Stop smashing the system!

We need to be clear: the aim of the Blair-Brown-Starmer constitutional changes is to take power away not from Westminster, but from us.

The Glorious Revolution of 1688 put the Crown under parliamentary control, counterbalancing it with a Protestant male bourgeoisie. In the centuries since then, we have seen a Glorious Evolution into a secular non-sexist democracy, with religious and ceremonial trappings.

At long last, we the people who are subject to the law are at the same time the citizens who make the law, through our representatives. Since 1928, all adults have had an equal voice in national self-government.

It is our country. This is what ideologues want to smash.

After Hitler invaded Russia, a London publican said to Claud Cockburn (p. 226):

“I can see it coming, Claud. The Communists are going to take over the country when this little lot’s finished with. And I don’t say they shouldn’t. I don’t say you don’t have common human justice on your side, Claud. All I ask of you is just one thing.”

“What’s that, Harry?”

“All I ask, Claud, is when you and your pals take over and make that great revolution, that you’ll just leave me my King, my constitution and my country.”

He had tears in his eyes, and it was hard not to be able to offer him a binding guarantee.

The power of Parliament is awesome. If sufficiently explicit, an Act passed by both Houses and receiving Royal Assent overrides any other law, treaty or authority anywhere. That is absolute sovereignty. The Crown in Parliament is not bound by any principle or aim other than the expression of the people’s will in pursuit of the nation’s interests.

Its unpredictability and complete liberty is what political zealots cannot stand; they wish to replace a purely procedural system with some programme and administrative arrangement that embodies their philosophy, and then our debates can be at an end.

Nor is it only the Left that undermines us. We have been betrayed on all sides by Quislings enriching themselves by colluding with multinational corporations and supranational organisations trending towards centralised global control. If they succeed, we shall find that absolute power, as Baron Acton said, corrupts absolutely, and that “RULERS”, as Coleridge said, “are as bad as they dare to be”.

How quickly politicians will shake off the common people who give them legitimacy! A touchstone for this misbehaviour is the German Foreign Minister Annalena Baerbock’s arrogant dismissal of democracy when she said she would stand with Ukraine “no matter what my German voters think“. It is especially ironic that she was not voted into the Bundestag personally, but simply through leading the Green Party under Germany’s proportional representation setup.

Our own system is still imperfect, and has flaws that can be exploited by the ruthless to turn it into a self-destroying machine. When in 1780 John Dunning moved that “the influence of the Crown has increased, is increasing, and ought to be diminished”, it was not anticipated that the office of the Prime Minister might become a tyranny, using the monarch’s Royal Prerogative; yet (for example) almost the first act of Blair’s New Labour Government was to politicise the Civil Service in a Privy Council meeting. The comprehensive damage to our constitution had been planned in advance like a bank raid.

In 1789, Thomas Jefferson mooted a periodic constitutional convention so that the living citizens of the United States could re-determine how they governed themselves. If we British value our freedom, then we must find some way to do the same; it cannot be left to a crypto-Communist cabal ruling us on the basis of a freakish electoral result that has already lost a significant portion of its tiny minority of supporters after less than four months.

Reposted from Wolves of Westminster.

Jumping Fences - PMQs 30th October 2024

The Left proves it is progressive by being transgressive. Customs are for breaching, rules for breaking. How else is one to smash the system?

So it was that the Lord Chancellor turned her back on the King after delivering his Speech; that the PM removed Mrs T’s portrait from Number 10 and Rachel Reeves followed suit in Number 11 - replacing Nigel Lawson’s with one of the early British Communist Ellen Wilkinson (no Che Guevara poster?)

Parliament must be disrespected, too. Speaker Hoyle had to roast Reeves a couple of days ago for her ‘extreme discourtesy’ in leaking Budget details in advance to American reporters; and after PMQs today the Deputy Speaker reminded ministers and the Treasury bench that such infractions were a discourtesy to the Speaker and the House and went against the Ministerial Code. Did their faces look bovvered?

Now, off to the races with the PM. We are early in the steeplechasing season and this session was a lesson in how not to set up fences.

Rishi Sunak’s were easy ones, more for Thelwell ponies than mighty steeds. His stepping down from leadership was an opportunity for the PM to wish him a ‘joyful’ Diwali (was he thinking of Kamala?) and to thank him for his service. There was a flick of the hoof as the PM said that, seeing how fast the Conservatives went through leaders, he might possibly be facing Sunak again sometime.

