Archive for the ‘David Cameron’ Category

Vampire politics of the living dead

25 July 2009

Cameron claims the high ground over Labour’s “utterly despicable campaign tactics.

He rightly points out that the Conservatives had a clear 20% lead over the nearest rival due to their fighting a cleaner, more hands-on and more truthful campaign.

Brown and cronies have nothing left to fight with and nothing left to lose – apart from the ratification of the Lisbon Treaty. Their tactics will become ever more dirty and loathesome as the general election date approaches.


Cameron’s fuzzy foreign aid policy

13 July 2009

Cameron’s speech on international development funding failed to make a case for government-sponsored aid – let alone a convincing case.

If a government feels so strongly about giving aid, then one would think that it would have specific objectives, in each case – such as the development of industries, reduction in despotism, educating people on sound economic principles (preferably the sound money principles of Austrian Economics).

Why, then, does Cameron advocate “MyAid”, where we get to choose the organisations/countries which receive our aid?

We can do that ourselves – with no help and no costly government administration involved.

If Cameron wants to help the Third World, then it should start by renegotiating CAP, under threat of our refusal to subsidise it. CAP subsidises EU countries to produce goods that are far more cheaply produced in the Third World.

The money we save from CAP can be diverted to helping the Third World – at no extra costs to ourselves. And the Third World gets a fairer deal.

Cameron needs to think again.

Cameron backs Coulson

10 July 2009

Recommended Reads

21 June 2009

Britain’s assassins

21 June 2009

Brown, Mandy or their lackeys are putting it about that Brown will step down before the end of 2009.

Simon Walters says of Brown that “despite his unpopularity in Britain, his economic skills have won him international plaudits”.

Brown? Economic skills? The man whose lax regulation coupled with low interest rates brought about the near collapse of the economy?

Brown will cling on until the Lisbon Treaty is signed, because that’s what Mandy and his EU masters want him to do. He won’t go until the Lisbon Treaty is ratified to ensure that the Tories can’t bin it easily.

Let’s not forget – the Scots have no love for the English or the English way of life. The EU doesn’t much care for them either. Between the Scottish Mafia and the europhiles, England has been given a nasty dose of swine flu. Brown and Mandy want to ensure that the disease is fatal – they can’t allow Cameron to resuscitate the patient they have brought to near death.

Cameron disowns Clarke’s remarks on Lisbon

21 June 2009

Last week, Ken Clark alarmed prospective Tory voter by proclaiming:

“If the Irish referendum endorses the treaty and ratification comes into effect, then our settled policy is quite clear that the treaty will not be reopened.

“But it has also been said by David Cameron – and he means it – that it will not rest there, and he will want to start discussions on divisions of competence between national states and the centre of the EU.”

Now the Telegraph “understands” that Cameron and Osborne have sought to assure MPs that Clarke’s remarks were not in accord with their “strongly eurosceptic” stance on Europe which is to reduce the power of Brussels.

Cameron has still not pledged to hold a referendum on the treaty should all member states have ratified it when the Tories come to power, as articulated by Tory MP, Philip Davies:

“We need to bring powers back from Europe but I don’t think it’s clear at the moment how we are going to do it. What happens if the Irish vote ‘yes’, which they probably will? That is when William Hague’s problems begin. We are pinning our hopes on it not being ratified but it looks as if it will be so we desperately need a plan B. I don’t think there is one.”

“I don’t see how we can repatriate a few powers here and there unless we are prepared to use the nuclear option which is to say ‘if you don’t allow us to have these powers back we are going to leave the EU altogether’. That is the only way you can negotiate.”

None of which is reassuring.

We can be sure that Brown intends to cling to power until the treaty is ratified – which could happen by October, should the Irish vote Yes. The Czechs have said they would ratify the treaty only if the Irish vote Yes.

Dan Hannan believes that Mandelson is prepared to destroy Labour, by propping up lame-duck Brown, until the treaty is ratified, knowing that Cameron would kill it if he does not. Hannan says:

“European Commissioners are obsessed with the need to keep David Cameron at bay until the Lisbon Treaty is ratified.”

… and that “Mandelson is their agent, their man in Westminster.”

Dan Hannan’s article suggests that Brussels is pulling Mandelson’s strings, exerting its influence over a sovereign state. That it is subverting our democracy via an unelected Mandelson, to gain power over Britain.

The EU lavishly rewards leaders and politicos of sovereign states who sell their countries for lucre. The EU is a cancer, each of its mutant politico cells spreading their corruption through nation states, laying waste to all that is healthy in democracy.

Conservatives’ vote losers

18 June 2009

There are two issues about which the public feel very strongly – Britain’s debt and a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty/EU.

Inheritance tax -v- Britain’s borrowing:

By 2013, Britain’s debt* will be just under £3 trillion, given McMental‘s spending commitments which include current borrowing, PFI (off-balance sheet), public sector pensions and bank bailouts. So far. This could rise if Brown decides to purchase public affection with more debt or if further bank/business bailouts are ‘needed’.

The markets rightly view this vast debt with alarm, as it saddles the taxpayer with the equivalent of a second home mortgage. There is only so much the average household can afford to pay in extra tax. To service this debt, the government will therefore have to borrow. That’s right – borrow more money to pay the interest on what it has already borrowed. When it becomes clear that nobody is prepared to purchase our debt, the cost of borrowing will rise, so increasing our debt cost in a vicious upward spiral.

This economics from the mad house is where Brown feels right at home.

The public is deeply uneasy about our prospects – especially those in fear of redundancy and on low incomes because they don’t have sufficient disposable income to build up a safety net should the financial floor crumble beneath their feet.

They worry about the basic services and do not want to see their taxes spent on people who are comfortably off – the category into which they would put people faced with inheritance taxes.

