Clegg about the Lord Rennard scandal:  http://www.theguardian.com/politics/2014/jan/22/lib-dems-qualified-apology-lord-rennard-nick-clegg?utm_source=twitterfeed&utm_medium=twitter

I am puzzled by the stress that is being made on Liberal Democrat internal rules that insist on "criminal burden of proof in these cases".

I am not a lawyer, but I know that Employment Law (which covers sexual harassment) trumps any "rules" devised by an organisation.  The rights conferred by employment legislation are inalienable rights and cannot be evaded, superseded or given up.  Therefore Lord Rennard needs to go through an enquiry that looks at what he did from the perspective of employment law, and if agreement cannot be reached the case should go to an Employment Tribunal for adjudication.

Update:  Cathy Newman (Channel 4 News) has written a synopsis of the scandal:  http://www.thetimes.co.uk/tto/news/politics/article3982052.ece?shareToken=ce1bc6c25dc2a5346e60df1b9bc3bf42

Nicky Morgan MP

Conservative Nicky Morgan MP has been reported in the Daily Telegraph:  In a recording of Miss Morgan’s words, obtained by the Huffington Post website, she told activists that politicians struggle to appeal to female voters because Westminster is seen as a “male club”. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/politics/conservative/10586568/Tories-need-less-hate-to-win-election-says-minister.html

Ms Morgan needs to understand that Westminster is not a "male club" per se.  There are almost no working class men and women in the House of Commons.  Westminster is a club for (all parties) privately-educated Oxbridge ex-lawyers like Nicky Morgan.

You are part of the problem Ms Morgan, not part of the solution.

The reason you claim that only "lone voices" are objecting to immigration is because most members of the House of Commons have no idea of the impact that swamping levels of immigration is having on the lives of ordinary people.

I would also advise you to get out more and talk to ordinary people and not the public school twerps in Bright Blue (who seem to be neither bright nor particularly blue).

Lord Rennard put his hand down the back of her dress

An unusual coalition seems to be rallying (very subtely) to Lord Rennard's defence.

Paddy Ashdown tells us we should not forget what a great service Lord Rennard did for the Liberal Democrats (and all great men have their foibles is the unspoken excuse).

Guardian writer Michael White has spent most of the day on Twitter calling for a sense of perspective (don't get your knickers in a twist could be a precis of his argument).

Labour activist Stephen Bush uses the Progress website to say that we are ALL guilty of sexism (and thus by implication Lord Rennard is no more guilty than the rest of us) http://www.progressonline.org.uk/2014/01/21/the-33-per-cent-problem/

Of course, these individuals (and others) are not really defending Lord Rennard.  They are attempting damage-limitation for the Liberal Democrat party - for a range of motives connected no doubt to marginal seat calculations related to 2015.  Sexual harassment is important, but not as important as winning the next election.

We are not helped by the clampdown that has been imposed on the scandal (secrecy that must inevitably fail - eventually the facts will come out).

We did hear yesterday from one of the complainants who said that Lord Rennard put his hand down the back of her dress.

Presumably (one hopes) he just put his hand down a little way before her objections stopped him. 

But one is forced to speculate whether his fat fumbling fingers intended to interfere with the most private parts of her body.

He is a dirty old man.

He must not be protected from the consequences of his actions, no matter how expedient it might be to do so.

And who knew all this was going on?  Why was nothing done?  Where does the buck stop?

According to the CBI "new manufacturing orders are growing at the fastest rate since 2011".

http://www.cbi.org.uk/media-centre/press-releases/2014/01/new-manufacturing-orders-growing-at-fastest-rate-since-2011-cbi-survey/

Did you know that there is a gulag in Tibet?

http://www.tchrd.org/2014/01/tchrd-releases-2013-annual-report-and-special-report-on-re-education-through-labor/

Polly Toynbee is very selective about her examples

In an otherwise reasonable article about the Lord Rennard scandal and its precursors, Polly Toynbee is very selective about her examples:  http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/jan/21/lord-rennard-why-sexual-harassment-matters?CMP=twt_gu

She quotes Conservative sleazebags and Liberal sleazebags but is strangely silent on the Labour variety (a few rotten apples among the Cabinet ministers).

Was it not the case that the late 1970s and all of the 1980s were characterised by a tsunami of sexist misogyny aimed at "that bloody woman"? (coming from all directions it is true, but a huge amount coming from the Labour party and the trade union movement).

