THE LIB DEMS ARE STILL HUFFING AND PUFFIN G.

Following last years failure to get the voting system changed to suit their inadequacies, the Liberal Democrats are now holding the Conservatives, their coalition partners, to ransom; to pass legislation for the reformation of the House of Lords. This would entail electing 80% of the members, leaving the remaining 20% appointed by their respective parties. The reason that this is about to take place, is due to weak leadership by Cameron and dishonesty by the Lib Dems, who had accepted that they had used up their 'quid pro quo', in exchange for changing constituency boundaries, with their referendum on an attempt to change the voting system. Since that failed, they are using the same ploy regarding the bill on Lords reform.

So what are the flaws of which we need to be wary? Firstly, the elected members would be voted in using the rejected method of a type of proportional representation, they'll never give up. In fact they're using a 'drip-drip-drip' approach. These elections would take place simultaneously with the General Election, every five years. This completely negates any checks and balances that would be required intermittently, mid term. For example; in electing a Labour Government, these voters would presumably elect a similar upper house. This means that we would be throttled by socialism for the total duration of a Parliament, doing the Union's bidding, in return for funds. Should that have happened, during the last two periods of socialist rule, we would have been bankrupted some time ago. The House of Lords must, therefore, be voted in mid term, for the purpose of restraint by any 'gung ho' Government. Under the proposals, in the case of a Labour victory, the nation would possibly last for five minutes rather than five years.

The most ridiculous aspect of this current process being, that unless we leave the European Union, it is pointless and a total waste of money, something we don't possess.


APPEASING CLEGGOLAND.

LET THEM ALL IN.

This week a tribunal has been held regarding the dismissal of Neville Sprague, a former Met officer, who in 2001 joined the Border Control Crime Team. The outfit, true to New Labour form, was headed by a woman, Jill Smith. Sprague pointed out to Smith, the scam operated by crime teams to get immigrants into Britain by the method of 'sham marriages'. Sprague's evidence to the tribunal outlined his report to his superior, plus the fact that other operatives were spending their days playing solitaire on their expensive computers; he was sidelined by Smith in best socialist fashion. This being reminiscent of Neil Kinnock (Kinnockio), as a European Union Commissioner during the 1990's; when advised of the glaring fraudulent activity in EU accounts by auditor, Marta Andreasen, she was immediately sidelined by Kinnockio, in best 'gravy train' fashion. The EU has been found to be guilty of fraud ever since, now about seventeen years. Kinnock was whisked to The House of Lords in Westminster. More importantly, Andreasen is a Member of the European Parliament, representing the United Kingdom Independence Party, doing a proper job.


IS IT ANY WONDER THE WESTERN WORLD IS HEADING FOR THE EXIT.

THE OMNISHAMBLES OF THE FSA.

Most of the western world is aware of the catastrophic effect from the start of the 'credit crunch' which has now been with us for at least four years, and shows little sign of going away. The banks certainly must take a lot of the blame for the debacle, aspects of which are still emerging; with possibly more to come. The CEO of the Glacier Fund, Mitchell Feierstein, has been warning us, for sometime, that the 'credit crunch proper' has not yet arrived. So let's look at another major player of ineptness in this disaster. The 'wrecking ball' set in place by Gordon Brown, the former Chancellor of the Exchequer, is the Financial Services Authority. This, apart from becoming a large employer of 'jobsworths', a jobs creation scheme. This was incorporated to act as a 'firewall' between the high street/investment banks and the Bank of England, which, formerly, was responsible for the overseeing of banking practices. What happened, I'm sure at Brown's behest, was a 'creditfest', giving the suckers that wonderful 'feel good' factor. It was a vote buying scam, giving low interest rates, which of course increased house prices extortionately. Existing home owners loved this; first time buyers however, had to look for even more credit. Such activity was bound to be unsustainable, but the FSA, in best 'Incapabilty Brown' manner, turned a 'blind eye'. On top of which, the capital investment arms of these banks started to play every kind of trick possible, thinking that they could walk on water, with nothing to keep them in check.


THERE IS OF COURSE ANOTHER PARTY IN THIS NIGHTMARE, THE BORROWER.

SOCIALISM AND DUMBING DOWN GO HAND IN HAND.

