Archive for November 2006

My son the racist

November 30, 2006 General 4 comments

Yesterday my 8 year old son was accused of racism at school.  One of his black friends was pulling monkey faces and he pointed to a picture of a monkey in a book that he was reading and said the boy looked like the monkey.  He realised that the boy might have been offended so he apologised and when another friend said the same thing he told her not to because it might be racist.

Later in the day, the boy said the word “sex” which they’re not allowed to say at the school.  While they were talking about punishment for it another child told the teacher about my son calling the boy a monkey.  The teacher bawled at him that he was being racist and took him to the deputy head.

This morning Mrs Sane went to see the deputy head who told her that he knew it wasn’t intended as a racist insult but it would have to go on record as such and he has been told he isn’t allowed to read his poem out at the christmas play – someone else will read it instead.

When I phoned this afternoon the deputy head had changed his mind and catagorically stated that it was a racist incident.  When I talked to my son this evening it turns out that the deputy head didn’t even have the right story!

The whole thing revolves around the fact that, somehow, my son has got the idea that if he offends somebody who is black or asian then that is racism whether it was racially motivated or not.  He hasn’t got that idea from home so it must have come from the school.

I complained to the head teacher and even though she also had the same story as the deputy head – ie. the wrong one – and didn’t know that anything had even happened until I phoned earlier in the day, she also categorically stated that it was a racist insult.

I asked why it’s not possible for an 8 year old child to innocently call another child a monkey without it being racist but she couldn’t tell me that – apparently that’s a bigger issue.  I asked he if the black child pointed to a white monkey in a book and my child was pulling monkey faces and he called him a monkey, if that would be racist and she said no.  When I asked why she couldn’t tell me.  When I saked who decided the policy on what is and isn’t racist she wouldn’t tell me.  I’ve since contacted the council and they told me it is the school that writes the policy.

So there you have it.  At 8 years old my son is branded a racist and his 8 year old school friend (he’s friends with the black boy) has had it reaffirmed to him that he’s a victim.  Needless to say I am livid and I will kick up a fuss until I get satisfaction.  Does anyone know if it is possible to slander a minor?

More press coverage of English devolution/independence

November 29, 2006 BBC Bias, England One comment

No matter how hard the BBC try to bury the story, it just isn’t going away …

The Business

Next May is the 300th anniversary of the Union of the Scottish and English Parliaments, which followed the Union of the Crowns in 1603 and began the United Kingdom. It should be a cause for much celebration of one of the most successful Unions the world has ever seen, one which (along with the Welsh and the Ulster-Scots) dominated the 19th century through the British Empire, played a crucial role in seeing off the great 20th century evils of fascism and communism and which remains an important economic, diplomatic and military power, even in the 21st century.

But instead of celebration the air is thick with talk of divorce on both sides of the border. What was put together in 1707 might soon be about to come apart. It has not yet dawned on the rest of the world that, in the foreseeable future, there might not be a United Kingdom.
(more)

International Herald Tribune

LONDON: A majority of British voters support Scottish independence and the breakup of the country’s 300-year-old union with England, a poll released Sunday suggests.

Fifty-two percent of Scots polled by ICM supported Scottish independence, as did 59 percent of English voters.

The 1707 Act of Union joined England and Scotland under a single Parliament and monarch. Scottish independence has risen on the political agenda since the country was granted its own parliament, with power over many domestic functions, by Prime Minister Tony Blair’s government in 1999.
(more)

Daily Telegraph

One of the more astonishing features of our politics is the way in which really quite clever and experienced people fail, from time to time, to see the blindingly obvious. One example is the way in which some of those around Tony Blair — and for all I know Mr Blair himself — have believed, on and off over the past few years, that it might be possible to stop Gordon Brown becoming PM. Another was the even more foolish, and much more widely held, fantasy that granting devolution to Scotland would not, sooner rather than later, lead to a rampant rise of Scottish nationalism. As the more astute among you will immediately realise, these two concerns are inextricably linked.
(more)