Sunak’s response to Starmer’s congratulations on being the first British Asian PM was to self-identify as a Yorkshireman and hope that Sir Keir would support cricket in schools - the latter agreed, of course. The pair also concurred on the importance of AI for the economy, and of support for Ukraine and NATO. Rishi’s wish to keep Stormont going was a gift to his oppo, who reflected on his own work in Northern Ireland.

This last was a high hedge that the final questioner, Mark Francois, could have used to make Sir Keir come a cropper. In 2023 Starmer committed himself in Opposition to repeal the Northern Ireland ‘Legacy Bill’ that gave British servicemen immunity from prosecution for alleged war crimes, and as PM reaffirmed it in July 2024 over Guinness with the Irish Taoiseach. There was a more carefully qualified statement a few days later, saying ‘it would be irresponsible to repeal the Act in its entirety without anything to replace it’ but giving various citations of the ECHR to show its conflicts with the Act’s amnesty. It is a most serious matter, threatening ex-servicemen in the autumn of their lives with the prospect of endless investigations.

But Francois fluffed his chance, in two ways. Here is his question: ‘Why, Sir, are you throwing these veterans to the wolves to pander to Sinn Fein?’ Despite over twenty years in Parliament he had addressed the PM in the first person rather than through the Chair, which caused the Speaker to remind him that Hoyle was not ‘you.’ This bought a few moments for Starmer to frame a short and ambiguous response: ‘I’m not.’ Not amending, or alternatively repealing and replacing the Act? Not doing it to satisfy Sinn Fein, some of whose fugitive supporters may themselves have received ‘comfort letters’ that indemnified them against prosecution for their own crimes? Over the safety barrier and away rode Sir Keir, free and clear.

Another imperfectly erected obstacle was the work of Lincoln Jopp, who has only been an MP since 4 July. He made a tyro’s mistake of raising three issues at once: the army of Labour MPs interfering with the US Presidential election, the ceding of the Chagos Islands, and the Foreign Secretary’s unsatisfactory performance at the recent Commonwealth Heads of State conference. Did the PM have full confidence in Lammy? ‘I was going to say he was an upgrade on his predecessor,’ came the reply, charging straight through the gap in the shrubbery. What a shame: either of the first two could have been challenging, if framed correctly.

Similarly, Rachael Maskell asked whether Starmer would set up a pensioner poverty task force, but because she had also mentioned child poverty the PM expressed his concern about that alone. Carla Rayner (Green) came a little closer to tripping him, deploring Israel’s hampering aid to Gaza and banning UNWRA, but when she used the word ‘genocide’ Sir Keir expressed his worry and concern yet said he had never described Israel’s actions with that term; a skilful swerve.

The Opposition benches need to study the example of the late Tam Dalyell, whose undodgeable queries used to instil ‘fear and Lothian’ in ministers.

Reposted from Wolves of Westminster

FRIDAY MUSIC: It's A Beautiful Day, by JD

This review by Lindsay Planer is part of the notes alongside the first video:

"Although they are not one of the better-known San Francisco bands to have emerged from the ballroom circuit of the late '60s and early '70s, It's a Beautiful Day were no less memorable for their unique progressive rock style that contrasted well with the Bay Area psychedelic scene. Led by David LaFlamme (flute/violin/vocals) and his wife, Linda LaFlamme (keyboards), the six-piece unit on this album vacillates between light and ethereal pieces such as the lead-off cut, "White Bird," to the heavier, prog rock-influenced "Bombay Calling."

“One of the most distinct characteristics of It's a Beautiful Day is their instrumentation. The prominence of David LaFlamme -- former violin soloist with the Utah Symphony and original member of Dan Hicks & His Hot Licks -- adds a refinement to It's a Beautiful Day's sound. Likewise, the intricate melodies -- mostly composed by the LaFlammes -- are structured around the band's immense virtuosity, a prime example being the exquisitely haunting harpsichord-driven "Girl With No Eyes." It's a Beautiful Day remains as a timepiece and evidence of how sophisticated rock & roll had become in the fertile environs of the San Francisco music scene."

It's A Beautiful Day - White Bird (1969)

It's a Beautiful Day - Don and Dewey [Jazz Fusion - Jazz-Rock] (1970)

Girl With No Eyes

It's a Beautiful Day - Hoedown

Galileo

Do You Remember The Sun

Jabber Wacky: Mercy Killing Fever

You wait ages for a euthanasia Bill and then three come along at once.

