The unofficial online home of the UK Independence Party
Archive for December, 2009
My first half year as an MEP
Dec 31st
My first months have been very interesting...albeit somewhat difficult...and it has certainly been a steep learning curve.
As a newly-elected MEP you are thrown into the deep end. Before I had time to figure out the implications of being an MEP, I was "up to my eyes" with membership of the two most important committees in the European Parliament – the Budget Committee and the Budgetary Control Committee. Important events unfolded in both Committees in the second half of the year: the Budget committee had to approve a budget for 2010 and the Budgetary Control committee had to deal with the European Court of Auditors' annual report. Whilst I was very early into the budget and the auditors report, I also needed to put aside time to understand the politics and the procedural requirements to deal with these matters – not an easy task!
It was as a member of the Budgetary Control committee that I encountered immediate hostility from "the system" when I was voted down as Vice President thanks to an illicit secret vote. In this committee I openly said what I thought and nobody challenged me. They appeared to ignore me but... I could see how uncomfortable they were from their rictus smiles... they could not gainsay the facts! Some of the members, like the German lady from the Popular Party who led the vote against me, made a show in the meetings of being openly critical of the Commission but then completely let them off the hook when it came to making meaningful decisions - at first I was surprised by this display of hypocrisy, but now I am afraid I view it as typical eurocrat behaviour.
The Budget Committee is led by Monsieur Lamassoure, a Frenchman who reminds me eerily of the Budget Director General at the Commission back in 2002. He has an endearingly patriarchal way with members of his "family" and until recently, I think that he dreamt that he could bring the black sheep back into the fold - alas, I fear that I have disappointed him! I gather that after my speech against his report on the transitional measures for the Lisbon Treaty and more recently after my speech in December against the provisions of the 2010 budget, he has apparently given me up as a lost cause – I am sorry to have disappointed him, but I cannot, as others do, voice a lot of criticism of the Commission and even show anger at Committee meetings but five minutes later vote in its favour..
After almost six months here, I fear that my worst suspicions have been confirmed - this Parliament functions in a way that has nothing to do with parliamentary democracy. There is little difference between what the socialists and the conservatives vote, whatever their nationalities. It is revealing to examine MEP voting records. British MEPs of whatever colour - Labour, Tories and Lib-Dems - have consistently voted against ALL my amendments; for example they ALL voted to exclude from the 2010 budget the huge costs pertaining to the implementation of the Lisbon Treaty. Instead they have voted to deal with these through separate "amending budgets" which will be incorporated through the back door and "lost"; and they have ALL voted in favour of the the 2010 Budget increases including the one to be applied to their salaries!
From all this, many of my dear readers will think that I am completely wasting my time sitting in this parliament...well this is not quite true! Dissidents such as I disturb their peace and I can certainly tell you that I make them very nervous! Few have attempted to treat me with the contempt they usually show to those who question the system. I always try to speak factually – using facts and figures which they have trouble refuting. AND they all know that I started out as a believer in the EC project only becoming a Eurosceptic after my chastening experience as Chief Accountant of the European Commission. They know "that I know" and the numbers usually speak for themselves! Whilst it is at times lonely and sometimes you feel that you are talking to the wind, I believe that I have a duty to my constituents to tell it as I see it – I think that they want the unvarnished truth. That is what I believe I was elected to do...
With the aim of helping certain constituents who have contacted me (as a substitute member of the ECON committee) about the draft Alternative Investment Fund (AIF) directive, I have started to work on it with the objective of minimizing its adverse effects on the City of London; to this end,I have had meetings with some AIF managers. I have also met with staff from the US treasury to understand what the US congress are planning; I am also organizing a visit to the European Parliament with representatives of the City of London – preferably on a day when the ECON Committee meets to take some important decisions on the proposed legislation (February/March). The situation is made more difficult because the rapporteur – a Frenchman (now there's a surprise) – has come up with proposals that ensure that the original EC draft is even more stringent. Unfortunately, the ECON Committee works in a similarly consensual way to the Budgetary Control and Budget committees and I have not seen much criticism so far of the proposals; worse, I am pretty much convinced, after attending several meetings, that few of the Committee have the faintest idea of the real implications of the AIF directive... very depressing but not, sadly, very surprising.