The Herald

So, what’s the worst that could happen? If the opinion polls are broadly correct, and the SNP is returned as the largest party in May, what could be the realistic downside, given that most people seem to have dismissed Tony Blair’s forecasts of constitutional apocalypse?

he reaction to the government’s warnings about families being split asunder and the nation being left defenceless has been one of bemused disdain in the Scottish press – traditionally a bastion of unionism. Times change.
(more)

The Guardian 

I think the word is panic. Last week the prime minister, chancellor of the exchequer, home secretary, defence secretary, trade secretary and Scots ministerial expatriates galore travelled in a posse north to a Labour conference in Oban, like a bunch of Spanish hidalgos racing back from the fleshpots of Madrid to quell a revolt in their home province.

Their objective was to suppress one man, Alex Salmond, leader of the Scottish National party. An opinion poll had shown support for Salmond’s crusade, an independent Scotland, rising to 52% of the electorate. Those regarding themselves as Scottish had risen from half to three-quarters in 25 years, while those saying “British” had halved to just 20%.

This is raw politics. Labour desperately needs its 40 or so Scottish seats at Westminster. Gordon Brown, probably the next prime minister, wears his distaste for England on his sleeve, and English voters sense it. Already devolution has subverted the legitimacy of Scots MPs in voting on English bills. Just when the 300th anniversary of the 1707 Act of Union is about to be celebrated, it seems to be falling apart, and Labour’s electoral fortunes with it. Battle will be joined next May in the Scottish parliamentary elections.
(more)

Twat of the Week voting

November 29, 2006 Twat of the Week One comment

The nominations are in an it’s time to cast your votes.

Twat of the Week
 
The survey finishes in 2 days
  Show Results

A quick reminder of what they’ve all done to deserve a nomination: 

“Terrorist supporter and sympathiser, obnoxious ugly git, all round arsehole and hater of England and the English Peter Hain. I cant even bear to look at him, let alone listen to his spiteful, bigoted drivel.”

The nomination for the unelected Scottish Home Secretary of England, Charlie Falconer, was because of his latest summary justice plans for England.

Gordon Brown for his two-faced “preserve the union and my job at all costs” speeches in Scotland.

Tony Bliar for apologising on behalf of us all for the British Empire’s support of slavery – nobody asked him to apologise for us and we have nothing to apologise for, it’s all ancient history.

Douglas Alexander, the Scottish Minister for Transport in England, for introducing road pricing in England but not in Scotland where he was elected.

George Bush is Mrs Sane’s wildcard entry this week and the reason is because he’s American, he’s annoying and because he has Tony Bliar up his arse and our soldiers are dying because of it.

Shropshire Star: Let’s have a national anthem for the English

November 29, 2006 Letters No comments

Let us have a national anthem for the English 

Shrewsbury MP, Daniel Kawczynski, has launched an Early Day Motion calling on Parliament to promote Jerusalem as the English national anthem.

For too long now England’s sporting teams have had to stand through God Save the Queen before matches and put up with ignorant commentators calling it the English national anthem – something that is increasingly irritating our neighbours.

Let’s just get is absolutely clear – God Save the Queen is the British national anthem, not the English national anthem.

In fact, to be totally accurate, it is the British royal anthem and national anthem by convention only as there has never been an Act of Parliament confirming it as a national anthem.

There are often letters in the Star criticising our sporting stars for no singing God Save the Queen.  I ask: why should they?  They are representing England, not Britain.

Before the Commonwealth Games, the Department for Culture, Media and Sport received many petitions for Jerusalem to be used as the English national anthem.

There have been a number of polls asking which song should be the English national anthem and every one comes up with the same answer – Jerusalem.

Instead of choosing a song that English people want they chose Land of Hope and Glory – another British royal anthem.  It isn’t even an English song.

The English cricket team has recently adopted Jerusalem as its anthem but the English FA and English rugby team refuse to use anything other than God Save the Queen.  So far EDM 2791 has been signed by the following Shropshrie MP’s: Daniel Kawczynski, David Wright, Derek Conway.

Please write to your MP and ask them to support EDM 2791 if they haven’t yet done so.

