Leopards Don’t Change their Spots
The Times has a dramatic picture on the front this morning. It shows one of their reporters being manhandled by someone from the BNP. Here’s the first paragraph of the article that accompanied the picture.
One man grabbed my nose and tried to remove it from my face. I was seized and shoved out of the door towards a parked car. I threw my hands out to steady myself. A BNP thug snarled: “Don’t touch people’s cars mate.” Obviously, I offered no resistance.
Apparently, the BNP were objecting to an article in The Times on Saturday.
I don’t object to that article and feel it is a sound analysis as to the prospects of the BNP. But I do worry about its conclusions. If there’s one thing we don’t want it’s for the BNP to gain a foothold in Westminster. Without that after a couple of years, they will probably return from whence they came.
Incompetent New Labour
In the report in The Times on Prudence’s Death Tax, there is an interesting comment.
Off topic I know, but I have got to point this out ,if only to show how utterly incompetent Labour are. Would you believe that Labour did not know that ALL of the Trademarks they hold for their name “Labour” “Labour Party” etc etc are ALL invalid. They only realised in November 2009 when they were told !!. They were granted one of the replacements 2 days ago and rest are still only applications. As I say, all the old ones are invalid because LABOUR did not know ,or care ?, that Unincorporated Associations cannot own any property including trademarks in the name of the Association. What incompetents Labour are.
Surely, if they can’t manage themselves, they can’t be competent to manage UK Plc.
Prudence’s Death Tax
According to The Times Prudence and his few supporters in Nulabor are possibly proposing a 10% death tax on all estates. Read some of the comments to the article
Now, I’m someone who has a bob or two and when I die I will pay substantial death duties. On the other hand, I would hopefully have sufficient money to make sure that I had enough nubile nurses to keep me happy in my last days. So just because I have saved, why should I pay for those who have not saved for their last days?
To actually suggest it is a crass idea and a vote loser. After all probably ninety percent of the population want to make enough money before they retire to really enjoy it.
But then what do you expect from a man who was a Chancellor, who had the same idea of taxes as the Sherriff of Nottingham?
It just shows how out of touch Nulabor is with everything.
Let’s take a couple of examples.
Suppose someone was dying in their thirties from some awful cancer. Because they have been ill for some time, they would probably not have any estate at all. Or perhaps just a small one. So the widow, who would be up shit-street anyway gets even more of her money taken away by a grasping government.
I also have two friends, who have very disabled children. Their care is expensive, so is it right that if the parents die, that disabled children are taxed, when they need the money. I suppose that their disabilities mean that they can’t vote, so it’s all right then!
Now we need to raise money for care of the elderly, but it would be better if we raised it say on energy taxes or VAT. Raising VAT to 20% would raise about £13billion, but I think that this may be a better alternative as Prudence’s lowering and raising of VAT didn’t seem to make much effect one way or the other.
We could also get rid of two unwanted aircraft carriers, the Joint Strike Fighter, Trident, tanks, identity cards and many other pet projects of Prudence and his cronies.
Cutting Unemployment
I run a couple of small businesses; one is a computer software firm and the other is a thoroughbred stud.
I have a problem on the stud in that work is distinctly seasonal and so some of the essential maintenance jobs that no-one really likes to do, get put to the bottom of the queue, when other more important things come up. For instance, if it means having an injured horse for rest after a racing injury, which requires extra care time, then this will take precedence over say painting fences or renewing a badly worn gateway, because the former is better for your cash flow.
In the past twenty years or so, whilst my late wife and I have run the stud, we’ve often needed someone for say a month or two for these maintenance and other tasks. Usually, we’ve subcontracted to a building firm, who don’t like these sort of small jobs and charge much more than say employing someone for a couple of months.
What is needed is a computer system based on the technology used on many web sites, to match the unemployed to the small jobs available. The site might be something like a cross between a dating-site for something like The Times and eBay.
Suppose you chose someone from this web site for a job that would last anything upwards of a week.
You would pay the site, which would then pay the employee directly and automatically adjust their benefit, so that they avoided the problem of going on and off benefit. After they’d finished, you would then assess their work and post it with ratings on the web site.
I think that this would have benefits for both employers and claimants.
Employers and especially small ones, would have a simple means of bridging that temporary labour problem without any great hassle. They could also read the references of those available for employment in their area and may well choose an employee whose skills and experience matched their needs. In the case of the stud, I’d probably do jobs where I can easily find people to do them. For instance, I have several painting jobs that need doing, so if I found someone, who had experience of industrial painting, then that job would be done.
Claimants would benefit from the work and the extra money, and because they were rated, this would increase their chances of getting full employment. The system would also benefit, those who perhaps because of circumstances like age, children and disability, did not need or want to work all of the year.
It is an idea, that I feel needs to be examined. As a computer scientist, I don’t believe that setting it up would be the biggest of technological problems, although asking the government to do it would probably be a disaster.
We’re Under Control
Last night’s television was frightening.