I can tell you that I have had quite a few conversations with MEPs of different nationalities; some of them have expressed their pride in sharing membership of the European Parliament with well-educated and well-connected people some of whom are "ex-prime ministers". I don't want to disillusion them or sound too world weary...but BIG DEAL! I know for certain that some of these people have been kicked out of their own national politics due to their rank incompetence and have only come to Brussels to earn a salary and a pension...that´s all.. The same is true of most of the EC Commissioners. In the Budgetary Control committee I only know of one member that has an accounting and financial background; as for the rest, many are teachers or philologists; but at least I have the comfort of knowing that the Chairman of this Committee is an Italian judge who has been fighting against Italian corruption – I am certainly putting my trust in him! So there is room for a small amount of optimism...
I have also spent time responding to requests from my various constituents. In particular, I have taken to trying to defend those British citizens who are suffering prejudice in respect of their second residences in the Mediterranean Spanish coast. Not an easy job I can tell you as the problem is very much linked to corruption not only on the part of the builders and real estate agencies but also and more importantly on the part of the local governments. The simple reality is that Spain is bogged down with corruption cases and honest Spanish citizens wake up to a new case every day... and what is worse is that the judges fail to prosecute and jail the fraudsters. I am hoping to put a motion to block subsidies to the region and have a reasonable hope that this should go through because a lot of nationalities are being adversely affected and I imagine – perhaps fondly! – that MEPs will not like to be seen to be so "unhelpful" as to vote against such a resolution...but we shall see because to successfully put forward a resolution I need a large number of signatures..(100 or more).
I receive very many requests... hundreds... but I simply cannot deal with them all and so I have to limit my efforts to those whom I believe that I can really help and where I believe that I can have some impact. I am very sorry that I cannot help everybody, but I hope that my constituents will understand.
All this activity has to date prevented me from having the time to set up a proper organisation to help me do the best possible job; I have been operating with only one assistant. Ries Baeten (he is a Dutch/Belgian, and I have hired him because he has been working in the European Parliament for 10 years, knows how to get things done efficiently in that environment and has followed and supported my case for years) and I am very grateful to him for his hard work thus far; but as from January I will be recruiting two more assistants; one will be a researcher to help me put together specific evidence of fraud in a number of cases that I am investigating and the other will help me with my involvement in the ECON committee. Recruiting the right person for the job is not an easy task: education and background are important, but efficiency and loyalty are of utmost importance.!
Thank you so much for your support over the last 6 months - I really appreciate it. In my next blog, I will speak about the challenges for the future ... as Lord Pearson likes to say - Onwards, Upwards and Outwards!
PS. I am appalled to learn that UKIP will not be included in the BBC national election debates. Don't the Governors of the BBC realize that whoever gets to Downing Street will not be governing the country???? At present 75% of the laws come from Brussels....and shortly it will go up to 90%...so frankly...who cares what Cameron, Brown or Clegg have to say...there is only one party that can change all that - UKIP - and the BBC are denying this party a voice - a complete disgrace.
As a newly-elected MEP you are thrown into the deep end. Before I had time to figure out the implications of being an MEP, I was "up to my eyes" with membership of the two most important committees in the European Parliament – the Budget Committee and the Budgetary Control Committee. Important events unfolded in both Committees in the second half of the year: the Budget committee had to approve a budget for 2010 and the Budgetary Control committee had to deal with the European Court of Auditors' annual report. Whilst I was very early into the budget and the auditors report, I also needed to put aside time to understand the politics and the procedural requirements to deal with these matters – not an easy task!
It was as a member of the Budgetary Control committee that I encountered immediate hostility from "the system" when I was voted down as Vice President thanks to an illicit secret vote. In this committee I openly said what I thought and nobody challenged me. They appeared to ignore me but... I could see how uncomfortable they were from their rictus smiles... they could not gainsay the facts! Some of the members, like the German lady from the Popular Party who led the vote against me, made a show in the meetings of being openly critical of the Commission but then completely let them off the hook when it came to making meaningful decisions - at first I was surprised by this display of hypocrisy, but now I am afraid I view it as typical eurocrat behaviour.
The Budget Committee is led by Monsieur Lamassoure, a Frenchman who reminds me eerily of the Budget Director General at the Commission back in 2002. He has an endearingly patriarchal way with members of his "family" and until recently, I think that he dreamt that he could bring the black sheep back into the fold - alas, I fear that I have disappointed him! I gather that after my speech against his report on the transitional measures for the Lisbon Treaty and more recently after my speech in December against the provisions of the 2010 budget, he has apparently given me up as a lost cause – I am sorry to have disappointed him, but I cannot, as others do, voice a lot of criticism of the Commission and even show anger at Committee meetings but five minutes later vote in its favour..
