Category: Blog

This morning we learn that, privately, Gordon Brown thinks the Constitutional Treaty is dead, in a carefully crafted piece briefed to the Eurosceptic Sunday Times. How can this be a private thought when it has been so thoughfully shared with the nation through a major newspaper’s front page? How can it be anything other than covering Eurosceptic fire from the top, when in practice we learn that the government intends to grind on with Lords ratification next week. It is false fire, cynical manipulation, when by their every action the government demonstrates it does not trust the British people to decided this and does not intend to be railroaded out of the project by the Irish people either. I could only be persuaded to a different view if there were an on-the-record statement by the government that the Treaty is dead, followed by cancellation of the legislation currently before the Lords to ratify.

I believe the on-the-record statements of the Euro Minister, who implies dollops of Brussels fudge to sort out the Irish once the other 26 countries have ratified whilst wisely avoiding all contact with their electors which might derail the project. Meanwhile, plucky, democratic Ireland is to be treated like some pariah who must not be allowed to “hold up” the others, and who will have to live in limbo or the dog-house for a bit whilst the Irish public cools off and is softened up for the next move towards the Euro centralising state.

It is a predictable disgrace that the Euro elite see the Irish vote as cause for annoyance, condescension and sidelining of the one country in the Union that has asked the public for a view. No wonder so many people mistrust European politicians, and so many are cynical about politics. What is it about these public servants that they arrogate the right to do the opposite of what the electors, their paymasters want? Why do they think they should be able to draw salaries and expenses of a generous nature in order to take more power away from us, and order us about in new ways, when we want the opposite?

If anyone in the European bureaucracy is listening, understand the mood of many people living in the EU. The economic performance is not good enough, taxes are too high for the amount of public service we get, and there are too many laws and regulations. Why, in such a context, do you think we want more of the same? We want change – we want more freedom.

The UK Europe Minister this morning gave us more of the tired old rubbish from the Euro elite following the stunning victory of the Irish people against their politicians in this week’s referendum.

He tells us that all other 26 states should carry on ratifying, as if nothing had happened, avoiding any further referenda which may show that this Treaty remains unpopular with a majority in many countries. The scorn for democracy is now doubly apparent – no referendum for us when one was promised, because they think we will vote the wrong way, and no agreement to scrap the Treaty, now that the one country that is allowed a say has said No. Exactly what part of “No” do they not understand?

Worse still, the EU Minister thinks all 26 other governments will ratify – over the heads, and despite the views, of their electors. Then presumably, the arm-twisting starts on Ireland, with a view to offering an odd opt-out or a transitional arrangement, and the odd, meaningless clarification of the Treaty, to “deal” with the Irish problem.

It is a disgrace that the UK government behaves in this cavalier way towards the clearly expressed views of the people of Ireland, and fails to understand the even larger majority here in the UK who oppose this Treaty according to Opinion Poll evidence. There is no mandate for this Treaty. The people do not think it either desirable or necessary. They should bin it.

They should come back with proposals to restore power and rights to the democracies of Europe, removing power from unelected officials in Brussels. They should come up with positive proposals to reduce both the cost and burden of Brussels, so we can have a tax cut and some deregulation instead of the endless diet of more spending, more taxes and more rules. When they say they need to streamline the decision processes in a larger community, it means they want to pass more laws. Why can’t they get it? WE WANT FEWER LAWS. TRY ABOLISHING SOMETHING. We do not need another bunch of expensive wannabe politicians and officials in Brussels bossing us around in ever more detail and more areas of our lives. The voters say “Get off our backs”. Instead they ignore us and make us even angrier.

Thank heavens the Irish were allowed a vote – the only country where they dared test their unwanted Treaty. Thank heavens they have voted No, showing that wherever the Constitution has been put to the people it has been defeated.

Instead of talking about the “crisis for the EU”, and saying the voters have made a mistake, the EU elite really must this time listen and change its mind. They should

1. Say sorry for pressing ahead this far, at our expense, against the wishes of so many people in the EU
2. Say they will now look at how to strengthen people and Parliaments and cut the powers the EU holds over us all as that is the clear message from a majority of voters who are consulted
3. Agree that no elements of this constitutional Treaty which strengthen the powers of the EU will go ahead. Lisbon should now be dead.
4. Accept that this is not the voters who have “plunged Europe” into more constitutional wranglings, but the elite of the EU who have plunged themselves into this by their obstinate refusal to listen

The UK should press ahead with its own referendum to reinforce the message to the elite. Given that these unrealistic bureaucrats are still talking about defying the wishes of the voters, they need to be taught another lesson in democracy.

Meanwhile our government should abandon all attempts to ratify the Treaty by Parliamentary process.

A recent blogger on this site kindly praised me for backing David Davis immediately he resigned, rather than waiting to see which way the wind was blowing. Of course – I make up my own mind on these things, and wanted to influence what happened next by being quick to judgement.