Indeed does she not recall the incident in the mid-1970s when Henry Kissinger, then American Secretary of State, visited the United Kingdom and among many meetings paid a call upon the then Leader of the Opposition?  Later Mr Kissinger was filmed arriving at Downing Street and the Labour Prime Minister James Callaghan asked him (on camera) "Did you kiss her?"  This was a Labour Prime Minister, Ms Toynbee.

Oh how the men laughed.

Oh how the fussy upstart woman was belittled.

A Labour Prime Minister, Ms Toynbee.

As the Norwegians say, a rotten fish stinks from the head downwards.

Is it possible that this imbroglio will topple Nick Clegg?

"Incompetent leadership" Jeremy Paxman has just said on Newsnight, referring to the Lord Rennard scandal.

Is it possible that this imbroglio will topple Nick Clegg?

The Liberal Democrat party when it was in Opposition received state funding for administration and also "Cranbourne money" for its activities in the House of Lords.

Surely as an organisation in receipt of public money it had a duty under Equalities legislation to eliminate discrimination, including (obviously) the sexual harassment of women?

In any case, as an employer it must take responsibility for any sexual harassment that occurs (it is not clear whether any of the complainants were employees at the time they were assaulted, but this scandal will have had an intimidating effect on all women employees of the party whether they have been fondled or not).

This is over and above the personal responsibility of Lord Rennard himself for his behaviour.

I thought it was disgraceful of Lord Greaves to make comparisons with South Africa and Northern Ireland.  The comparison should be with the very considerable body of best practice that exists in the corporate world for dealing with allegations of misconduct.  Any middle-ranking personnel manager will be able to advise the Liberal-Democrat party on this.

As an aside, excellent report by Emily Maitlis from Westminster (all her reports so far in her new role have been excellent - precise and informative and without waffle).

Tim Farron was interviewed by Eddie Mair on the PM programme about Lord Rennard.

And on Channel 4 News he was interviewed by Cathy Newman, in a discussion that included Harriet Harman and Bridget Harris (one of the complainants).

I thought Tim Farron's argument that it was just "democracy" that was responsible for the delays, obfuscation and attempted cover-up over the Rennard scandal was weaselly and unconvincing.

I am not a lawyer, but I thought that in cases of sexual harassment the burden of proof lay with the organisation (ie the Liberal Party), not with the victims? 

The Lord Rennard statement is astonishing:  http://www.libdemvoice.org/statement-by-lord-rennard-on-his-suspension-by-the-party-37906.html

First he says he was ill (the implication being that he was so ill he was not responsible for his actions).

Then he says it was all a conspiracy (by whom?  for what purpose?).

Then he says the women complainants had withdrawn their complaints and they were not real complaints anyway (just silly girls who got too excited presumably).

Then he says the police investigation has been intolerable but has totally cleared him.

Then he says it has all been settled by a handshake among men in the House of Lords so why don't we all just give it a rest.

Perhaps I am being over-suspicious, but is the reason for Lord Rennard's refusal to apologise because there is still much more to come out?

At the moment the LibDem leadership is holding together and facing down any complaints, belittling any criticisms, booing any journalists who get too close.

If this broederbond breaks down and Lord Rennard's hegemony over the party no longer has the power to intimidate do they fear that more women will come forward? 

It's always the cover-up that kills

Attempts to silence questions will blow up in Mr Clegg's face:  http://www.telegraph.co.uk/women/womens-politics/10583759/Nick-Clegg-Lord-Rennard-row-Why-is-the-deputy-prime-minister-letting-ME-get-booed.html

It's always the cover-up that kills, seldom the original offence.

And is there any suggestion that the booing of a journalist from a national news channel was organised?  Did the whispers go out that if Cathy Newman strayed off the subject of mental health she should be booed into submission?  Would a male journalist (Nick Robinson say) be booed in the same way?

Dated

Horribly dated new "community building" going up at St Pancras Square on behalf of Camden Council:  http://www.camden.gov.uk/ccm/content/council-and-democracy/plans-and-policies/camden-strategies-%26-partnerships/map-and-artists-impressions-of-5-pancras-square.en

It is as if the architect has become stuck in the 1920s and is fantasising he is Mies van der Rohe.

No relation to its architectural surroundings.  No acknowledgment of the architectural history of the site.  No understanding of how people feel when entering such an alienating building.

Have we really not progressed beyond the 1920s/30s?

This "community building" looks as if it has been dug out of Bauhaus Berlin and plonked down between St Pancras and Kings Cross.