After almost six months here, I fear that my worst suspicions have been confirmed - this Parliament functions in a way that has nothing to do with parliamentary democracy. There is little difference between what the socialists and the conservatives vote, whatever their nationalities. It is revealing to examine MEP voting records. British MEPs of whatever colour - Labour, Tories and Lib-Dems - have consistently voted against ALL my amendments; for example they ALL voted to exclude from the 2010 budget the huge costs pertaining to the implementation of the Lisbon Treaty. Instead they have voted to deal with these through separate "amending budgets" which will be incorporated through the back door and "lost"; and they have ALL voted in favour of the the 2010 Budget increases including the one to be applied to their salaries!
From all this, many of my dear readers will think that I am completely wasting my time sitting in this parliament...well this is not quite true! Dissidents such as I disturb their peace and I can certainly tell you that I make them very nervous! Few have attempted to treat me with the contempt they usually show to those who question the system. I always try to speak factually – using facts and figures which they have trouble refuting. AND they all know that I started out as a believer in the EC project only becoming a Eurosceptic after my chastening experience as Chief Accountant of the European Commission. They know "that I know" and the numbers usually speak for themselves! Whilst it is at times lonely and sometimes you feel that you are talking to the wind, I believe that I have a duty to my constituents to tell it as I see it – I think that they want the unvarnished truth. That is what I believe I was elected to do...
With the aim of helping certain constituents who have contacted me (as a substitute member of the ECON committee) about the draft Alternative Investment Fund (AIF) directive, I have started to work on it with the objective of minimizing its adverse effects on the City of London; to this end,I have had meetings with some AIF managers. I have also met with staff from the US treasury to understand what the US congress are planning; I am also organizing a visit to the European Parliament with representatives of the City of London – preferably on a day when the ECON Committee meets to take some important decisions on the proposed legislation (February/March). The situation is made more difficult because the rapporteur – a Frenchman (now there's a surprise) – has come up with proposals that ensure that the original EC draft is even more stringent. Unfortunately, the ECON Committee works in a similarly consensual way to the Budgetary Control and Budget committees and I have not seen much criticism so far of the proposals; worse, I am pretty much convinced, after attending several meetings, that few of the Committee have the faintest idea of the real implications of the AIF directive... very depressing but not, sadly, very surprising.
I can tell you that I have had quite a few conversations with MEPs of different nationalities; some of them have expressed their pride in sharing membership of the European Parliament with well-educated and well-connected people some of whom are "ex-prime ministers". I don't want to disillusion them or sound too world weary...but BIG DEAL! I know for certain that some of these people have been kicked out of their own national politics due to their rank incompetence and have only come to Brussels to earn a salary and a pension...that´s all.. The same is true of most of the EC Commissioners. In the Budgetary Control committee I only know of one member that has an accounting and financial background; as for the rest, many are teachers or philologists; but at least I have the comfort of knowing that the Chairman of this Committee is an Italian judge who has been fighting against Italian corruption – I am certainly putting my trust in him! So there is room for a small amount of optimism...
I have also spent time responding to requests from my various constituents. In particular, I have taken to trying to defend those British citizens who are suffering prejudice in respect of their second residences in the Mediterranean Spanish coast. Not an easy job I can tell you as the problem is very much linked to corruption not only on the part of the builders and real estate agencies but also and more importantly on the part of the local governments. The simple reality is that Spain is bogged down with corruption cases and honest Spanish citizens wake up to a new case every day... and what is worse is that the judges fail to prosecute and jail the fraudsters. I am hoping to put a motion to block subsidies to the region and have a reasonable hope that this should go through because a lot of nationalities are being adversely affected and I imagine – perhaps fondly! – that MEPs will not like to be seen to be so "unhelpful" as to vote against such a resolution...but we shall see because to successfully put forward a resolution I need a large number of signatures..(100 or more).
I receive very many requests... hundreds... but I simply cannot deal with them all and so I have to limit my efforts to those whom I believe that I can really help and where I believe that I can have some impact. I am very sorry that I cannot help everybody, but I hope that my constituents will understand.
All this activity has to date prevented me from having the time to set up a proper organisation to help me do the best possible job; I have been operating with only one assistant. Ries Baeten (he is a Dutch/Belgian, and I have hired him because he has been working in the European Parliament for 10 years, knows how to get things done efficiently in that environment and has followed and supported my case for years) and I am very grateful to him for his hard work thus far; but as from January I will be recruiting two more assistants; one will be a researcher to help me put together specific evidence of fraud in a number of cases that I am investigating and the other will help me with my involvement in the ECON committee. Recruiting the right person for the job is not an easy task: education and background are important, but efficiency and loyalty are of utmost importance.!