Stuart Parr
Telford 

Bliar admits England wants a parliament

November 29, 2006 Anglophobia No comments

Princess Tony has told the Yorkshire Post that if the people of England were asked if they wanted an English Parliament then they would vote for one.  He denied that they would vote for the breakup of the union despite a Sunday Telegraph poll showing that 48% of English people support independence.

This is the first time that the traitor has publically admitted that English people want their own government so he’s going to let us have one right?  Wrong.  He’s putting all his support into the regionalisation project – in particular, city regions – which will break England up into artificial regions.

How can he get away with it?  He was (dubiously) elected to represent the interest and wishes of the electorate, not his own English-hating eurofederalist personal agenda.

Hat-tip: CEP

81% of Sun readers want independence

November 28, 2006 Britain, England, Northern Ireland, Scotland, Wales 5 comments

Yesterday’s phone-in poll amongst Sun readers resulted in 81% of people saying they wanted English independence from the rest of the UK.

UK Dead

BBC censorship over independence poll

November 27, 2006 Anglophobia, BBC Bias No comments

Yesterday’s poll in the Sunday Telegraph was possibly the most important news story of the year.  The results of the poll combined with the SNP’s projected win in the Scottish elections means that it is increasingly likely that the 300th anniversary of the Act of Union next year will be the last.

So where is the coverage on the BBC?  Not so much as a mention on BBC Breakfast this morning as I was eating my Weetabix and not a bean on the front page of the BBC News website.  The story is, in fact, hidden away on the Scottish Politics page of the BBC News website where most English people wouldn’t look.  Predictable censorship from the BBC who must surely wondering what will happen to the British Broadcasting Corporation when there is no long a Britain to broadcast to.

Even the Sun managed to find space amongst the usual stories about who’s shagging who and Pete Docherty getting arrested for posession of cocaine again (I made this up but it’s probably true) to publish a fairly meaty report by the Sun’s standards.

The Scottish Home Secretary (who has hardly any control over Scotland), John Reid, says that independence would be bad because our children and grandchildren would be required to choose between a Scottish or Welsh passport.  I’m sure there’s a point there but I must be missing it.  Legislation could be introduced post independence to allow free movement of citizens within the UK – we already have free movement of citizens within the EU, there’s no reason why we couldn’t do the same without.

Twat of the Week nominations

November 27, 2006 Twat of the Week 5 comments

Well, there’s certainly no shortage of contenders this week.

Please let me have your nominations asap, either in the comments or by email.

Scottish Transport Minister says congestion fees only for England

November 26, 2006 Anglophobia, England No comments

Douglas Alexander, MP for Paisley & Renfrewshire South, Transport Minister for England, Secretary for State for North Britain, is introducing legislation to impose congestion charging on England.

However, the legislation won’t apply in North Britain where the people who voted for him live because transport is devolved to the North British Parliament.

Why should an MP elected in North Britain be minister for a department that only has jurisdiction over England?

The Union: Dead, Marw, Déide, Marbh, Neuvio, Marow

November 26, 2006 Britain, England, Federal Europe, Northern Ireland, Scotland, Wales 3 comments

A poll in today’s Sunday Telegraph shows that a massive 68% of English people believe that England should have an English Parliament and 48% of people believe that England should declare its independence.

What is most interesting is that English support for North British independence is higher than in North Britain.

The figures are as follows:

Should Scotland become and independent country?

England:
Yes – 59%
No – 28%

Scotland:
Yes – 52%
No – 35%

Should England become independent of Scotland, Wales & NI?

England:
Yes – 48%
No – 43%

Scotland:
Yes – 45%
No – 38%

Should England have its own Parliament with similar powers to those of the Scottish Parliament?

England:
Yes – 68%
No – 25%

Scotland:
Yes – 58%
No – 31%

Should Scottish MP’s be allowed to vote on English laws when English MP’s can’t vote on Scottish laws?

England:
Yes – 34%
No – 62%

Scotland:
Yes – 47%
No – 46%

Government spending per head is higher in Scotland that in England, is this justified?