Enough of this erzatz internationalist nonsense.

We have national styles of architecture in this country, related to traditional social interactions, and public money should be used to promote them.

Why is Nick Clegg freezing out Channel 4 News over the Lord Rennard scandal?

Running away is never the answer.

Rachel Reeves on the Today programme

Listening to Rachel Reeves on the Today programme this morning she talked about youth unemployment and said that under a Labour government young claimants will be obliged to sit literacy and numeracy tests, and if they fail will be obliged to attend further education courses to learn to read and write.

Can I suggest that if individuals fail these literacy and numeracy tests their schools should be contacted and asked to explain why.  And if the explanation is unsatisfactory, they have the cost of the further education course deducted from their school funding.  That might start to concentrate the minds of state school teachers that their lackadaisical attitude to failure will not be tolerated.

I am still puzzled by Michael Goldfarb's use of the phrase "greed mongering" on Dateline London.

I know what greed is, and I know what mongering is, but greed mongering (the selling of greed?) defeats me.

Later in the same programme Agnes Poirier used the phase "scare mongering" which is at least intelligible. 

All the time Sunday Politics was discussing Lord Rennard I seemed to hear a voice, in a Harry H. Corbett accent, saying You dirty old man.

A disappointing film

I went to see The Wolf of Wall Street yesterday.

It was a disappointing film, with two-dimensional characters and exaggerated scenes.

Occasionally there were striking images.  At one point a naked DiCaprio walks slowly, in a mann von hinten sequence, through the aftermath of an orgy that resembles the Death of Sardanapalus.  But mostly it was a bore, with no serious ideas.

I have no intention of going to see Twelve Years A Slave, the only other notable film at the local cinema.  It appears to be pornography masquerading as literary adaption (much like Tinto Brass's Caligula).  Politically correct pornography, but pornography nonetheless.

The past week at work

Monday

A day spent with my freelance client.  We drove into London, and parked near Soho.  Various calls then to the hotel, the ballroom in the basement (pink, white and gold rococo) almost packed, rows of seats under the shining chandeliers.

Seminar on equities, followed by a lunch - the food very fine (Roquefort souffle, poached salmon, and keeping to my resolution I just had Vichy water instead of wine).

Then to Bishopsgate where my client went into a massive glass block to see his client.  I sat in the huge reception hall and read the Financial Times.  Then when I got bored I went for a walk along Artillery Lane.

Tuesday

Calls from Ashish Sharma (new Director of the Birmingham office) are a nuisance.  He has asked me to give a briefing to his staff about campaigns over the next seventeen months.  At least I will finally get to see the mysterious Birmingham operation.

Sensational news that Peter J has resigned, leaving his team in the lurch.

Wednesday

I wrote a very reasoned e-mail to the Director of Media Relations at Head Office, attacking everything they have done for the Institute recently.  I was helped by a blistering complaint that has come in about the errant press release.  I sent an e-mail to Anne Boswell-Urquart (nasty person) implying her department had caused the trouble.

Thursday

Proof-reading, some exhibition planning, a variety of other little tasks.

Friday

To Head Office for a publications meeting.  They had a range of booklets newly printed, including one I had written (although I could not look at it, I was afraid I would see mistakes).  Afterwards I walked around the City.

The more esoteric and encoded messages of Ed Miliband’s speech

Ed Miliband’s speech earlier today was extremely interesting. In 2165 words he outlined practical ideas combined with popular sentiments. However, as a Conservative I was interested in the more esoteric and encoded messages of Ed Miliband’s speech.

“It is about those families who work all the hours that God sends and don’t feel they get anything back.” Mention of God and family, in the opening sentences of the speech, seems to be raising the oriflamme of High Toryism at the heart of the Labour party. Is it possible that Ed Miliband is working for us?

“It is about those just starting out who can’t imagine they will ever afford a home of their own.” Here Mr Miliband seems to be endorsing the idea of a property–owning democracy. Ownership of private property is of course a cornerstone of Conservatism.

“It is about who we are as a country.” Forget about internationalism, national identity is going to be a focus. Indeed, Milibandism is embracing identity politics (which included an apology for immigration don’t forget).

“It is about all those who believe that we’re Britain and we should never settle for second best.” Did he really say this? Can a Labour leader in the 21st century be promoting the idea of British exceptionalism? (I mentally imagine him chanting “The British are best, the British are best, I wouldn’t give tuppence for all of the rest…”).