Thank you so much for your support over the last 6 months - I really appreciate it. In my next blog, I will speak about the challenges for the future ... as Lord Pearson likes to say - Onwards, Upwards and Outwards!
PS. I am appalled to learn that UKIP will not be included in the BBC national election debates. Don't the Governors of the BBC realize that whoever gets to Downing Street will not be governing the country???? At present 75% of the laws come from Brussels....and shortly it will go up to 90%...so frankly...who cares what Cameron, Brown or Clegg have to say...there is only one party that can change all that - UKIP - and the BBC are denying this party a voice - a complete disgrace.
Cameron Running Scared Of Farage?
Dec 31st
If the Times is to be believed it would seem Cameron is running scared of a certain Mr Nigel Farage…
Mr Bercow — who, despite being a Conservative, owed his victory to a well-organised campaign by Labour MPs — has repaired relations with Mr Cameron. The Tory leader has made clear to party members in Mr Bercow’s Buckingham constituency that he will eject anyone found helping Nigel Farage, standing for UKIP against the Speaker at the election.
I was under the impression that since the Conservative Party si not standing an official party candidate in the seat, then Conservative Party members were free to support and campaign for Nigel without being disciplined.
If Cameron was confident of victory then a few of his members delivering a few leaflets for Nigel would be of no concern. Certainly not enough for it to be considered a disciplinary issue.
So his strange threat would appear to be a sharp warning to any Conservative members that it is “your party or your membership”, and indicating his current worries.
Te he he! Roll on polling day is all I can say!
BNP challenge must be met by main parties, says Howard
Dec 27th
Former Conservative leader Michael Howard has accused all the mainstream parties of failing to do enough to challenge the British National Party.
Mr Howard said it was important for politicians to confront the BNP in the run-up to the general election.
But this was not being done to the extent necessary, he told the BBC.
Mr Howard said there was no room for complacency because there were a number of constituencies where the BNP could be a “potent threat” at the polls.
‘Potent threat’
Mr Howard told BBC Radio 4’s The World This Weekend: “I think I am still the only party leader who went to Burnley and devoted an entire speech to confronting the BNP and saying that we’ve really got to take them on and we’ve got to take their arguments on.
“I don’t think we can afford to be complacent. There are one or two constituencies where they are said to be a potent threat.
“I think you have to take them on, you have to confront them and you have to expose the appalling evil of their arguments.”
BNP leader Nick Griffin announced last month he would stand for Westminster in the east London constituency of Barking at the next general election.
‘Honest’ party
Mr Griffin said that his party was not racist, but won votes because it “spoke openly about the problem of immigration”.
He told a news conference: “It’s all phoney with the other parties.
“Sometimes we can be a little blunt, a little politically incorrect, but we’re always honest and people know that now.”
The BNP won its first two seats in the European Parliament in June – Mr Griffin in the North West and Andrew Brons in Yorkshire and the Humber where it got 10% of the vote.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/8431749.stm
I read this article with interest., not least of all as it was involving Mr . Howard someone I have a lot of respect for.
The BNP are indeed a threat to the establishment, and I feel even now they haven’t been tackled properly by the major parties. And because of this I feel their will be a BNP voice in parliament this time next year, probably a certain Mr. Griffin but their are a few other possible candidates.
Now I have no love for the BNP, they revolt me, I do not believe for a second they have changed. However I can see why many would be tempted to vote BNP. From the outside they seem well run, they seem (at least publically) to be united behind their leader. They have a very effective media department (that I for one look upon and feel very jealous) their online following is very shall we say dedicated. They also have a very simple and clear set of ideals.
I feel the BNP will at least in the short term make an impact on British politics and I shall admit part of me is glad of this, I may not support what they stand for but I think it is about time their was a major shock to the Westminster system. However I feel if the “big” parties do tackle the BNP a lot of their more mild support would fall away. This needs to be addressed in a well thought out politcal campaign not by protests and anti facist groups (on Question Time I felt sorry for the BNP) we need to let them have a platform to get their views out and then show the people in a fair and reasoned way that this is not the right approach (much like supporting Labour).
Also on this topic, whilst I admit their is a place in British politics for the BNP; I know a small minority in UKIP and some of the BNP would be in favour of the two working together or lord help us joining, if UKIP ever even considered this I would leave the party the second I heard of it.