Education Secretary, Michael Gove, a bright beacon in a sea of ineptness, is embarking on a plan to reinvigorate the English education system. Dare we say it, he is planning a more competitive spirit in learning. Yes, this will show more academically astute pupils in a better light, when they get to examination time. This represents how the world is. Nations that practise this fact of life, will always head the education standing polls. The author, incidentally, does not speak from a situation of academic prowess, but more of a practical ability; something that has never made me feel inferior. Gove will naturally come under fire from the left, Labour and the Lib-Dems, who thrive on dumbness. Strange how Socialism doesn't takes the same view regarding sport.

So what makes the Left pursue low expectations in education? Followers of these columns will recall the earlier comments about Labour's simpleton approach. They cannot afford to have brighter folk then those on the front bench; so they insist on a flock of under achievers, who will always give them the vote, join a union, which in turn funds the party. This is hoped to create a kind of perpetual motion. Unfortunately, what is overlooked, is the loss of cash in this non-productive process. Since the nation is theoretically bust, that road is a non-starter to the educated thinker.

This item was triggered by a letter in the national press from a fellow Nottinghamian, WH Doe, who thinks along similar lines.

IT'S GOOD TO KNOW THAT WE ARE NOT PLOUGHING A LONELY FURROW.

RACIALISM IS ALIVE AND BEING PRACTICED BY UNIVERSITY PROFESSORS.

The author was reminded, by a letter to the press this week, of the exclusion of Israeli academics from British Universities. The ban, which has been in operation for the last decade, is the work of Professor Steven Rose, presumably a self-appointed know-all, who prevents such academics from these so-called seats of learning; better known to most as hot-beds of socialism.

To remind ourselves of the Jewish contribution to the development of the modern world, it might be worth reading a book by Steve Maltz, 'The People Of Many Names'; it's a good place to start. Much of the advancement of medical science is due to Jewish work, plus science in general.

It remains possible that we live in a free world, due to the fact that Hitler excluded two of Germany's top nuclear scientists, both Jews, Rudolf Peieris and Otto Frisch, who, when practising their speciality at Birmingham University, found that only approximately 1kilo of uranium was required rather than the assumed barrow load, for the necessary reaction required for their ends. This gave the Allies the edge in producing the atom bomb. Before some of you are up in arms about this, remember, had the Germans been there first, chances are that you would not be reading this.

My particular forte` is music from the early 1900's to around the '60's. Jerome Kern established the genre` of the standard song, closely followed by the likes of Irving Berlin, George Gershwin, Richard Rodgers and many more; all Jewish.

If our bigoted Professor Rose can come close to any of these achievements, let's hear about them. In the meantime, why isn't he facing charges? Better still, behind bars.


AND I'M STRICTLY GOYAM.

A GREEN AND PLEASANT OLYMPIC DREAM.

Artistic Director Danny Boyle has displayed a model for the opening of the 2012 Olympiad. Evidently we are to create a scene typical of the British countryside. This will include livestock, horses ploughing; although there could be a few left, this is something from the past. We'll even see a cricket match in action. However, what will be missing, is the omission of wind turbines, currently becoming the blight of our diminishing green space. Neither is there a suggestion of planning officials being confronted by crowds of local objectors opposed to the limited use of these turbines; plus the unnecessary thousands more homes, when we should be looking to reduce the population. Such schemes, invariably on flood meadows, are proving to be disastrous.

This may appear to be a cynic's view of the proposed opening, that is, nevertheless, not the case. The principal is good,


WILL THE GOVERNMENT TAKE NOTE?

SOMEONE'S TELLING PORKIES.

For our readers abroad, porkies (pork pies) is Cockney rhyming slang for lies. Such utterances are occurring regularly at a judicial enquiry, currently proceeding in London, referred to in Britain as the Leveson Enquiry. Leveson is the Judge in charge of looking into the 'goings on' by the media, initially the phone hacking scandal. This has now blossomed into considering successive Governments relationships with Rupert Murdoch's News Corp. This type of relationship commenced with former Prime Minister, Tony Blair, to get his New Labour into power back in the 1990's; and carried on with the equally fanciful David Cameron. The daily TV news reports make it sound rather like 'Listen with mother', without the panache.