England:
Yes – 28%
No – 60%

Scotland:
Yes – 51%
No – 36%

Are there too many Scottish MP’s in the Cabinet, not enough it or doesn’t matter?

England:
Too Many – 21%
Not Enough – 2%
Doesn’t Matter – 76%

Scotland:
Too Many – 4%
Not Enough – 17%
Doesn’t Matter – 77%

Who do you support when England/Scotland are playing a foreign team?

England:
Scotland – 70%
Foreign Team – 14%

Scotland:
England – 48%
Foreign Team – 34%

The SNP are predicted win the North British elections next year and with a win will come the end of the union.  The fact that it will coincide with the 300th anniversary of the Act of Union and the 50th anniversary of the European Federation (if the UK doesn’t exist then England won’t be in the European Federation either) will make it even more meaningful.

Gordon Brown told the Scots yesterday that they didn’t want independence and neither did the English yet this is the latest poll to prove that is a downright lie.  The Welsh Assembly was established on the back of a 51% yes vote in which only 50% of the country participated.  If this is claimed as the settled will of the Welsh people then how many more polls like this is it going to take to force the Scottish Raj to hold a referendum in England?

When the union is dissolved, Labour will pay for it’s anglophobia.  The SNP have taken Labour’s majority in North Britain and the Conservatives have long been the choice of English voters with Labour relying on a combination of votes from north of the border and gerrymandered electoral boundaries to win the last election.  The Conservatives will lose their beloved union because of their unwillingness to support equality for the English.  The Illiberal Democrats are nothing and without their combined vote in England, North Britain and West Britain they will soon disappear off the political radar.

Bliar & Brown denounce independence

November 25, 2006 England, Labour, Scotland One comment

The Ignorant Jock is at the North British Labour Conference today (well he wouldn’t be at the English Labour Conference – there isn’t an English Labour Party) to tell the North British Labour Party faithful that independence would be a disaster for the nations and regions of the UK.

No doubt he’ll harp on about this mysterious “union dividend” that we apparently all benefit from.  At first I thought the dividend might have been the subsidies paid out via the Barnett Formula but the dividend is supposed to benefit us all and the Barnett Formula costs English taxpayers billions.

The SNP are predicted to win the North British elections next year and have pledged to hold a referendum on independence when they do so.  This has Labour worried as their biggest support base is in North Britain where they regularly use MP’s that have been elected to North British constituencies to pass laws in England.

The Tartan Taxman and Traitor Blair are actually telling the truth when they say that independence will be a disaster for North Britain.  Over half of their GDP comes from the public sector whilst the entire country is insolvent, requiring billions of pounds of subsidies from the English taxpayer to pay the bills and keep the North Britons in the lifestyle to which they have become accustomed.

Whilst I remain a unionist, I do not agree that the union should be preserved at all costs.  If the cost is the abolition of England and discrimination against its citizens then the price is too high.  Ending the union would benefit England immensely and doing so on the 300th anniversary of the Act of Union would be appropriate timing.  At least nobody can accuse us of not giving the union a chance – we’ve given it 300 years and it just isn’t working!

Charles Clarke supports English devolution now

November 25, 2006 General No comments

Former British Home Secretary, Charles Clarke, has suddenly decided that England needs devolution and that the current discriminatory devolution settlement is threatening the union.

This isn’t the sort of opinion you suddenly have, he must have had the same opinion when he was in the cabinet and in a position to actually do something about it.  This is a perfect example of why party politics is so bad for democracy – career politicians will follow the party line rather than stand up for what they believe.

Anyway, don’t get too excited about this call for English devolution – he still believes that England should be divided up into euroregions despite the fact that next to nobody in England actually wants regional government.

Twat of the Week: Matthew Taylor

November 25, 2006 Twat of the Week No comments

A clear winner again this week.  Matthew Taylor is the New Labour lacky who blamed bloggers for harming the relationship between politicians and the electorate.  He went on to say that bloggers make unreasonable demands and suggests that they don’t have a right to criticise politicians or question their actions.

