Nosemonkey's EUtopia

In search of a European identity

April 3, 2006
by Nosemonkey
5 Comments

Yet more dismantling of the constitution

No matter your opinions on having an antirely unelected former flatmate of the Prime minister as the head of the judiciary, the fact that the Lord Chancellor Charlie “the Lord” Falconer has today given up one of his office’s most central roles is a tad worrying. As that BBC report notes,

“The title will continue but the post may in the future be filled by an MP who is not a lawyer. Presently, it has to be taken by the most senior lawyer in the House of Lords.”

So we go from a situation in which the final say on legal matters is (supposedly, at least) taken by the person with the most experience and qualification so to do to one where any Tom, Dick or Harriet who happens to have sucked up to the head honchos of the governing party can set new legal precedents with little or no knowledge of how the system is supposed to work.

So now we get Baron Phillips of Worth Matravers, the Lord Chief Justice, taking over as head of the judiciary, effecitvely ending one of the few English traditions which can genuinely be claimed to have lasted for a thousand years. The Lord Phillips seems well qualified (certainly more so than did Charlie “drinking buddy” Falconer at any rate). But it’s quite hard to tell what he stands for, having apparently never voted on any issue since being elevated to the Lords in 1998. He has, however, criticised the government over their handling of the BSE crisis, so there is at least some hope of a certain degree of independence.

But this is beside the point. When these plans were first announced there was a good deal of controversy, and rightly so. For such a serious alteration of the way the constitution works, you’d have thought they’d have a bit more discussion, and try to come up with a genuine solution rather than mere window-dressing. (Well, you would were you not used to the way this government conducts all of its constitutional affairs, at any rate).

Yes, we need an independent head of the judiciary, and this new set-up could be considered an improvement on what’s gone before. But why are they introducing it before setting up an independent supreme court? The Constitutional Reform Act 2005, from which these changes stem, also states that the long argued-for supreme court will finally be set up. But the building to which the Law Lords are supposed to move will not be ready until 2008, and the new court has yet to be convened.

An independent head of the judiciary while both the head and the judiciary itself are still a part of the legislature smacks of the half-arsed 1999 reform of the House of Lords, getting rid of one problematic system but having nothing well thought out to replace it, and leaving us with a mish-mash arguably little better than the thing it is replacing. The only benefit is that instead of having a head of our legal system who has gained his position purely by dint of being mates with the Prime Minister, we have someone who should at least know what they are doing. Constitutionally, however, we are no better off, as the Law Lords remain installed in the Upper House.

Changing a part of the system a good two years before the rest is ready strikes me as a tad silly – like putting on your tie before your shirt. But if there’s one thing you can’t accuse this government of, it’s paying due care and attention to constitutional reform… Legislative and Regulatory Reform Bill, anyone?

April 3, 2006
by Nosemonkey
1 Comment

Labour loans

Guido’s keeping up the good work on the dodgy Labour loans, with some Capita suspicions and Sainsbury questions. As the man says, if Lord Sainsbury has “lent” Labour between £8.5 million and £13 million, what’s the likelihood of him being sacked from his ministerial post – a post which gives him power over areas of policy that can directly affect his business interests – when he can single-handedly bankrupt the Labour party in revenge?Why the hell has this little scandal – which makes Neil Hamilton’s acceptance of brown envelopes look like schoolboy stuff – not yet led to any ministerial resignations? Why did Peter Mandelson resign when he had a dodgy loan if Tony Blair can carry on regardless?

April 2, 2006
by Nosemonkey
Comments Off on Mini blog roundup

Mini blog roundup

A mini Britblog roundup while we’re waiting for the real thing – some posts that caught my eye: Jim Bliss on anti-Americanism, Phil Edwards on Asbos, Notes From A Small Bedroom looks to the past, as does To the Tooting Station – both seem to wonder where we’ve gone wrong, while John Elledge has a prod about the class system. All good stuff.Update: The real thing, and typically top work from that McKeating chap.

March 31, 2006
by Nosemonkey
5 Comments

“Tony Brown”

Bill Clinton being interviewed on Newsnight just now, talking about the Labour leadership, made the wonderful Freudian slip of referring to “Tony Brown”…

Well I found it funny. (And at this juncture I will point out that the only reason I’m not in the pub is because the local’s closed for refurbishment…)

March 31, 2006
by Nosemonkey
6 Comments

One to keep the conspiracy theorists happy

Nutters of the world rejoice! Yep, all those raging loons who reckon the EU is a giant Catholic conspiracy to reverse the Reformation and subjugate us all to the laws of Rome (intriguingly often having a lot of crossover with the crowd who seem to think “dhimmi” Europe is heading towards the Caliphate) are likely to have a field day with Pope Benedict XVI’s latest little foray into EU affairs, arguing Christianity (aka Catholicism) to be central to the European ideal. The pro-lifers are also getting excited about Benny’s hopes for EU-wide bans on abortion and the like – well, they would, wouldn’t they?