It wasn’t any old horror story, but two programmes which shared a common theme.
The first was Panorama about the Government’s, Vetting and Barring Scheme (VBS) which aims to stop unsuitable people working with children and vulnerable adults. A laudable idea, but it is being done in such a heavy handed way, that it will end up with large numbers of people being branded unsuitable, despite there being no real evidence.
Here’s what Sir Ian McKellen had to say about the effect on the theatre.
A new vetting scheme is dissuading amateur theatre companies from casting child actors, Lord of the Rings star Sir Ian McKellen has said.
The Vetting and Barring Scheme (VBS) aims to stop unsuitable people working with children and vulnerable adults.
But some theatres say they do not have resources to carry out the paperwork it entails, and Sir Ian fears child actors will lose important stage experience.
He may be overreacting, but then I always worry about schemes like this, as I have a very common name. As an example I’m in a database in Hong Kong and every time I visit, I’m called aside for special treatment. At least I haven’t ended up in jail, but one day my namesake might have upped his level of crime or annoyance. I also used to live in a small village with a criminal with a similar first name and the same surname. I had great difficulty getting a credit card, as I was thought of as one of his relatives.
I will be very unlikely to have any trouble with the Act, but then I only have about two hours contact alone with children in every year. And that is with my granddaughter, either when I take her to the supermarket or show her something on the computer, with one of her parents in the next room!
However, I’m thinking about volunteering to perhaps provide transport or computer help. Because of this Act, I have said that I don’t want to do anything concerned with children or their parents.
Is that the purpose of the Act? Because if no-one worked with children, then we wouldn’t have any problems would we!
And then I watched Generation Jihad.
This was chilling as young Muslims talked candidly about their outlandish views.
I feel that we may be winning some of the battles against those who feel we should be punished because of our lack of religion. The Police are arresting people before they do any damage, mullahs seem to talk sense in good English, and the tone of Muslims on phone-in programmes seems to be very much more tolerant to others.
But again oppressive legislation has been used against the Muslim extremists, that in the end may prove to be unproductive. How many people have downloaded anti-Western videos? Probably a lot more than you would think. For instance, I’ve been sent links to them in spam, by spammers in the Middle East. I unknowingly downloaded the first bit, but then as my Arabic is a bit rusty, so I deleted it.
If your brother was locked up for doing something like this, would you support the authorities or the brother? I suspect, where no actual threat has been proved you would support him.
So is this legislation actually creating more potential terrorists, rather than reducing them? After all if you’re prepared to be a suicide bomber, then a few years in jail if you get caught preparing, is a small price to pay. You can wait and probably you’ll learn a lot more in prison to help you on your way.
Let’s face it, on a scale of nastiness, terrorists and paedophiles are the lowest of the low. Oppressive agencies feasting on innuendo as well as facts, relying on typical government computing and staffed by people on not the best wages are one way to do it. But is that the best?
No!
These systems only catch those on the radar of the authorities. The London bombers weren’t and neither are most paedophiles.
I also have a big worry about these sort of systems. Supposing one was found to be a complete waste of time. Would it be scrapped? After all, if a government did, they’d be described as pro-paedophile or pro-terrorist. Look at how long it took them to sort out the Child Support Agency and the damage that was done in the interim.
So what should we do?
We should look at what causes people to become paedophiles, terrorists and criminals for that matter. One thing stands out; poverty. There is also the way that the parents treat their children. Many paedophiles were abused by their parents, many criminals take up their parents habits and there are terrorists, who have strained relationships with their family. Obviously, not all, but as the programmes pointed out last night, the seeds of criminality are sown within the family home.
Poverty is a very difficult one. The poor are very little better off after nearly thirteen years of Labour rule. But perhaps we should radically change things like the tax system to make sure that those at the bottom end keep more of what they earn, paying for it with taxes on energy. The tax system should also be seamless with the benefit system, so that part-time work is better and less hassle than no-time work.
I have hopes though about poverty and from a rather surprising person; Iain Duncan Smith.
As to family problems, my late wife spent a lot of her working life dealing with their breakdown. Barristers like her are being squeezed by the Legal Aid Fund and anyone worth his or her salt would not go into that field today. But then government doesn’t properly fund the Social Services, so that we get so many problems there.
But then those at the bottom end of society don’t vote, so looking after them is not on the average politician’s radar. Also horrendous crime plays well in Middle Britain, when the government says that they’ll bring in ASBOs, Super-ASBOs, life for littering etc. etc. I bet some wish capital punishment was still available.
But perhaps something that would help everybody, is that we should look at society and make it all a lot simpler.
Let’s have a Bonfire of the Regulations.
Squeezing the Moderates
When I hear the words Northern Ireland or Ulster on television or radio, I reach for the off button. All my adult life we have had the Irish problem. I should say that all my adult life in my mind, there has been one obvious solution, give Ulster to Eire.