PS. One of the main reasons I feel long term they will fail to make a large impact is a lack of true policy (perhaps a bit rich from a member of UKIP? ) here’s just one example from their website “In the long run, we wish to end the conflict in Ireland by welcoming Eire as well as Ulster as equal partners in a federation of the nations of the British Isles” this one makes me chuckle, the thought of the people of the Republic having anything to do with the UK politically, what planet are the BNP on (Eire and Ulster its Northern Ireland and the ROI for a start- honestly this is official policy!)
Election Posters
Dec 27th
Conservative Home have a thread running which asks: “Can you produce a better anti-Labour poster?” This is a competition in which all three main political parties should combine their efforts and produce a poster that all three could use and thus save costs.
How about:
Vote Labour – Get more EU and more Labour
Vote Conservative – Get more EU and more Labour
Vote Liberal Democrat – Get more EU and ………..Err, what exactly?
There is a fourth way – the only way to rescue the sovereignty of Britain:
Vote UK Independence Party – Get your country back!
An Irish history lesson for you all
Dec 27th
Ok so im a uni History student from Northern Ireland, a unionist oddly enough but I have a big interest in Nationalist history and here’s a quick bit of History for you all from when all Ireland was British. It is linked to what I would have UKIP doing if it was up to me.
So their was a party set up called the Irish Parlimentary Party, who wanted reform and home rule for Ireland they were lead by a man called Charles Stewart Parnell (despite his beliefs hes one of my hero’s). They quickly gained the majority of the Irish seats in the HOC, now obviously this was a tiny minority (though it was key as their support gave the Liberals a majority so this actually at times gave them a lot of influence.) Anyway although they had a tiny minority they for a long long time were able to keep the focus of the parliment upon Ireland (which hardly anyone was even interested in). They thought up the idea of Obstructionism, they made long speeches to disrupt the house and keep the Irish question at the forefront, they turned every single debate to their topic, if it was about farming, the military, education, they would find a way to drag the subject back to their aim. They held up all business, kept their issues to the forefront and stopped the government from running things effectively. And you know what it ****ing worked! its still used today around the world.
Now UKIP do this to a small extent in Brussels, its hard though so many MEP’s and you get so little time to speak. However over time when we (hopefully) build up a group of MP’s we can use this to make ourselves the loudest voice in the Commons, this will bring our issues into the public’s view, we will be seen as active and it will get us more support. it doesnt matter who is in governemnt all we need to do is make ourselves heard, it is time for UKIP to stand up, put the EU down from its stage and set it beside every other policy, we must make it so all know our policy on health, on education (etc…). This for me is the only way we can punch above our weight within the Commons until we build up. We need to shake things up, cause some disruption and get ourselves heard. Groups like the Lib Dem’s could do this but they negect the opportunity they are bogged down in the system, we should not be afraid of falling out with the other parties, it will only make us more popular in the eyes of many voters.
It wouldnt be hard for UKIP to gain a seat or two in the commons and sit in obscurity hardly ever heard but we need to avoid this at all costs, we can not become part of this system we must do anything and everything to bring it down, this was the attitude of the IPP, they were despised by most the policital elite and do you know what (although it was a successor group that achieved it, they laid the groundwork) most of Ireland is now a Republic……
You Cannot Be Serious!
Dec 26th
Apparently some bright spark in our federal government (that’s the EU, by the way) has come up with this blinding idea…
Europe is making moves to give British MEPs the ‘right’ to sit in the House of Commons at certain times in the year.
I told you it was a blinder. But, er, why, you ask?
The Europeans’ idea is, on the face of it, not unreasonable. They reckon that MEPs probably know more than most of us about European legislation (fair comment) and think they should therefore help the Commons scrutinise laws emerging from Brussels.This could be done by them helping the Commons select committee on European scrutiny.
Surely the scrutiny committee could simply call on the relevant MEPs to be questioned? Or is this a policy drawn up as a one-size-fits-all for all EU national Parliaments in ignorance of national set-ups? Ah, I’ve answered my own question, haven’t I?!
Here one hits an awkward principle. Should Commons parliamentary scrutiny not be the preserve of elected parliamentarians? Once you start to unpick that, the whole notion of parliamentary sovereignty could disintegrate.
Come now Quentin. Parliamentary Sovereignty has been undermined in technicality and in practice for some time.