Cameron should promise to reduce inheritance tax only when the threat of job redundancies and falling living standards has slowed or reversed. It’s no good promising to fund inheritance tax decreases with efficiency savings, because those savings would be better spent paying back our debt and improving our credit rating.


The Tories have been wriggling and writhing on this for years. We are almost at crunch point at which the wretched treaty is in danger of being ratified by all member states. When that occurs, the vast majority of people will want a referendum on it, or on our membership of the EU.

Our sovereignty is at stake here and along with it, our freedoms. The ruling classes have to realise that life for them as the ‘elites’ is vastly different to life for the rest of us.

If Cameron doesn’t tackle this decisively and openly, he will find his stock falling to the point where he is in danger of winning the general election with an awkwardly small majority.

He can’t say he hasn’t been warned.

* See Taxpayers’ Alliance.

Blair or Brown to be first EU President?

16 June 2009

If the Lisbon Treaty is ratified by all member states in the autumn, an EU President could be appointed and installed before the end of 2009.

While the Cameron camp says it stands to gain nothing by blocking Blair’s appointment, a spokeswoman declared “We do not accept the need for an EU president”.

Eurosceptics are unlikely to be satisfied with such a vague stance, particularly since Kenneth Clarke threw a spanner in the works on Sunday, casting doubt on Cameron’s allegedly eurosceptic stance.

The Mirror asserts that Brown is likely to be the first EU President, which leads me to suspect that Brown is hanging on to his job so that he can deliver the Lisbon Treaty unto his EU masters in order to swipe the presidency from his old rival Blair.

Philip Davies (Tory MP) is against Brown securing the Presidency, opining that it would be a “slap in the face” for British voters.

It is difficult to discern any decidedly eurosceptic stance from the three mainstream parties so far and it looks increasingly likely that UKIP will have to lead us out of Europe.

UKIP has already embarked on such a course, as Bloggers4UKIP reports:

UKIP’s Lord Willoughby de Broke has introduced the Constitutional Reform Bill 2009 into the House of Lords which, if hell freezes over and the LibLabCon pass it, would:

    • Repeal the European Communities Act 1972
    • Repeal the Human Rights Act 1998
    • Introduce binding referenda
    • Require the British Parliament to approve international treaties and declare war
    • Hand powers down from the British Parliament to local authorities
    • Fix the salary and expenses of a British MP and what expenses can be claimed for

Update: Hague, on asked whether he wants Blair to be President of the EU:

UKIP will get my vote

14 June 2009

I had fully intended to vote Conservative at the General Election, but after Clarke’s and Hague’s pronouncements today on the Politics Show, I shall be voting UKIP.

Cameron has been prevaricating for too long and now the cat is out of the bag.

Update: UKIP Leader Nigel Farage said:

“This statement just goes to show that all the Tory promises during the European Election campaign about holding a referendum can now be seen to be sheer, brass-necked dishonesty.

“If Cameron’s Conservatives cannot be trusted not to dissemble on this vital matter, how can anybody trust them on anything else?

“Of course we saw that 60% of those who voted on the June 4 voted against the Treaty, but they are not the only ones who are denied their say. Britain deserves a referendum, and deserves to be shot of both this government and the dishonest opposition.

“UKIP will have more than 500 candidates in the next general election and we plan to fight every inch of the way to allow our people a say in their own future. Nothing else is acceptable.”

Dan Hannan: totus porcus

27 May 2009

At a time when the intellectual pygmies of this world, such as Jack Straw, pretend to have the answer to our broken politics – which Labour brokeDan Hannan and Douglas Carswell produce the solution that we all instinctively know to be right.

Contrast Straw’s twisted logic and purported objectives for a British constitution with Dan’s and Douglas’s intellectually sharp and elegant logic, which characterises The Plan.

Straw’s offerings are just what we have come to expect from this shabby Labour government – craven, dishonest and useless at best. At worst, Straw’s proposed British Constitution would further destroy the freedoms of the individual and further empower the state. Under common law, the individual has a number of inalienable rights. Jack Straw seeks to override these rights such that any freedom not explicitly granted to the individual is implicitly disallowed. This amounts to a gross perversion of the freedoms that we have enjoyed over the centuries.

Straw’s proposed constitution results in a curtailment of freedoms and an increase in state power while doing nothing to increase the accountability of the ruling ‘elite’.

Today in the Telegraph, Dan Hannan describes Cameron’s adoption of the ideas in book The Plan, co-authored by Dan and Douglas.

Dan argues that he will be returned to Brussels on June 5th precisely because he is a beneficiary of the party list system by which party whips have purloined power from the electorate.

Dan writes (my emphasis):

The solutions which David Cameron goes on to propose are drawn directly from that text, and from its sequel, The Plan: Twelve Months to Renew Britain, which I co-authored with Douglas Carswell six months ago: local control over schools, housing and policing; fewer MPs; more power for councils; referendums, local and national; legislation by citizens’ initiative; a shift in power from the executive and judicial branches of government to the legislature; weaker Whips; the end of the patronage powers enjoyed by the Prime Minister under Crown Prerogative; the appointment of public officials through open parliamentary hearings.

Six months ago, these ideas were widely dismissed as both abstruse (“no one is interested in constitutional reform”) and impractical (“yes yes, Hannan, but back in the real world…”). The expenses revelations have made them seem not just pertinent, but urgent. David Cameron has spotted this and, with the decisiveness that has characterised his response to the allowances crisis, has adopted the agenda whole hog – totus porcus.

He reminds us that the corruption of politics will not be achievable while some MPs have what is essentially a job for life (my emphasis):

As long as 70 per cent of seats are safe, the only way for an MP to lose his job is to fall out with his party. That is the argument for open primaries, which will abolish the concept of a safe seat.

Read Dan’s article.