First was the 'Assisted Dying for Terminally Ill Adults (Scotland) Bill'introduced on 27 March 2024 by Liam McArthur MSP (Lib Dem). There is no specific limit to the sufferer's expected remaining life: 'a person is terminally ill if they have an advanced and progressive disease, illness or condition from which they are unable to recover and that can reasonably be expected to cause their premature death.' The Bill does not define the term 'premature' but the World Health Organisation seems to be working with age 70 as a marker, outside Africa.

Next was (Labour) Lord Falconer's 'Assisted Dying for Terminally Ill Adults Bill', drawn second of 25 Private Members' Bills (PMB) in the House of Lords and given its first reading on 26 July. It's not clear how many slips were in the red box though the administrator says typically it might have 'say, 100 or so entries in it.' So, a 1 in 4 chance of being pulled out.

Falconer's Bill is narrowly worded and covers cases where the patient is predicted to die within six months. It was to have received its second reading on 15 November but he withdrew it in favour of (Labour) Kim Leadbeater MP's Bill, introduced 16 October, to 'allow adults who are terminally ill, subject to safeguards and protections, to request and be provided with assistance to end their own life.'

Leadbeater's text hasn't yet been published but will be debated on 29 November. Hers was drawn first of the 20 in the Commons PMB ballot (another lucky shot!) but she has been vague about the death prognosis: '6 months, 12 months.'

All three Bills are only for 'adults', which in England and Wales means 18 years old and over, but in Scotland people have full legal capacity at 16. In Belgium and the Netherlands children have already been mercy-killed but for now at least, the British attitude is, to adapt an old saying, 'euthanasia is wasted on the young.' Doubtless we'll catch up with more progressive nations in due course.

All three are predicated on using medically prescribed lethal drugs. The Scottish Health Secretary has said that McArthur's Bill is 'ultra vires' in this respect for the Scottish Government. On the other hand Holyrood's presiding officer has said that she is confident the Bill is indeed within Scotland's powers; and McArthur is 'very confident' that the UK and Scottish governments would work together to ensure it becomes law if backed by MSPs.' Where there's a will…

Despite Dignity In Death's enthusiasm and Dame Esther Rantzen's celebrity endorsement, euthanasia opens up a can of coffin worms. Jack King's book on the subject shows that the medical procedure is not guaranteed to be either swift or painless. If the only consideration is the patient's experience rather than a potentially misleading show for witnesses, a near-instantaneous and absolutely certain method would be a bolt gun to the head, as used to kill cattle.

Also, there is the question of authorisation. Lord Falconer's Bill (section 3 para 4 subsection c) says the patient must show they have 'a clear and settled intention to end their own life which has been reached voluntarily, on an informed basis and without undue influence.' Set a good brief to work on those adjectives, especially what counts as 'undue' influence. Already the Archbishop of Canterbury has warned that a right to die may easily become, in the patient's mind, a 'duty to die.'

And how well 'informed' will the patient have been on pain management, palliative care, hospices? Is there an undeclared official intention to starve these alternatives of funds and make death by doctor the quick 'n' easy solution, a big money-saver for the NHS and Treasury?

Ironically the Right are accused of loving wealth too much, yet some on the Left - like George Bernard Shaw in this 1931 speech - measure the value of individuals in brutally economic terms and are prepared to cull those who have become a burden. Is their real emphasis less on mercy and more on killing?

Published earlier on the Bruges Group blog

FRIDAY MUSIC: Zoe Conway, by JD

Zoë Conway effortlessly combines a background steeped in Ireland’s rich aural music tradition with a strong founding in classical music. She has toured worldwide and has appeared in many prestigious concert halls including Carnegie Hall, New York, The Kremlin Palace, Moscow and The National Concert Hall, Dublin.

Her versatility as an instrumentalist has allowed her to perform across a broad range of genres, from guest soloist with world renowned orchestras, to touring with Riverdance and working with mainstream international acts such as Rodrigo y Gabriella, Damien Rice, Lisa Hannigan, Nick Cave and Lou Reed among others.