But yes, the principle that only those who have been elected to a body should have the privilege to sit within it an exercise the rights they are awarded is fairly fundamental. One does not, for example, have Senators turning up in State legislatures in the USA, or MPs appearing in the Scottish Parliament.
If those who have not been elected to a body are allowed to sit within it then it makes the body redundant. As a thought exercise I see two preferable alternatives to the proposed idea which would achieve the same ends but more democratically (as far as being in the EU is democratic anyway!)…
1) Give MPs a dual mandate and scrap MEPs, such that MPs now sit in the European Parliament. This means when we elect our national legislators and invest in them the authority to law-make, they are involved directly in all laws, whether national or EU/federal.
2) Make Westminster a tri-cameral Parliament with three chambers – Commons, Lords and (overLords?) – such that MEPs form part of the national legislative process and as such are able to scrutinise EU legislation on a national basis
Of course the whole premise is flawed anyway, since what can ’scrutiny’ actually achieve? If our national Parliament – whether bi-cameral or tri-cameral – cannot block or amend EU legislation, then what benefit is there in improved scrutiny?
Just take a look at this question by UKIP Peer and Leader Lord Pearson of Rannoch, to see how many times the government has over-ridden the Commons and Lords EU Scrutiny Committees’ “scrutiny reserve”. Shocking!
This cunning plan, as Baldrick might put it, was on the agenda at a Swedish gathering of speakers of Europe’s various national assemblies.
It went further than what I have just outlined. It proposed, furthermore, that MEPs should have ‘the right to be invited once a year to speak in plenary sittings of national parliaments’.
In plain English, this means giving MEPs the right to sit on the green leather benches of the Commons Chamber.
Maybe this will finally be enough to get our MPs riled? After all, they went spare at the prospect of the Youth Parliament having access to the Commons chamber!
Fortunately for us we have a honest, decent, democrat as Speaker. Oh, wait a f****** minute…
Speaker Bercow did not attend the meeting because it ‘clashed with parliamentary business’ (actually, the Commons did not sit on either of those days). Instead, he sent along the Deputy Speaker, Sir Alan Haselhurst.
Sir Alan confirms that the proposal was on the agenda. He says he did his best to play a dead bat. But the matter is unlikely to rest there. It will be discussed next in Madrid at a conference in early May, quite possibly clashing with our general election.
Ukip, whose Mr Farage hopes to beat Mr Bercow in Buckingham at that election, employs heavy irony in praising ‘the robust defence of our parliamentary sovereignty by the Speaker’s office’.
Mr Farage adds: ‘It had ruddy better not fly, this proposal. Ukip will shoot it down if it does. Those whose job it is to guard our rights in Westminster seem to be sleepwalking into oblivion.’
Well said Nigel. If anybody from Buckingham is reading this then please elect Nigel Farage at the general election and oust that cretin Bercow.
EU Propaganda
Dec 25th
By J Conway…
On Wednesday 23rd December, I went with my father to see the Coen brothers’ latest film A Serious Man at one of London’s Everyman Cinemas. (The film is an excellent modern retelling of the Book of Job, I highly recommend it).
Before the film started there were, as usual, a number of adverts, mostly for mobile phones and Christmas presents. One such advert, however, was very different: it was a cross between a charity appeal and the trailer for a documentary about climate change. Dramatic music accompanied images of different people gazing at the camera as well as farmers from different parts of the world accompanied by captions describing the virtues of agriculture . At the end of the video a message popped up which read ‘Distributed by the European Commission and the French Presidency of the Council of the European Union’. At which point my father turned to me and said “What the hell was that?”
“Propaganda” I replied,
“I’ll say”
Don’t get me wrong I have nothing against farmers but I think it is disgusting that as people prepare to enjoy a film, the EU is targeting them with the notion that they must do more to support farmers and EU agriculture, if that even was the conclusion we are supposed to walk away with! (Perhaps this is some sick method to brainwash us into supporting the CAP.) Whatever the case, such images of muscular farmers with captions about how they are the pioneers of the world of tomorrow remind me of nothing other than Nazi and Soviet propaganda.
If you want to watch this neo-fascist propaganda you can watch it on the following link to the EU’s oh-so-necessary Youtube page: http://www.youtube.com/eutube?gl=GB&hl=en-GB#p/search/0/sNSHUEb9vqE
Merry Christmas
Dec 25th
Wishing all Independence Home readers a very merry Christmas, wherever you are, and a prosperous new year!