Twat of the Week
Terry Grange
5 (19%)
Matthew Taylor
15 (56%)
Gordon Brown
5 (19%)
Tony Bliar
2 (7%)
The survey has ended

Matthew Taylor, you are this weeks Twat of the Week.

Charging Scots to drive into England

November 23, 2006 General No comments

A British MP has suggested that North Britons should be charged £1.50 for driving over the border to England.

The SNP have denounced it as another example of how North Britain pays through the nose for England (just don’t mention the £11.3bn subsidy or they might change their mind about North British independence).

Can’t find a link at the moment, it was in my local rag.

Jack Straw on another planet

November 23, 2006 Anglophobia, Labour 2 comments

BBC Question Time had a question and answer session with the Demon Headmaster and somehow a question mentioning England managed to slip through the net.  His answer is below, my comments are in italics:

Question from Stephen, London: As Leader of the Commons, how can having two Scottish MPs as the front runners for PM be democratic? Powers for most agencies including health, education etc have been devolved in Scotland, yet Mr Reid or Mr Brown would set the agenda for solely English matters when they represent Scottish constituencies.

Jack Straw: English MPs control all the money which Scotland receives – is that ‘fair’?
The chancellor controls what our taxes are spent on, the chancellor decides the subsidy England pays to the rest of the UK, the chancellor is the MP for Kirkaldy & Cowdenbeath in Scotland.
England constitutes 85% of the UK’s population and 87% of its wealth.
So he admits we are subsidising the rest of the UK.
It was English MPs who agreed to devolve some powers to Scotland in a Westminster Act of Parliament; but year by year controls over public spending levels for all of the UK continue to be exercised by Westminster. And power devolved is power retained, not ceded.
It was BRITISH MP’s that devolved MOST powers to Scotland.  Westminster is the seat of the BRITISH parliament.

While the current Tory cry of “English votes on English laws” has a simplistic appeal, it is in reality unworkable, undesirable and dangerous. It would create a two-tier system of “ins and outs” that would be so complex and confusing as to be unworkable.
Correct but something needs to be done about the current situation and the Tories are the only mainstream party offering a solution, even if it is crap.

How is it possible, for example, to distinguish between English “bits” of legislation and UK “bits”? It isn’t. The territorial extent of the clause in a bill – or part of a clause – cannot be conclusive, as so many “England only” decisions have plain implications for Scotland as well.
How is it possible to decide that a bit of legislation is Scottish?  Because they have a parliament?  You’ve answered your own question there Jack.

Hence, Vernon Bogdanor, perhaps the foremost constitutional expert in Britain, has claimed that the Tory proposals would “destroy the principle of collective responsibility, according to which government must stand or fall as a whole, commanding a majority on all the issues that come before Parliament, not just a selection. It is difficult to see how Britain could be effectively governed in such circumstances.”
Never heard of him.  The British government doesn’t vote on laws that are devolved to Scotland and Wales but the British government hasn’t fallen yet.

Moreover, it is difficult to see how the UK could remain united. The outcome of a break-up of the union would be calamitous.
For Labour and anti-English British MP’s it would.  For the subisidy junkies it would.  For England it would be the best thing that could happen.

The United Kingdom – Great Britain and Northern Ireland – is a union which works to the equal benefit of all four nations of the union. The whole is greater than the sum of the parts.
The union benefits our neighbours, it doesn’t benefit England.  It costs England money, it costs English lives and it keeps England ruled by MP’s elected in another country that aren’t accountable to any English voter.

Historically, England called the shots to achieve a union because the union was seen as a way, among others things, of amplifying England’s power worldwide.
The Scots were desperate to form a union after bankrupting themselves trying to colonise Panama.  They couldn’t unite with England quick enough and we’re still paying for it now.

And the reverse would certainly be true. A broken-up United Kingdom would not be in the interests of Scotland, Wales or Northern Ireland, but especially not England.
It would be terrible for Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland because they need us to subsidise them.  It would be fantastic for England.