She has released two solo albums, Zoë Conway, produced by Bill Whelan, and The Horse’s Tail, both critically acclaimed, and has also released a live DVD, Zoë Conway Live.

https://zoeconway.com/

Zoë Conway and John Mc Intyre - Faoiseamh a Gheobhadsa (I Will Find Solace)

Zoë Conway + John McIntyre - Gillespies Mazurka / The Bakers Reel / The Calgary Polka

Zoe Conway And John Mc Intyre - 'The half moon waltz' suivi de 'The Hangman's reel' - Live

Zoë Conway: Mná na hEireann/Toss the Feathers/The Glen Road to Carrick (Germany, 2016)

Zoë Conway Live (The Drunken Sailor)

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -

With an exciting blend of eclectic fiddle and guitar music, Zoë Conway and John Mc Intyre bring to the stage sympathetic arrangements of traditional Irish music, compositions and songs, old and new. The husband and wife folk duo possess a rare facility to draw pieces into their repertoire from other genres such as classical, jazz and world music and express this material in way which not only displays the sheer range and knowledge of both instrumentalists but also exhibits the wonderful versatility of their instruments.
http://www.zoeandjohn.com/about.html

Angie rides out – PMQs 23rd October 2024

Angela Rayner fielded the questions today. Facing her for the Opposition was Sir Oliver Dowden, on his last PMQs stint before the new Tory leader takes over. The two gingers were gracious to each other; Rayner said she’d miss him and did the heart sign with her hands.

Although the session was testing as usual, Angie carried her burden lightly, without that sense of embattlement exuded by her boss. It’s a neuro thing: she’s tough, but she’s a normie.

The opening exchanges were on familiar lines, with Labour relying on Starmerite counterattacks, evasions and non-sequiturs. Dowden asked what Labour’s definition of ‘working people’ was; Rayner said it was the people the Tories had failed for fourteen years. Five million small businesses affected? Labour would sort out the mess they had inherited. Wasn’t raising employer NI a job tax and a £5 billion hit to the economy? The new employment bill would raise living standards.

Angie agreed on the value of our relationship with the Commonwealth and the efforts of the King and the late Queen; perhaps there was a deeper significance in the combination of her red hair, white jacket and blue dress? Then she laid into the Conservatives’ past failures and the ‘chaos’ they had left behind. This was old-fashioned Saturday TV wrestling: nothing personal, Oliver. Ding ding!

It was the later rounds that presented more challenges, holds that might be harder to break.

As Kim Leadbeater’s gestating euthanasia Bill slouches towards its November debate, Rachael Maskell raised the issue of palliative care for the terminally ill. Would the deputy PM consider a commission? Rayner praised carers and said discussions had begun – another deflection avoiding expensive commitments. Later, Kim Johnson asked whether hospices should have to rely less on charity; again, this was important, but a matter for further discussion.

Daisy Cooper highlighted the need for more care workers in the coming NHS winter crisis of patients who cannot be discharged without a care plan, and the effect of increased employer NI on the budgets of 18,000 small care providers. As in previous PMQs, the answer combined the aspiration to grow the economy with a reluctance to anticipate the Chancellor’s Budget, due next week.

Monica Harding told us 1,800 Surrey children with special needs (e.g. autism) had no provision; the reply was sympathy and, again, to await the Budget.

As Chancellor, Rachel Reeves has so many circles to square – as does the PM!

Mike Tapp (Labour, Dover) spoke of migrants’ deaths in the Channel; the stock answer was the inherited asylum chaos, the new Border Security Command and the need to target the people smugglers. Unmentioned was the derogation or withdrawal from the ECHR that one of the Tory leadership candidates is touting.

Related, perhaps, was Sir Edward Leigh’s request for an assurance that RAF Scampton could be sold off without being covered with new housing. Odd how a radical government evades certain radical solutions, bearing in mind that our recent population increase is more than entirely due to net immigration, the low wage end of which – as the OBR decided last month – harms our GDP per capita.

Land management also featured in questions from:

• Helen Morgan (inundation of Shropshire farms. Answer: ‘14 years’, etc., plans to improve flood defences);
• Blake Stephenson (risk of building on flood plains. Answer: commitment to build 1.5 million new homes, need for better infrastructure);
• Sir John Hayes (Grade 1 and 2 farmland threatened by giant pylons and solar panels – food and energy production in conflict. Answer: both important and “we will get Britain building again”.)

Rayner remained confident – bullish – but Labour is beginning to look like the proverbial chameleon placed on a tartan cloth.