Dartmouth pushes Barroso on cost to UK
Dec 24th
UKIP MEP William Dartmouth pushes EC President Jose Manuel Barroso on how Britain's contribution will increase in the future.
This cut in Uni funding- thank you Mr. Mandelson
Dec 24th
Our wonderful government has announced cuts to University funding http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/8427546.stm and claims it wont harm the Uni’s
here’s the latest word from the Uni’s lets just say they dont toe the governent line: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/education/8429283.stm
University organisations have voiced fears about the scale of spending cuts being imposed in England by the government.
They would cut budgets by more than £130m on top of nearly £200m ordered earlier this year. Longer term cuts of £600m were unveiled last month.
And next year will see the loss of 10,000 additional student places that were brought in this year.
One union official said the cuts would do long-term damage to the economy.
Business Secretary Lord Mandelson said in his annual grant letter to the Higher Education Funding Council for England that the cuts were needed to pay for the “higher than expected” costs of funding grants record numbers of students during the recession.
The government said it remained committed to ensuring that 50% of school leavers went on to university, which is a central plank of Labour’s education policy.
‘Long-term damage’
Higher Education Minister David Lammy insisted student numbers would continue to enjoy managed growth, a stance dismissed by both university unions and opposition parties.
They point out that not only are teaching budgets being cut by £50m next year but the government is also planning to fine universities that have taken on too many undergraduates by £3,799 per student.
Dave Prentis, general secretary of the Unison union, said the cuts would do “long-term damage to our economy”.
“A quality higher education sector is what this country needs to keep competitive in the global economy,” he said.
Rehana Azam, national officer for the GMB union, said: “This is of serious concern to GMB members in the higher education sector, many of which are already in redundancy consultation processes.
‘Kick in the teeth’
“This announcement of funding cuts comes at a time when record numbers of people are seeking university places, primarily due to the recession and people seeking to upgrade their skill so that they can support themselves through this recession.”
Sally Hunt, general secretary of the University and College Union, described the letter as a “real Christmas kick in the teeth for staff and students”.
She called it “Final proof that the Government has completely lost its way when it comes to higher education. You cannot make these kinds of cuts and expect no consequences.”
The vice-chancellors’ organisation Universities UK said the higher education sector understood the current pressures on public spending and was playing a key role in tackling many of the long-term challenges facing the economy, but that these cuts would put universities in England under severe pressure.
“A reduction in the public funding per student could seriously threaten our ability to offer the high-quality experience our students deserve and expect,” said its president, Professor Steve Smith.
And he noted that it was the rising cost of student support in the recession that was causing much of the funding squeeze.
Now as a student this is something I take very seriously. Our Universities are constantly under pressure by the government to allow more students in, this means more places and often lower entry requirements, now I disagree with this (this will be unpopular). Slightly off topic but I know people who got into University with DDD, this is something I just cant agree with. The government forced these Universities to take in more people and know what they to do it with less money!
But Lord Mandelson also says some universities have recruited more students than they should have – so asks the Hefce to claw back £3,700 per student where this has happened, to cover the costs of their financial support. My oh my I wonder who it was who pressured these Universities to take in these extra students Mr. Mandelson, and now you want to charge for it.
For me what makes the pill hardest to swallow is Mr. Mandelson’s involvement, the man who organised billions upon billons of pounds wasted bailing out companies who failed. And now he wants to weaken Universities, I would have thought it was the people currently in University that would have went on to contribute to the economy he is trying to rebuild and indeed it is these same people who could be taking up high positions where the previous holder had failed. In my opinion by cutting University funding this Labour government is weakening these institutions and Mr Mandelson is shooting himself in the foot.
This is of course my personal opinion and many may disagree
Stepping out from the ranks
Dec 23rd
I am what you would call an endangered species, I am a member of UKIP who believes in global warming/man made climate change. I agree it was a good thing to have Lord Monckton on board ( http://www.ukip.org/content/latest-news/1363-monckton-joins-ukip ) and it is bringing in publicity which is never a bad thing. But I feel UKIP must be careful not to isolate members who believe in global warming. It is great to see UKIP are prepared to consider an issue other sides stay clear of, but I just want to sound a note of caution towards being perceived as favoring either side whilst the debate remains very much up in the air. Now personally I am in the crowd who believes in the view, that man is changing the climate with a certainty but feels there is much too much of a fuss made about it, so UKIP and the good Lord can argue it doesn’t exist and it won’t bother me in the slightest. I simply feel UKIP should avoid getting too involved in the skeptic side, I would much prefer to see us trying to highlight that regardless of whether it exists or not the changes haven’t been deserving of as much fuss as people seem to think.