“Personal debt for ordinary families rising again, as wages are squeezed and productivity remains low.” Personal debt is both wrong and immoral. Live within your means, as Margaret would say.

“Over-reliance on insecure, low paid jobs, not enough of the secure, high paying ones that used to keep our middle class strong.” Yes! At last a Labour leader is emphasizing the desirability of a strong middle class and the discreet charms of the bourgeoisie.

“Part of the reason as a country we rely too much on low paid, insecure work is that the small and medium sized firms that could create the good, high paying jobs of the future can’t get the finance they need.” Good old Ed. Forget about the workers and endorse the small businesses that create wealth – the factory owners, the mill owners, the pit owners...

And how he was cheered and clapped!

What a terrible meeting (for the old socialists).

What a wonderful meeting.

How is the New Statesman going to define "an ethnic minority background"

An unusual advertisement from the New Statesman:  http://www.newstatesman.com/2014/01/wellcome-trust-scholarship-new-statesman

"The New Statesman wants to help create a more diverse media, so we're hosting an eight-week paid placement for aspiring science writers from an ethnic minority background."

How is the New Statesman going to define "an ethnic minority background" and how are they going to check whether someone qualifies?

Will self-assertion be enough? (in which case they can presumably expect some mischief-makers to apply).

Is skin colour sufficient? (which will no doubt lead to considerations of how black is "black").

Are community leaders expected to endorse whether an applicant is a Muslim, or Hindu, or Jedi?

This scheme does seem to be attempting in miniature all the contradictions and absurdities of the pass-law requirements of apartheid South Africa.

There are no Muslim babies

Erroneous article by Daniel Trilling on the Rationalist Association website:  http://rationalist.org.uk/articles/4535/is-there-such-a-thing-as-a-muslim-birthrate

Brusquely Mr Trilling tells readers:  "This use of language is annoying. Children are not “born” Muslim, any more than they are born supporters of West Bromwich Albion, or speakers of Russian."

The legal position is that all children born in England are automatically Christian members of the Church of England.

Of course, there is complete toleration of personal belief.

But the Thirty-Nine Articles are still in law, and good luck to anyone who tries to change them ("That the Articles of the Church of England which have been allowed and authorized heretofore, and which Our Clergy generally have subscribed unto do contain the true Doctrine of the Church of England agreeable to God's Word: which We do therefore ratify and confirm, requiring all Our loving Subjects to continue in the uniform Profession thereof, and prohibiting the least difference from the said Articles...").

There are no Muslim babies - they are all born Anglicans.

This is inclusivity in action.

To the list of consequences of the First World War in the Guardian should be added the mechanisation of agriculture and the depopulation of the countryside.

http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/jan/15/firstworldwar

Unofficial eugenics programme

Article in the Independent suggesting that female children are being aborted because of cultural preference in some sections of the BME population (Pakistani-heritage, Bangladeshi-heritage and Afghani-heritage are mentioned):  http://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/the-lost-girls-illegal-abortion-widely-used-by-some-uk-ethnic-groups-to-avoid-daughters-has-reduced-female-population-by-between-1500-and-4700-9059790.html

Are these not the same communities that insist on importing brides for their male off-spring?

Is it possible that the importation of female brides from the Indian sub-continent is helping to facilitate the kill-the-female-embryos unofficial eugenics programme?

Can I suggest we apply a default position of refusing visas for imported brides from Pakistan, Bangladesh and Afghanistan (and perhaps India also) until this disgusting perversion of the abortion process has come to a stop?

£25 billion, problem solved

Exultant whooping from the pro-immigration lobby over asinine pronouncement on immigration by the Office for Budget Responsibility:

http://blogs.telegraph.co.uk/news/benedictbrogan/100254565/bad-news-for-david-cameron-the-obr-says-immigration-helps-deficit-reduction/

However they can only make their projections work over a fifty year timescale!

Here is an easier way to help the Treasury.

The foreign-born population of the United Kingdom is estimated to be 7, 354,000.

The Chancellor needs to find £25 billion extra per year.

Impose an annual tax of £3,400 per immigrant per year.

Total raised £25 billion, problem solved.

If they don't like the tax they can go home - which helps solve the immigration problem.

Illiterate article by Aditya Chakrabortty

Economically illiterate article by Aditya Chakrabortty about North Sea oil and its revenues:

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2014/jan/13/north-sea-oil-money-uk-norwegians-fund

There can be no comparison between the United Kingdom economy and Norway during the 1970s and 1980s.