Reposted from Wolves of Westminster

WEEKENDER: Energy, by Wiggia

Why is it that so many of the promoters of green policies and in particular purveyors of climate change are so stereotypical in the way they speak and promote their ideology? The examples below are typical and now we have the Edstone in charge of the nation’s energy supply and our net zero ‘obligations.’ None of it bodes well for the future of this country.

Ed Miliband is one of the eco loons who frequent the TV screens and spread the ‘save the planet’ gospel on a regular basis. Needless to say like all of them they have skin in the game, running an eco audit firm. He also tells porkies as well as spouting nonsense such as this:

https://www.independent.co.uk/tv/news/environmental-activist-says-we-should-give-up-pets-to-save-planet-b2183768.html

He is also of the ‘give up meat for the same reasons’ brigade as well as the usual ‘cycle everywhere and don’t drive a car.’

Not quite sure how they will get anyone else to give up cattle. Somehow I think Argentina and India for different reasons will say no - and as we speak an offshoot of the green movement has introduced bison into wildest Kent, and they are thriving; a clash of ideologies is imminent, and I put money on the bison.

The ‘don’t drive’ comment is interesting. Only a few weeks ago in one of his interviews he stated he had never owned a car, yet only two weeks previously on the same program he proudly stated he had managed to go a whole year without driving his car? The car he had never owned? Or like so much else he made it up.

Meanwhile whilst talking about cars he stated a few days ago that EV sales were up something like 26%. The truth is somewhat different. Overall the market relies on subsidies for sales, but it is not just the inflated price of these vehicles but the lack of infrastructure, as with everything else, and the belief, rightly that any price advantages of today will disappear when EVs become the majority vehicle of choice as our green governments hope they will: the lost fuel tax that EVs represent can not be sustained ‘as any fule kno.’

https://www.thisismoney.co.uk/money/electriccars/article-13390757/UK-car-sector-downgrades-EV-sales-expectations-2024-public-demand-plummets-EVs.html

Other facts come to light as the number of these EVs gains a foot in the market place: their propensity to simply carry on burning should they catch fire, and the fact that should an accident damage the battery, meaning a total write off, means insurance quotes have ballooned out of all recognition in the last couple of years to cover the costs; this of course affects all types of vehicles. Not only should Milliband not be allowed anywhere near the control of the UK’s energy but he is also a danger to the food industry. In fairness to him he could have been distracted when spellbound by Greta Thunberg along with others of equal persuasion:

 



It’s good to know that our energy policies are in such good hands. He has indeed returned, putting out the most condescending video, treating all as five-year-olds:

https://x.com/i/status/1837781253992419453

There seems to be no end to these loons. Jim ‘jail the deniers’ Dale, a comedy turn who when challenged as to what his qualifications were by someone who had them in spades, mumbled eventually that he had several years as a meteorologist. It seems that in a later interview he mysteriously claimed to have obtained qualifications. Yet these people want climate change to be accepted on their terms; any other opinion even when backed by the ‘same’ science is immediately slammed as a form of heretic nonsense.

Below is a good example:

dailysceptic.org/2024/10/18/scientists-find-no-change-in-global-warming-rate-since-1970-despite-hottest-year-ever-in-2023/

Had he been arpound at the same time Jim Dale could also have been a stand-in for Jimmy Durante…

And finally there is Dale Vince who has made millions out of government subsidies and as is typical with all these zealots talks rubbish. His claim that wind now accounts for 46% of the load base is reliant on the wind actually blowing. Again when confronted with the fact that the wind is not reliable he said we can overcome the odd day the wind does not blow…

The odd day…

As can be seen from a typical graph of the wind blowing over a calender year there are more days when the wind hardly blows at all than any over 40% peaks. Still he has done very nicely out of it.

It is easy, very easy to be cynical with such people promoting all that needs to be done in order to meet the targets for the mythical net zero, but when we are lied to by these cultists, for that is what they have become it is difficult (beyond the desire to clean the planet up e.g. cleaning rivers) to see most of it as anything other than a giant scam. As with Covid any dissent is rubbished, and look how many so-called conspiracy theories are coming true in that area. The presumption that so many factors are indicating the end of the world is simply not true, the list of predictions that never happened lengthens by the year. It’s time to get real on all this.

For if climate change is happening as it has over the millennia then nature will win. Sitting on the beach at Brighton like Canute saying ‘go away’, or shutting down power stations or throwing paint over Van Gogh's paintings will not make a jot of difference.