I don’t make this decision on political grounds, but through strict economic grounds. I have been to Ulster a few times and it is an expensive place to live and to run a business. Energy is expensive for a start. So everything needs to be subsidised. I know it is the same in other far-flung parts of the UK, like the Highlands of Scotland and Cornwall, but they don’t spit the bile about everybody who disagrees with them, that many Ulster politicians do. I don’t ever remember them trying to bomb and kill their way to get their aims.
I know that the Protestants would bleat about the reunification of Ireland, but because of population dynamics with an increasing and younger Catholic population, that they will be in the minority in a few years anyway. How will the the Catholics vote?
I have just heard Ken Maginnis on Radio 5, eloquently complaining about how New Labour has played the extreme card and cut out the moderate Unionists and the SDLP in favour of Sinn Fein and the DUP. He has a point, especially, as his party was not at the current talks.
I read once that subsidies to help Northern Ireland cost about £3-4 billion a year. (If anybody has an up-to-date figure then please let me know!) But to move control of justice and policing to the province would have cost £800 million. If it was a subsidiary of a company it would have been declared bust many years ago.
Surely, this amount of money means that on the one hand a long term solution to Ulster must be found and that on our part, we put a proper, rather than a part-time minister into the province to make a deal that is fair for all stick.
The Iraq Inquiry
I can’t see the point to the Iraq Inquiry.
Never has so much hot air and money been wasted on so much to generate so little. Well possibly the Inquiry into Bloody Sunday has wasted a lot more and all of the money wasted would have far better been spent on the victims.
But that is only the start to this pointless inquiry, which will not find anybody guilty and never get anywhere near the truth. Probably, in my view, because the truth isn’t actually written down and it is much more a cock-up by lightweight incompetents, rather than any conspiracy.
You have to ask why Tony Blair was the politician and his wife was the lawyer. Perhaps she had the brains to earn the money and he had the style to convince the average man in the street. Could he convince the average judge and jury? He gave up the Bar too soon for anybody to find out.
But what really gets me about the Iraq Inquiry is that the best daytime radio programme of the week, the Mayo/Kermode film review has been cancelled.
Shame on the BBC for giving us endless drivel instead of entertainment. I doubt more than a dozen people outside the Westminster circle are listening. And that is the problem with British politics. It’s them in control and us what pays for it!
The Pen is Mightier than the Sword
Well! Perhaps I should say Bomb.
The government has now raised the security threat from substantial to severe.
Without wishing to be too flippant, can this be anything to do with the fact that we will have to have an election in the next few months. Obviously, terrorism and the fear of it, can be considered to be a vote winner for the incumbent.
But we are fighting these criminals in totally the wrong way.
At least though, some are using humour.
Chris Morris has made a jihadist comedy called Four Lions. It is premiered today at the Sundance Film Festival. I hope it succeeds. Note there is a clip on the first link.
And then there is Jihad, The Musical.
We need more of this satire. But not just against so-called Muslim criminals, but anybody else who really has a warped sense of what the world should be like. How about The Graduate II featuring another Mrs. Robinson? Or Don’t Make a Monkey out of Me with Sarah Palin?
Unfair Trials Abroad
My late wife was a barrister and I’m proud to have lots of lawyers and judges amongst my friends. If ever I ended up in a court in the UK, I would suspect that I’d get a fair trial.
But! Is it that way abroad? Just take the case of Garry Mann, which has been well documented by Fair Trials International. An English judge has said that his trial was a travesty, but now he will be deported to Portugal to serve a two year sentence.
And there is nothing that the English Courts can do about it, as our human rights have been signed away by this stupid government.
Who do I Support in Angola?
It is strange the rules you apply to decide which team to support in the Africa Cup of Nations in Angola.
Take Egypt against Nigeria.
Egypt is a country, where I enjoyed a good gluten-free holiday at Luxor and is somewhere I’ll go to again. Nigeria on the other hand is a country I’ve never visited and from which I get endless spam, named after article 419 in their penal code. (To be fair to Nigeria, they are doing their best to stop the spam!)
But I supported Nigeria for no apparent reason!
Now, I’m watching Benin against Mozambique.
Here it’s Mozambique.
I was in Trinidad and happened to be staying at a hotel, where there was a Speakers’ Conference of all the Commonwealth countries. At breakfast I was in the queue with a guy whose badge said he was an official of the Mozambique parliament!
But then they aren’t in the Commonwealth are they?
Oh yes they are! And when I questioned the guy about it, he told me how important the Commonwealth were to his country in providing aid and specialist advisors. He made some comment about the Commonwealth sending a sole advisor who knew his stuff, whilst the UN sent one who didn’t with a useless entourage.
Another thing I remember at this conference was Betty Boothroyd, who was doing a sterling job at making everybody’s time a good and productive one. She was always immaculately dressed and at breakfast I asked my wife, a barrister, who was the scruffy bloke with Miss Boothroyd. She choked on her muesli, laughed and said it was Derry Irving. He was definitely second class to Miss Boothroyd!
The Anonymous Widower 