Well done Gordon - another stroke of genius

I see Gordon Brown has given the Palestinians £30,000,000 of British taxpayers' money to the Palestinian Authority to assist in 'rebuilding' their neighbourhoods. He has also offered that Britain will train the Palestinian police force, and that he will host an 'investment conference' for them in London.

One or two questions arise. Why thirty million pounds? Why Palestine? And why now? At a time when oil prices have never been so high, what is our Prime Minister doing offering British financial aid and assistance to Palestine? What does he think the reaction of the Arab states will be to this?

If that wasn't enough, Mr Brown has also aggravated the Israelis by criticising their policy of building settlements on disputed land. Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert said at a press conference. "You criticised our settlement policy, and I tried to explain to you the restraints that we put on ourselves on the one hand, and the need to keep the pace of life going on the other. While you disagree with us I hope you understand the position of Israel." It remains to be seen what pearls of Wisdom Mr Brown will have for the Israeli Parliament - the Knesset - when he addresses them on Monday.

Well done Gordon - another stroke of genius.

Is Britain really worth so little?

It's certainly been an interesting week. Following the "No" vote in Ireland at the end of last week, Wednesday saw the ill-fated and largely unwanted EU (Amendment) Act - otherwise known as the Lisbon Treaty - pass through the House of Lords, gaining Royal Assent on Thursday.

An unsuccessful attempt by solicitor Bill Cash, Conservative MP for Stone in Staffordshire to gain a judicial review of the ratification process were rejected by the High Court. It took a further High Court action by Conservative backer Stuart Wheeler to force the legal wheels to turn.

However, in a staggering display of arrogance, Treasury solicitors sent a letter to the High Court following Thursday's Royal Assent which said "The government is now proceeding to ratify the Treaty of Lisbon."

In turn the High Court responded through Lord Justic Richards, effectively forbidding the Government to proceed until Mr Wheeler's judgement had been determined, which should be sometime next week. In a classic understatement, the Government were "invited to stay their hand voluntarily until judgement."

Gordon Brown - currently attending an EU summit himself - seems untroubled by this unsuccessful attempt by his Government to sidestep the legal process, and is quoted as saying that this "fits in with our timetable".

When will this country stand up for itself? Headed up by a collection of Euro fanatics and Brussells groupies, we seem to be sleepwalking into a nightmare of catastrophic proportions from which it will take years to recover.

Is Britain really worth so little to this Government that it can so casually be handed over? Does Gordon Brown have so little regard for the very people he is elected to represent that he would sign away our future without even asking us?

For Mr Brown at least, fear of asking the people of Britain their view seems to be something of a habit...

If it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck...

53.4% to 46.6% - the jury, in Ireland at least, has returned on the Lisbon Treaty. Time will tell whether other EU leaders subscribe to Jose Manuel Barroso's view that "...the treaty is not dead". It may not be dead, but surely it's time to show some respect for the people and at least ask them if the actions of their leaders, allegedly on behalf of the people, is actually what the people want?

Both France and Germany have described the result as "a serious blow" - yet they still resolutely want the EU to forge ahead. It speaks volumes about the quality of our democratic systems that, devoid of a true current mandate, our leaders wish the EU to lumber on regardless. At best, this is surely an expensive "members' club" whose exclusivity, not to mention effectiveness, dwindles with every new tranche of applicants.

At the last count, the cost of EU membership to the UK was in the region of £16,000,000 each and every day. Cast aside for a moment the "what else could we do with the money" argument, (an endless wish list of schools, hospitals, elderly care homes, roads, pavements, police...) can the Commission really tell us they've done and are doing everything they can to root out corruption and ensure that costs are pared to the bone? I think we all know the answer to that one; not a week goes by without another story in the press about MEPs or bureaucrats enjoying first class gravy train tickets at our expense.

I recall some years ago an an "Innovation Forum" formed out of the 22 top performing local councils in the UK. Within just a couple of years this had expanded to around 150 authorities, from tiny district and borough councils to the largest county and unitary authorities. It did strike me at the time that the issues faced by this range of bodies - some strategic, some local, some with a budget in tens of millions, some with billions - might be difficult to manage or indeed reach a concensus.