Our voting power in the European Union would diminish. We’d slip down in the world league GDP tables. Our case for staying in the G8 would diminish and there could easily be an assault on our permanent seat in the UN Security Council.
Why would England stay in the European Federation if the union broke up?  The English taxpayer is subsidising the Scots, the Welsh, the Northern Irish and virtually the whole of the European Federation now, why would we want to carry on subsidising them afterwards?  Without the burden of our insolvent neighbours our economy would thrive.  The rest of the world equates Britain with England.  If you asked a hundred random people from around the world if they knew where Scotland was, most of them would say it was in England.

Cruisin’ for a Boozin’

November 23, 2006 Federal Europe No comments

The European Federation has ruled against a Dutch wine club which tried to get a ruling that they didn’t have to pay duty on fags and booze being imported from another EU member state.

The ruling will disappoint smokers and drinkers alike who woud have been able to order their cigarettes and alcohol at booze cruise prices without having to leave their armchair.  To make up for the lost duty, the British government would have had to put up taxes on other things, spreading the tax burdon around the majority of the population rather than just targetted at smokers and drinkers.

All is not lost for the eurofederalists though – new draft legislation will, if passed, reverse the decision of the European Court of Injustice giving the European Federation the authority to overrule elected national governments when it comes to taxation.

EU consulates

November 23, 2006 Federal Europe No comments

The European Federation is pressing ahead with its plans to introduce EU consulates around the world.

The consulates were part of the EU constitution which was rejected in a referendum by France and the Netherlands – both traditionally eurofederalist countries although my Dutch friends tell me that our clog wearing friends are rapidly cooling to the prospect fo further EU federalism.

The Road to EU Serfdom asks what purpose the EU consulates will serve as it is traditional for travellers abroad to use the consulate of a friendly nation if they can’t find one of their own – surely this is a duplication?  I think we all know the answer to that one.  The EU consulates will be a duplication but then having individual consulates for each member state is even more of a duplication so we may as well just have EU consulates instead and get rid of our own.

Olympic Bill increases by £900m

November 21, 2006 Federal Europe, Labour No comments

The bill for hosting the 2012 Olympics in London has risen by another £900m.

The Culture Secretary, Tessa Jowell, was hauled in front of MP’s to own up to the rising cost of hosting the Olympics.

What isn’t clear, though, is how much of this £900m is down to the European Federation’s demand that the British government charge VAT on the construction despite the Treasury’s promise not to charge VAT when the bids were put forward.  The British government is, of course, powerless to stand by their promise as the European Federation can over-rule them.

A couple of weeks ago the Ignorant Jock said we didn’t have to worry about the VAT bill because it’s just moving money around in the Treasury but fails to tell us how much of the VAT collected will be given to the European Federation because the amount of VAT the Treasury collects determines how much our contributions are.

The phrase “white elephant” springs to mind, I wonder why.

Is that allowed?

November 21, 2006 General One comment

I saw a very interesting story in the Shropshire Star tonight involving the leader of Telford & Wrekin council.

The council has set up a limited company which will be responsible for carrying out a lot of the executive functions currently vested in the elected council.  This company will be funded by the taxpayer, minority owned by the council, run by an unelected board and immune from the Freedom of Information Act.  The company has been set up without any public consultation and has already cost £1.3m whilst running as a “shadow company” and not actually doing anything.

Today they appointed a new Chairman of the company – now called Transforming Telford after these people registered their original name, Telford First to try and force them into being more open (which didn’t work unfortunately).  The new Chairman isn’t the interesting thing though, it’s the outgoing Chairman – Leader of the council, Keith Austin.

As Chairman of this company, Councillor Austin would be barred from taking part in debates and votes relating to the company because of his prejudicial interest.  If it transpires that he did take part in any debates and/or votes then he will have to appear before the Standards Board to answer for his actions.

Twat of the Week voting

November 21, 2006 Twat of the Week No comments

Please cast your votes for this week’s Twat of the Week competition.

Click here to find out who Matthew Taylor is and here for Terry Grange’s nomination.

Twat of the Week
 
The survey finishes in 2 days
  Show Results
« Older Entries