It is obvious from all reports, that someone is not telling the truth upon their oath. The big problem will be sifting this out; politicians versus the media. Where would one start?

The very presence of such an activity is loved, particularly by the BBC, which has for sometime recognised Murdoch as the enemy, a self-made media boss, who probably has got a little too big for his boots. The BBC on the other hand, has a pious 'left wing' view of the world, always a weakness of public funded corporations. They sneer at any suggestions of cutting the National Debt. For that very reason, they view Leveson and his expensive enquiry as a wonderful form of fodder for it's own pathetic news broadcasting; a good example being, not keeping cricket fans, of which there are many, updated on the Test Match score.

The outcome of this enquiry needs caution; politicians any more than the press, are not above the law, and must always be held to account for their conduct, certainly when their decisions effect the electorate.


WHAT ABOUT THE REAL PROBLEMS?

A JUBILEE OF SOME RARITY.

It's not every year that the United Kingdom, or indeed any Kingdom can boast of a Diamond Jubilee. Queen Elizabeth II has been on the throne now since 1952. Although her function, as a Constitutional Monarch, does not include any form of governance, the incumbent Prime Minister has a weekly meeting with the monarch to keep he or she informed. The Queen, or King, has to give the Royal assent to bills passed in the Houses of Parliament, purely as a matter of routine; the monarch does not oppose decisions made by her/his Government, but may make comment in an advisory capacity. The Queen has now been performing these duties, along with official visits and openings  for all that time. Had she been in receipt of air miles, she wouldn't have been around for the recent celebrations. But the Queen is always there, and has been for all of her sixty year reign.

The overwhelming affection for the monarchy is still very much apparent, mainly due to the Queen and Prince Philip, who is invariably is at her side. Unfortunately, he had to succumb to an infection during the weekend celebrations. He will be 91 years old in a few days time. The author likes Philip in particular, he is what I call 'blokish'.

There is, nevertheless, another side to the last 60 years, not the fault necessarily of our Royalty, which is very much a downside. Abuse of so many things, drugs and the law in general. Education has deteriorated dramatically, but young folk are told that they are clever, something that is backfiring on the nation, particularly in the work place. Whether or not people work for their self respect, everyone appears to think that they are entitled to whatever is on offer. Many will spend a lifetime in the world of dependency and benefit, paid for out of the labours of others. Add to this the fact that many major companies have either disappeared or been swallowed up by foreign companies, very often with borrowed money, which I'm sure will not bode well with what could happen in the world of high finance in the very near future.

Are we a better prepared nation now than we were in 1952? I'm not convinced that we are. We pretend that we are, but from every aspect, we are living in denial, living beyond our means as individuals, and as a nation.

SERIOUS DECISIONS ARE OVERDUE.

IT'S NOT ALWAYS FIRST IMPRESSIONS.

Much of the author's working life was in sales. It was important, therefore, to quickly assess the potential customer, which was basing everything on ones initial impression, something that generally stood me in good stead as things progressed. There are, nevertheless, anomalies to such rules. Journalist and TV personality, Anne Robinson, whom I've considered to be no more than a 'champagne socialist', wrote an article for the national press, covering her mother's influence and attitude towards politics. Instead of returning to a domestic role after the Second World War, her mother started a successful wholesale poultry business, and very soon had moved to a more elite residential district of Liverpool. Mother voted Tory, as any working person should, but had two political favourites, poles apart; Enoch Powell and Michael Foot, both mavericks.

In her subsequent pursuit of her journalistic career, Anne never forgot this, and befriended the Foots, and developed an admiration, through experience and personal contact, with Enoch Powell. The Powells and the Foots were known to have supper together, by way of interest. The average Brit, interested in the recent political history, would be familiar with Powell's 1968 speech regarding immigration, something for which he has been vilified, by some, ever since. Anne Robinson then went on to point out, that Michael Foot was quite adamant that Powell was not remotely racialist. I wonder if he made this point to his colleagues in the Labour Government of the time, who made a meal of Powell's comments, which were totally based upon the requirements of his constituents; something almost unheard of these days.

For the record, the majority of the nation was in agreement with his concerns about immigration; furthermore, some of the second and third generation immigrants have the same worries now.


THE REST OF THE WORLD CANNOT SETTLE HERE.