This all comes on the back of Popey’s meeting with the centre-right European Parliament EPP group leader Hans-Gert Poettering, largely unreported in the English language press – though there is a bit more if you read Spanish or Italian… Poettering has, however, managed to spew a wonderful load of hyperbolic garbage should you be arsed to track his silly pronouncements down, with cack like “The EU constitution is a ‘holy text'” oozing from his lips along with blatant untruths about how the (largely anti-Turkish EU-entry) EPP “aims for new relationships, for which Christians and Muslims can be privileged partners as believers.”

From a British perspective, this Papal intrusion into EPP affairs could be interesting. After all, the Tories – currently a part of the EPP group, though David Cameron has hinted at a pull-out – were for many years associated with the Catholic Jacobite claim to the throne. Could this be a true back to basics for the Tories? Will they be promoting the Stuart claim? Or will this be just the excuse they need to withdraw from the EPP and go it alone in the right-wing hinterland of EU parliamentary politics with the likes of UKIP, Kilroy and the fascists? The EPP is currently the only viable centre-right group in the European Parliament, but if it starts allying itself with Catholic interests, can the Church Party afford to remain allied to what could end up pitched as a Catholic front organisation while continuing to laud the Church of England to keep its core voters onside?

Of course, I’m being facetious, and it’s all a lot more complex and (a little) less silly than all that. It’s also no coincidence that Benny’s spouting his latest God-approved guff shortly before the Italian elections. Is Rome trying to influence the people of Italy to vote in favour of Berlusconi? Most likely – the Church has always been keen to keep close to the wealthy (how else can they afford all those lovely marble buildings and golden chalices?), and as Italy’s richest man Berlusconi’s the obvious bloke to get on board. Shame there are no Michelangelos around to gain lucrative commissions from the Vatican these days, really… Maybe they could make do with Tracey Emin?

If you can be bothered, the Pope’s full address is typically bland nonsense, but easy to spin beyond all recognition, should you be that way inclined (which, following a nice liquid lunch and a heavy week in the office, I evidently am). I mean yes, as the Catholic Church’s main PR man he has to argue his case, but Christ,

“By valuing its Christian roots, Europe will be able to give a secure direction to the choices of its citizens and peoples, it will strengthen their awareness of belonging to a common civilization and it will nourish the commitment of all to address the challenges of the present for the sake of a better future.”

Bugger off, Benny – Christianity is obviously central to European culture, and only an idiot would deny it. But the Catholic Church has also – bar the 20th century’s flirtations with the new religions of fascism and communism – been the single biggest cause of chaos and rupture between nations in the continent’s history. The last fifty years have seen an increasing movement towards secularism continent-wide, and fifty years of peace. The only conflict on the continent in that time – the Yugoslav unpleasantness – being categorised by some particularly vicious massacres of people based on their religion.

Hardly something to aspire to, I’d say.

(This has been an alcohol-fuelled exercise in exasperated, under-researched exaggeration and misrepresentation. Normal service will resume at some point. Probably.)

March 29, 2006
by Nosemonkey
7 Comments

ID Cards

The Guardian – All-night battle over ID cards looms:

“This afternoon MPs in the Commons voted to reject the peers’ amendments, which would have given an opt-out of the national identity register to people simply applying for a new passport.

“The bill now goes back to the Lords tonight, with parliament breaking for the Easter recess at the end of today’s session.”

Meanwhile, in a wonderful display of governmental misdirection, that disgusting excuse for a Home Secretary (so bad I’m almost pining for the days of David Blunkett or Michael Howard) has offered a “compromise” which spectacularly misses the point: people applying for passports won’t have to carry ID cards for a few more years, but they’ll still have to have their details entered onto the National Identity Database – the real evil at the heart of the project… Nice one Charles, you tit.

Late update: FUCK. The Lords have fallen for it. After a heroic, drawn-out defence they’ve been conned into believing it’s the cards, rather than the database that backs up the cards, that’s the problem.