There is a stark similarity in the EU. The purpose behind its formation, the reasons for its continuance, even the objectives of those states seeking to join its ranks, are a world away from the initial mandate. The people are increasingly tiring of an arrogant "we know best what's good for our citizens" view adopted by most of the other leaders.

Czech President Vaclav Claus - whose forthright views on technology I had the pleasure to hear at during a dinner in the Royal Palace on the hill in Prague a few years ago - at least has the courage to admit that "the Treaty is dead". Our own David Miliband however states "...the UK will continue to press on with its ratification".

France and Holland, when allowed to voice their opinion came out massively against, and rebranding the old Constitution into the new Lisbon treaty will make little difference.

What's the old saying? "If it looks like a duck and quacks like a duck...". But what do you think?

Brown hits slippery patch on oil

Just saw this story from the KCC Press Office:

"Gordon Brown has urged oil industry leaders to come up with ideas for improving supplies as fuel prices soar. The government has announced new moves to increase oil production in the North Sea. Number 10 says it wants to make the most of the UK's reserves."

Isn't this just typical? The Government makes a higher profit off fuel tax than almost any other country, yet faced with impossibly high fuel costs at the pump, faced with the slow lingering death of our once-great haulage industry, faced with motorists rebelling against unaffordable fill-ups, what does our Prime Minister do?

Does he look at ways to reduce the price at the pump? Does he explore alternative energies? Does he look at tax breaks for hauliers? Does he use the obscene Government windfall from the rocketing barrel price of crude to ease the pressure?

No. He orders North Sea production to be raised, using up precious resources faster so he can provide more over-taxed fuel and make even more profit from his own citizens.

Enough is enough. End the madness. Change the Government.

Eurovision - or Euro stitch up?

It's official. The Eurovision Song Contest is no longer a showcase to vote for the best song writing talent in Europe. It's a trading floor of diplomatic etiquette, where votes are a currency to be used to kowtow to allies and show subservience to superior states.

I know it's meant to be fun and not taken too seriously, but it's beyond me how Andy Abrahams (http://www.andyabraham.co.uk/) can be applauded on X Factor week after week by Osbourne, Walsh and Cowell (not to mention nine million of the British viewing public) yet last night scrape through in last place with fourteen votes - six from San Marino and eight from Ireland.

I was not altogether surprised to hear last week that the UK will always be guaranteed a place in the Eurovision final, solely because the competition receives far and away the highest amount of funding for TV rights - from the dear old BBC, which through our licence fees is ultimately through you and me.

Maybe it's time to agree that Eurovision was fun while it was fair, but with the EU costing the UK upwards of £16m a day, we're probably giving Europe enough of our hard earned cash.

Only in America

I've just seen a trailer on TV for a new movie - "Harold and Kumar Escape From Guantanamo Bay" - http://www.haroldandkumar.com/

It appears to be a story about two men - played by John Cho and Kal Penn - who get mistaken for terrorists. In the tradition of seventies anti-heroes "Cheech and Chong", their previous "hit" was apparently about their road trip across America to satisfy their "weed-induced case of 'the munchies'".

The New York Times rates it as "The Perfect Movie" while TIME magazine calls it "The first feel-good torture film".

Laugh? There goes another rib...

Do we have no sense of propriety any more? This US-made film has to be one of the sickest examples of profiteering I've seen in a long time.

I assume the writers, Jon Hurwitz and Hayden Schlossberg spent real time in Guantanamo Bay, experienced the realities, and still found it a source of amusement?

As they say - only in America.

Fascinating, but very different

Our Cabinet Members' meeting on Monday morning saw a visit from Metropolitan King County Council in Seattle, Washington State.

Councilmember (that's his title as an elected member) Larry Gossett and Auditor Cheryle Broom are spending the week with us in Kent, to learn about the differences in our governance and to share the way they do things in King County.

There are similarities - a population of 1.9m compared to our 1.5m and a similar budget. The interesting thing was that in terms of democratic representation, the whole county, with its urban and rural communities and thirty nine cities, has just nine elected members. It's very different.

We heard about their impressive focus on the green agenda - around 100 of the 1800 council-controlled buses are hybrid, and over the next few years two thirds of the council's 2000 cars will be low emission vehicles.