I am pleased that David Cameron has appointed Dominic Grieve as Shadow Home Secretary. We do need someone in that post in the next few weeks to carry on the campaign in Parliament. Dominic is talented and entirely in agreement with the stance we have been taking in defence of liberty. I look forward to his contributions as the government gets embroiled in battles in the Lords for its grubby legislation. It is also good news that David Cameron has supported David Davis’s view on the issue, to give the lie to any idea that there was a split on it. It is more welcome than the sniping we have got used to at the top on the Labour side.

To those who ask, why did David Davis do it, can’t they for once think that maybe he did it for the reasons he set out? He is a clever enough politician to know that David Cameron’s position is rightly strong in the Conservative party, and there is no question over the leadership. Sometimes commentators can be too clever or cynical. There is no split in Conservative ranks over 42 day detention (save for Miss Widdecombe who is retiring at the next election).

The EU should stop grabbing power from democracies, stop pretending it is a bastion of liberty and modern purpose, and understand just how hated its bureacratic and self serving ways have become.

It should issue a simple statement:

“The EU is grateful to the Irish people, and to the French and Dutch people before them, for voting No to this Treaty. It understands that if the British people and others had been allowed a vote they too would have voted it down. The Constitution will be abandoned, the EU will make no further demands for the transfer of pwoers, and it wil look at ways to make itself less intrusive and less annoying to the people it wants to serve and who pay its wages”

That was a pig you saw flying past the window.

The US Supreme Court made the right decision yesterday, giving to the interns of Guantanamo rights to justice from the civilian courts in the USA.

One of the many attacks upon our liberties perpetrated by this Labour government was its acquiescence in the arrest and detention without charge or trail of UK citizens at Guantanamo. I and others spoke out against this, urging the then Prime Minister to bring them to trial for terrorist plotting or to give them their freedom if there was no evidence of wrong doing. It took all too long before the UK authorities negotiated the homecoming of the detainees, for their freedom or their punishment.

When great democracies form a coalition to champion liberty around the world it is especially important that they do not damage that liberty they wish to champion in the name of security. Of course in extreme and dangerous wartime conditions combattants have to be locked up under the rules applying to military prisoners. There may have been a case for this in the early days of the Iraq conflict, but once the President had declared victory and the troops became policemen in a new democracy established by the invasion the authorities should have charged or released the prisoners.

Some think this position is naïve. Surely, they say, if we have suspicions about these people and think they might be planning mass murder in our countries, we should lock them up for long periods? Such conduct breeds distrust with minority communities in our own society, acts as a further grievance to recruit more evil people of violence and damages the very causes we hold dear. If the authorities have suspicions about certain people, we have given them powers to keep them under surveillance. Such powers are designed both to protect us, by gaining advance warning of any evil they may be planning, and to allow the security services to collect evidence so they can be brought to trial.

The UK government’s idea that it should be able to arrest people on suspicion and then hunt the evidence of wrong doing is dangerous as well as wrong. Let us suppose the UK authorities rightly have worries about an individual. If they arrest him and detain him for 42 days in order to try to find evidence that he has committed an offence already they alert all other members of his network to their suspicions. Those who have not been arrested can then destroy evidence, lie low, leave the country for a time or do whatever it takes to avoid arrest. If, on the other hand, the authorities use their powers to intercept communications and eavesdrop, they have more chance both of collecting evidence to charge the first person with an offence, and of finding out who all the others are. Terrorists do not normally operate on their own.

Liberty is not just the right approach. It may also be our best security.

I agree with everything David said about the erosion of our freedoms. He expressed the frustration many of us feel about the build up of the controlling state – the way ID cards, spy cameras, the loss of Habeas Corpus, the daily assault on our freedoms by nit picking regulation – now add up to an unacceptable loss of liberty. He spoke for me when he listed the monstrous assaults on freedom this government has mounted.

His selfless act to give more prominence to this issue is a bolt from the blue. I do hope the Conservative party will allow him to fight the seat as he sees fit, and welcome him back if and when he wins. He deserves to win, for surely he speaks for the overwhelming majority of English people who want to keep their freedoms, or regain control over their lives after years of stealthy assaults on our liberties. It is a commentary on the way that this government has marginalised and sidelined its part time Parliament that a leading MP feels he needs to trigger a by election to get the message across.

Good on you David. I want you to win.

If Labour fail to put up a candidate we will know they are frit, unable to face the electors on a crucial topic where they claim to be on the popualr side of the argument. Clearly they do not really believe it is the popular side if they don’t want to fight.

The Treasury and the Bank lurch from policies which promote boom, to bust, and from boom to bust again. In the period 2001-6 they followed a low interest rate strategy, supplemented by a regulatory approach which encouraged the most extraordinary boom in off balance sheet financings and a credit bubble. The government was especially keen on this, ballooning its own true balance sheet with PFI and PPP packages which it did not include in its stated borrowing figures.

In the summer of 2007 the Chancellor and the Governor concerted their rhetoric to blame the banks for this inflationary bubble, telling them that there would be no bail outs and they would have to correct it on their own. Readers of this site will remember I urged them (as others did from the banking sector itself) to make the markets more liquid in August and early September to avoid a banking crunch. The pleas fell on deaf ears, so we witnessed the run on Northern Rock. If the authorities had made less than £50 billion available in September to the markets the Rock crisis could have been avoided.