Now I do not claim to have vast knowledge of this subject and if someone can prove me wrong I shall be happy to admit my mistake. I study history which isn’t shall we say exactly overly relevant, I just felt it needed to be pointed out that as so many UKIP’ers seem to be passionately jumping on the band wagon behind Lord Monckton they need to be careful not to scare away potential support over what in my opinion is a small issue compared to many that we face today.
Thoughts welcome…
Why UKIP?
Dec 23rd
I joined UKIP as I truly believe that they are the only party that can save our great country. Unlike the other parties they will put the British people first. Many don’t understand my choice and I constantly get told “they only have one policy” and I can’t blame them for this as we don’t push our other policies nearly enough. We have many fantastic policies and we have failed to properly promote these. I have confidence this will soon change, I believe we will force our way in through the door at the next general election and when we do we won’t be pushed back out.
It is true UKIP is not your average political party, it is not a party for everyone. I feel it takes guts to stand up and oppose the majority. Corrupt governments and media have brainwashed the people of Britain into thinking there is no other way than the status quo, yes UKIP has its flaws, we have made mistakes including some huge ones and our opponents jump on these but we are still a young party. We punch above our weight; we will learn from our mistakes and grow stronger from them.
We stand for good conservative values, it is about time British industry was rebuilt after being obliterated by Labour. We have abandoned our commonwealth brothers in favour of countries we have traditionally been hostile towards in Europe. British territory and waters need to be restored, it is about time the armed forces were funded as they should be. We need to be tough on crime and bring immigration under control. UKIP will end the joke that is political correctness and bring back freedom of speech and restore our sovereignty.
For too long the United Kingdom has been lead astray by the political elite, it is time for our people to stand up, say enough is enough and restore our great nation to its former glory. And in the humble opinion of this writer that means we must unite behind UKIP.
UKIPWatch Exposed
Dec 23rd
Courtesy of UKIP Liverpool, some digging seems to have uncovered the people behind the anti-UKIP website…
MORE HELP URGED
Dec 23rd
Cumbria MEP Paul Nuttall today urged the county council to try to ensure the plight of Workington folk, many of whose lives were devastated in the recent flooding, is not exacerbated by the bad weather.
“The people of Cumbria are hardy and are well used to harsh winter weather but for those whose homes and livelihoods were destroyed or damaged in the floods, the current conditions are an extra hardship,” said Mr Nuttall, UKIP Euro MP.
“It is easy for those whose lives were untouched to blithely carry on but we must not forget those victims and I urge the local authority and all the community organisations to ensure every help is given to them.
“We have also read much in the media about councils being dilatory in gritting roads and preparing for the snow and ice and I hope that Cumbria County Council keeps up its gritting programme to keep the roads safe.”
“Obviously people should only travel if it is really necessary. We all want to enjoy a happy Christmas and I particularly hope that the people of Workington have a happy New Year,” he added.
Nativity: BNP Style
Dec 22nd
This is just embarrassing. More embarrassing than Sion Simon MP doing his hideous attempt at humour.
This is the nativity story as told by…Nick Griffin. Notice him stroking his cat like some friendly evil villain with shocking story telling abilities.
No doubt he has something to say about the horrendous birth rate from these bloody immigrants pushing up the prices of Inns in Bethlehem!
TV debates must include UKIP
Dec 22nd
UKIP Leader Lord Pearson has called on all the major TV broadcasters to make way for the Party in their planned national debates in the lead-up to the General Election.
With Gordon Brown, David Cameron and Nick Clegg all slated to appear in the televised 90-minute pre-election debates, Lord Pearson has insisted UKIP be included as well.
After writing to the heads of the BBC, ITV and Sky, Lord Pearson said: "It would be wrong for UKIP, which came second in the last test of national political opinion, to be excluded from these debates.
"I accept that UKIP may not win the General Election, but nor will the Liberal Democrats.
"We suggest that an acceptable alternative would be for UKIP to appear in a part of each debate linked to four vital policy areas: membership of the EU, direct democracy, immigration and the economy.
"Our position on the first two of these areas will be diametrically opposed to the policies of the three main parties, and our position on the other two will be sufficiently different to deserve inclusion in the televised events. Surely the British people should be allowed to see us tested on these great issues in open debate?
"Our presence would provide the voice of real opposition, which will not be heard if we are not there. And, I would suggest, it would also make the debates rather more entertaining."