But on the minus side, only fifteen percent of the population who need social housing actually get it - leaving, as we were told, 85% of the rest "left to hustle".

We talked about the criminal justice system, and I was amazed to hear that 25% of the wordl's jail population are imprisoned in the United States. Of the 2,000,000 in jail in the US, 1,100,000 are African American.

It's a very different place. Fascinating, but very different.

It was this big...

Do you remember when Brussels dictated that because of the run on cod stocks, in future fishermen would only be allowed to land cod of a prescribed size?

I heard last week of the British Government's response to this prescriptive and protectionist legislation. Did they argue for a change to the legislation? No. Did they push for a change to our quotas? No. Did they seek to expand the protected zone to our fishing waters? No.

No - they immediately employed three hundred-odd "fish measurers". Civil servants at every port, employed to measure the size of fish landed, bringing down revenge and retribution on any British fisherman who happened to bring back an undersized cod.

Spain? They employed fish measurers too. How many?

Three...

Fuelling our anger?

According to Ray Holloway, Director of the Petrol. Retailers Association, the OPEC nations fully expect to achieve $200 a barrel for crude oil.

This in turn will push up the price on the forecourts, which has already risen out of all proportions.

However, when faced with the accusation that Shell and BP have made record profits of around £3,000,000,000 and £4,000,000,000 in one quarter alone, his response was interesting.

He said that the higher price of oil gave the Government an unexpected windfall of around £4,000,000,000 in the last financial year. Yet they chose not to give any of this to the motorist by way of reduced tax.

Actually, doesn't he have a point?

What would we do without them?

It's official. We now know precisely why so many illegal immigrants are managing to gain access to this country.

A crack team of peers have worked long and hard to examine the reasons why so many people are managing to cross the UK's borders and slip quietly into the Black Economy.

Lord Joplin and his EU Committee on Home Affairs have burned the midnight oil and put their considerable collective intelligence to work. Was it the carbon dioxide sensors which sense exhaled breath? Was it the 'magic eye' millimetre wave scanners which can effectively 'see through' lorries? Was it perhaps the heartbeat sensor technology? How about the new biometric IDs for Non-European Economic Area foreign nationals proposed from later this year?

No. It's the fences. If we repaired the fences at Calais, we could prevent at least fifteen hundred additional immigrants gaining access to the UK.

That's it then - despatch a white Transit immediately with nail gun and roll of weld mesh. One wonders what great mysteries of the world they might turn their attentions to next?

What would we do without them?

You couldn't write this stuff...

Some of us thought it bad enough that convicted illegal immigrants were given tax payers' money to go back to their country of origin, let alone giving them fifteen hundred pounds.

But a report out today tells us our Government have now doubled this to three thousand pounds. Many will think this is money well spent, as it is intended to help those law breakers with rent, moving expenses and so on, as they resettle in their country of origin.

Wouldn't you have thought it better to spend that cash tightening up our border controls so that we accepted those who wanted to make a positive contribution to this country?

And just so we don't think the magical fifteen hundred pound figure is gone - papers today annouce that this is exactly the amount by which Scottish tax payers are subsidised by English tax payers.

You couldn't write this stuff...

And the point is?

With Fidel Castro now handing over the reigns of power to his brother Raoul, I fell into conversation today with a Canadian who enlightened me as to the somewhat "sledgehammer to crack a nut" approach that America took to keep Cuba in its place.

I'm told that under its Constitution, America can't actually prevent its citizens from visiting Cuba. Instead, whilst its visitors can travel there, they're not actually allowed to spend any American currency whilst on the island. In case this doesn't work, American ships are prevented from visiting with a law that says if you land in Cuba, you cannot dock in any US port for two years.

Lastly, Cuba has always been fairly "hand to mouth" with its fiscal policies, and depends on imported oil to run its power supplies. When Cuba orders another tanker full of oil then, America apparently waits for it to be enroute, then often buys up the entire cargo for twice the market price. Since Cuba cannot afford to pre-purchase the oil, this is entirely legal, resulting in a last-minute non-delivery, and another blackout in Havana.

And the point is...?