End result? If you renew your passport you will be on the database, and there’s nothing you can do about it. You won’t have to carry an ID card until 2010 – but as that’s potentially within the lifetime of this parliament, there’s little hope of a reversal. We’re all screwed.

March 29, 2006
by Nosemonkey
Comments Off on ID

ID

Still insanely busy, but this from Longrider covers the latest government ID cards nonsense (with more good stuff from Bookdrunk at DK’s place), Tim Ireland continues to compile reasons why Blair must go, Rachel continues to highlight examples of Home Secretary Charles Clarke being one of the least likable men in the country, and Simon Jenkins in the Guardian has a decent piece on how “Government ministers have spent two weeks telling lies”.

March 28, 2006
by Nosemonkey
Comments Off on An army of crudely built straw men

An army of crudely built straw men

Our man Garry the Curious Hamster is on top form at the moment, with two great posts nicely demolishing Tony Blair’s “army of crudely built strawmen” and tedious “semantics, misrepresentations and downright nasty shits bullying anyone who disagrees into submission”. Good stuff. I’d doubtless do something similar on Jack Straw’s new Foreign Policy White Paper, launched today, but sadly am far too busy in the real world…

March 27, 2006
by Nosemonkey
4 Comments

Ukraine election pointers

Looks like the Guardian has recommended this place as a source for Ukraine info thanks to my liveblogging of the “Orange Revolution” back in November/December 2004 (see here for the relevant posts).

I am, however, massively out of touch with the situation over there – if you’re interested, try Foreign Notes, Orange Ukraine, Neeka’s Backlog, Leopolis, Publius Pundit’s Ukraine archives and the (English language) Kyiv Post.

Be careful though – the Kyiv Post is also perpetuating the “Yanukovich is pro-Russian, Yuschenko pro-Western” nonsense over-simplification that took many of us in during the Orange Revolution. Hell – even the BBC’s doing it… It really is nowhere near that simple – and there’s a lot more to it than mere post Cold War political repositioning going on out in Ukraine, with dodgy business links and behind-the-scenes financial/personal ties between almost all the major political figures in the country that are enough to put even Blair’s Labour party to shame…

Personally I’m rooting for Yulia Tymoshenko, but only because she’s rather prettier to look at than the other major figures (despite her bizarre hairstyle). Her origins are as uncertain as her intentions – much like the rest of the leading candidates.

In other words, whoever wins by the time all the votes are counted (probably sometime tomorrow), no one is likely to be able to predict the ramifications. Foreign Notes, however, seems to have been doing the most consistent job of informed, largely unpartisan coverage of political events over in Ukraine for the last year or so. Almost certainly the best place to start in an attempt to unravel and understand the Byzantine rivalries of the place.

March 27, 2006
by Nosemonkey
2 Comments

Protest exclusion zone

Looks like now the initial interest has died down they’ve started testing the protest exclusion zone law again, briefly arresting Brian Haw and an unnamed woman yesterday “on suspicion of obstructing police”> Considering Haw’s barely moved from his position on the Parliament Square roundabout (which is all it effectively is) for four years, and that there are no pedestrian crossings to the patch of grass opposite parliament where he stages his lone protest, it sounds like the police must have gone out of their way to be obstructed by the guy. It’s hardly like he’s easy to miss – that’s the whole reason the government are so keen to evict him…

March 27, 2006
by Nosemonkey
1 Comment

The Enabling Act

In case you’ve come in late, a handy summary of the current state of the nation. If what is said sounds alarming and over-the-top, that’s largely because the legislation it’s discussing is also alarming and over-the-top:

“Tyranny is sidling in. It is entering with face averted, under cover of a host of laws whose ostensible purpose is the reverse of their actual effect…

“The Regulatory Reform Bill is an Enabling Act, identical in spirit to the one the Nazis passed in 1933. On that occasion, Hitler promised that ‘the government will make use of these powers only insofar as they are essential for carrying out vitally necessary measures…

‘The number of cases in which an internal necessity exists for having recourse to such a law is a limited one.’ Our Government says much the same about the legislation it is passing today…

“But our concern should not be with today or tomorrow, but with the day after tomorrow, when different, nastier politicians might be in power, and the habits of decency and common sense have been even further eroded.”

March 24, 2006
by Nosemonkey
Comments Off on Blair must fall

Blair must fall

Oh yes – this.

“This is a formal call for an ammunition check. What have we got that we haven’t used? What have we got that can be used again? Count it, check it, and get ready to use it. Blair must fall.”