Possession of North Sea oil made the pound sterling a "petro currency" - effectively the United Kingdom could not go bankrupt and so sterling was an extremely safe investment.

Thus the value of the pound began to rise.

A rising pound made British manufactured exports more expensive and companies became uncompetitive.

Manufacturing companies closed or relocated overseas, and hundreds of thousands of workers became unemployed.

North Sea oil revenues were used to pay the unemployment benefit of the newly unemployed people - and at the time the benefits were relatively generous and not limited by timescale.

Thus possession of North Sea oil for the United Kingdom was economically neutral (Norway did not have such a large manufacturing base and so did not experience this process).

All this was proved by left-wing economist Lord Kagan years ago.

When I heard Alex Salmon singing Scottish folk songs to a 1970s musical backing on the Today programme this morning it sounded like a excerpt from the horror film The Wicker Man.

It is very disconcerting to have to liaise with a senior person who has an highly-developed sense of humour that one does not understand.

His Last Bow

Discussion on the Today programme this morning about Sherlock Holmes and his various revivals over the years.

It would be appropriate during 2014 for the BBC to dramatise the Sherlock Holmes story His Last Bow, set on the eve of the First World War in which the great detective confounds a German espionage ring.

It would also be an antidote to the Blackadder version of dramatised war history.

An astonishingly comprehensive and cogent article about the First World War from an Australian perspective:  http://quadrant.org.au/magazine/2014/01-02/paul-keating-betrayed-anzacs/

I think we are justified in saying Enoch Powell was right

Alarming front page of the Independent today.  The accompanying article tells us "an estimated 278,000 hate crimes a year – of which 154,000 had an element of racial motivation".  That is nearly three thousand racially-motivated incidents every week.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/exclusive-race-hate--a-crime-the-police-will-not-solve-9054695.html

Leaving on one side issues of right and wrong (and it goes without saying that all violence, whether verbal or physical, is wrong). 

Also leaving on one side the identity of the perpetrators and the identity of the victims.

154,000 incidents a year represents an inter-communal war - there really is no other way of describing it.

Therefore I think we are justified in saying Enoch Powell was right.

He correctly predicted this state of affairs.  All the evidence is presented here by the left-leaning Independent.  Perhaps more attention can now be given to Mr Powell's analysis of the immigration problem and how it is going to play out.

The mutation of right-to-buy into buy-to-let in London

Tom Copley (Labour Member of the London Assembly) has produced a report on the mutation of right-to-buy into buy-to-let in London.

Strangely however there is no mention in his report of "vibrant diversity".

Is it not the case that the majority of former right-to-buy properties that are now buy-to-let are characterised by asian tenants exercising their right-to-buy options and then selling-on to asian buy-to-let landlords?

One does not like to be suspicious, but is it possible that within this "vibrantly diverse" right-to-buy-and-buy-to-let nexus there is a culture of extended family conspiring, inter-communal kickbacks and subtle (sometimes less than subtle) respect-your-elders pressures.

It needs investigating.

http://tomcopley.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/01/From-Right-to-Buy-to-Buy-to-Let-Jan-2014.pdf

The pro-immigration lobby is constantly changing its argument

Barbara Roche, former Labour MP and now representing the lobby group Migration Matters, appeared on BBC News 24 earlier today telling us that immigration was essential to economic growth.

Like some shape-shifting elemental force, the pro-immigration lobby is constantly changing its argument.  At first we were told immigrants were here to do the jobs we were too lazy to do; and when that argument was debunked we were told it was because "vibrant diversity" and multiculturalism was good for us; and when multiculturalism as a policy was junked we were told that we needed immigrants to look after the old (as if immigrants would not get old themselves, as well as wanting to bring their aged relations over here).  Now we are being assured that immigration is responsible for economic growth.

Well here we have them.

Economic growth is not some esoteric concept like "vibrant diversity".

Economic growth can be defined and measured. 

The bean counters will be able to tell us when this economic growth occurred, which immigrants caused it, and what the value was to average voter. 

So please tell us Ms Roche, what immigrants were responsible for this economic growth, when did they arrive here and when did the resulting economic growth happen, and what was the direct chain of cause and effect that delivered a financial benefit to the average man and woman in the United Kingdom (and how much was that financial benefit).

Of course, you might not be able to prove your argument Ms Roche.

In which case I hope you will not mind if I call you a lying toad.

http://www.migrationmatterstrust.co.uk/