Once the Rock run began, many of us urged a quick deal to buttress the bank’s mortgage book. Instead, the Bank claimed it could not do this owing to EU rules – although on the continent under the same rules banks were rescued quickly. We had to watch the agony of the Rock leading to the eventual nationalisation of the bank.
I argued strongly against nationalisation. The government, the BBC and others allowed Vince Cable to front the ridiculous case for nationalisation and give it plenty of airtime so it would go through without it being an Old Labour idea. The Lib Dems showed themselves to be old time spend and tax socialists wanting to stick anything really expensive onto the taxpayers account: now the taxpayer has to pay the losses as the business is run down. As a result Northern Rock has effectively withdrawn from the mortgage market (for good competition reasons as a nationalised and subsidised bank) making the housing market worse. It will have to sack more than half its staff as it retrenches and fights to pay back the huge sums of money taxpayers were forced into lending it. The collapse of Northern Rock is a huge hammer blow to the housing market in the UK, as it was a large participant who can no longer play any serious part and is effectively in run off.

After the Rock had been nationalised at huge cost to taxpayers – with a maximum potential liability of over £100 billion – the Bank then made available up to a £100 billion to ease credit shortages in the markets! Why on earth didn’t they do that before the run on the Rock? Then they would have saved themselves the large sums they spent on the Rock as well. At last it seemed the authorities understood that they had to be in the downturn fighting business, and had to ease the credit squeeze.

More recently, following further increases in international oil and food prices, the Bank has decided its policy is too loose, and has warned that it might have to put interest rates up again! It effectively declared war on the property sector, and helped trigger large share price falls in the shares of the housebuilders. It threatened higher rates at a time when banks were seeking to recapitalise themselves by asking shareholders for more funds, helping to drive their share prices lower and jeopardise those fund raising activities.

The idiotic inconsistency of the authorities has reached new heights. The early 2000s saw low rates and boom boom. 2007 brought higher rates and bust. Early 2008 saw edging to lower rates and more liquidity. Middle 2008 has delivered the threat of higher rates and bust. This is made worse by their gross insensitivity to markets struggling to recapitalise the banks, and to the financial plight of the housebuilders, retailers and others. They should want a better equity market to raise the large sums of new capital it will take, following the wealth destruction brought about by their lurch from credit boom to credit bust.

It seems clear that we no longer have an “independent” Bank of England, if we ever did. The Chancellor and the Governor concerted their tough talk and their decision to say “No” to more liquidity in the crucial summer months of last year. They concerted their bungled response to the run on the Rock, and agreed the eventual nationalisation. They clearly agreed the extra liquidity earlier this year, and are now both trying to talk price increases down. I just don’t think the international oil and food markets are listening, and it makes the Governor and the Chancellor both look silly.

As a result the government’s housebuilding strategy is in tatters. When the government published its work telling us the problem in the UK was one of a shortage of new homes being built, I pointed out that you need to understand the impact of mortgage finance on the market. Take the excess credit creation away, as they have now done, and you have no shortage of homes for sale, as you cut off the possible buyers. The government went out with a demand that the UK industry move towards building 300,000 homes a year at the very top of the cycle when ti was obvious there would be a sharp fall, not an increase. How stupid can you get? They should revise their position, for this year will see a big downturn in the numbers of new houses being built.

The government should recognise there is a credit crunch, for after all they created it. In a credit crunch businesses can’t afford to build new homes, and people can’t afford to buy them. The government needs to be in downturn fighting mode.

I know my critics think I am too careless about the inflationary threat. I tell them that was something to worry about a couple of years ago when the authorities were encouraging a bubble with too much credit. You cannot stop global demand for oil and the action of global oil speculators by hiking UK interest rates. Tightening money here is not going to stop Chinese and Indian housewives buying more meat and grain. The UK economy is no longer inflationary. Each time oil and food prices go up we do not demand more wages – we take a further cut in our real pay, and rein back on other items in our budgets. That’s not evidence of an inflationary problem. It’s evidence that the government has declared war on individuals and families, and is going to make them pay for its economic mistakes by a very nasty squeeze on the living standards of us all.

I awoke this morning to hear the BBC say the irish “No” campaign had “sniped” at the Treaty with a series of “improbable claims”.

Why can’t these journalists get into their head that many Irish and English people want to keep the right of self government – hard won in Ireland’s case – in their own country. Why do they use such pejorative language about people struggling against a monstrous bureaucracy to keep some control of their own lives and some meaning to their own votes?

The BBC just can’t help itself coming over as a pro European government organisation in receipt of Euro money.

UKIP showed its true colours in the Commons yesterday, voting for Brown’s ghastly Bill. They voted against Habeas Corpus and the doctrine that someone is innocent until proved guilty, by voting for 42 day detention without charge. Don’t rely on them to save our constitution.