-
As I sit here ready to leave work at 4.47pm on this sunny Thursday afternoon, with all classes done for the week but a lot of grading to do, a few thoughts are going through my head that I want to write on my blog.
I was speaking with a student earlier who was telling me that he has a friend in the UK, and I was asked questions that essentially amounted to "Is this true...or not...? etc"
I spent the next ten minutes explaining what are a lot of the current "negatives" in the UK, and I couldn't disagree when the student challenged me concerning social issues - namely:
Is it true that young girls are getting pregnant all the time?
Is it true that technologically we are falling behind?
Is it true that a lot of people are not working, and there are those who live directly off the government?
I found myself having to agree, but to clarify the points in more detail. I also reiterated strongly that despite clear issues that we currently face as a country, including drugs, the benefits culture, political correctness, teenage pregnancies and the effects of the economic crisis, (amongst others) that we do still have some wonderful things. Let's not forget that should we work hard and find a life purpose, that quality of life in general is good; that education standards despite political correctness is excellent, and who can doubt the beauty of the British countryside? There are still things to look towards!
I left the conversation and told my student to ask his friend "What does it mean to be English?" and "What are English traits as supposed to British ones?" I think these questions in the short-term future will present problems that currently exist but are underestimated.
All in all, upon coming back to the office I couldn't help but feel an overall sadness. What is going on in the UK? Am I just an eternal pessismist? I miss my family and my country, but there is little to feel patriotic for, whilst we face this collective political, economic and social mess. What kind of a future do we have as a society? Such great questions have no clear answer; however what is crystal clear is the feeling of sadness I have, as I contemplate certain realities that we cannot deny.
-
Thursday, 11 March 2010
Monday, 1 March 2010
Councils won’t cut back if they can make savings elsewhere……
The title says it all. The link is here to read the offending article….let’s just provide readers with the part that made me burst out laughing…..
“However John Denham, the local Government secretary, refused to a put a figure on local authority spending cuts, admitting only that "things are going to be tighter" for councils.
In a bad tempered exchange on BBC Radio 4's Today programme, Mr Denham refused seven times to quantify the amount councils may have to cut spending.
He insisted that cuts in front line services would not be necessary if councils made efficiency savings elsewhere.”
The Government won’t say to what extent the cuts will be….claims that things are going to be tighter, and the real good part is that if cuts can be avoided by making savings elsewhere…..WHY WEREN’T CUTS MADE DURING THE GOOD TIMES? There were obviously opportunities to save money before, and there is a strong implication that wastage has been at the heart of local Government……and for how long?
A pity state of affairs – an inefficient local Government that is about to get a whole lot worse. Can’t protect cuts from the economic realities that this Government has largely created.
Back to writing….
In these last 20 minutes before I go to an extra class scheduled at 10am, I finally decided to get back into blogging. Regular readers will be pleased to know that I’m going to commence writing, for there remains a lot of economic/political and other issues and interests to blog about.
I’m using Windows Live Writer, which means that I no longer need to go into Blogger directly…..I always found it a chore to have to log in, and I like the idea of trying this method, as I used to do with ScribeFire, the Firefox-extra that allows you to blog from any webpage.
I’m hoping that by integrating my blog writing with other day-to-day activities that it’ll become easier to keep a written record of events. All I need to do now is find an easier method of saving posts rather than manually putting them into a word document. If anybody has any suggestions let me know.
Classes are going well at school, where I am redesigning and giving an introductory class to economics and politics. Although many of the themes remain the same to the previous incarnation of this class, the source materials have been completely overhauled, and I’m very glad to be using a book published in 2010! I am also making use of several excellent resources; one which I have found particularly useful is http://www.economics-network.co.uk – credit be to those who deserve it.
That’s all for now!
Friday, 20 November 2009
Our New EU President and High Representative
It´s finally time to make a post on the post-Lisbon Treaty full ratification era, albeit one long overdue.
What´s the name of our new EU President again? Van Rumpey? Rumpole of the "new" Old Bailey? Oh, indeed not, damn, it´s actually Van Rompuy! How dare I begin my post with such an error and terrible example of British ignorance to the European project! Well, I might as well keep the error now; it sounds rather funny, and if we can´t keep our humour through these troubled and disturbing times, we have little else!
It has taken me some time to get over the shock of the sudden reversal of the Vaclav Klaus´s decision to fight the Lisbon Treaty. Granted, the overwhelming collective might of the 26 might have been too much, but I fear we lost a perfect and unique opportunity to expose this project for what it is. Not unless Vaclav Klaus is complicit to the project, as conspiracy theorists would claim. I won´t venture there but will try to stick to certain facts.
Let´s examine some of them. He is an ardent Euro-sceptic. He could have fought this until the day they impeached him, thereby exposing the project. Only he truly knows the reason for turning his back on his own principles. We can judge him for that hypocrisy only - in all other things he had no obligation, and thus I´ll reiterate, as I have done before, that we cannot blame Klaus for the fact that Britain has signed away even more of its sovereignty.
The deed is done. The Treaty of Lisbon amending previous Treaty texts, essentially bringing the rejected constitution into reality, comes into force on December 1st. Another sad day just around the corner - the good thing however is that being a Tuesday and close to final exams, I´ll be too busy preparing those and observing World Aids Day to worry too much about the Treaty entering into effect. I won´t need it splashed all over the papers in my face - I´ll quietly contemplate the defining moment; the death of large tracts of British political ideology and culture, in a more tranquil setting, from far far away.
Ushering in the Treaty, we saw the appointment of the new EU President and High Representative (a.k.a. Foreign Minister) yesterday. I am ready to comment on the whole saga. I am glad that those who argued for a Chairman´s role for the President as supposed to global showman won that argument. But to be honest there were evils to be had everywhere. Let´s mention them in turn:
a) By opting for a Chairman´s role for the President, this is surely, to borrow the wonderful headline from an article today in The Independent, the "path to least resistance." Typical EU strategy - condition people to getting used to the situation slowly; the big boys come later.
b) Choosing a President from a small country as supposed to a large one keeps smaller states in line. Belgium is most deserving, as the state that turned itself over to the EU from the beginning, and as the state that could become the sovereign EU if its national government continues along its current path of instability. Is it really crazy to imagine? Sovereign territory is all we need - Belgium would make the perfect Washington D.C., or Mexico D.F. This was a spontaneous thought that occurred to me late last night - and it certainly doesn´t hurt to consider all possibilities - let´s wait for the evidence to manifest itself.
c) The new EU President is a federalist - it couldn´t have been otherwise.
d) France and Germany showed that they still run the show behind the scenes. They got their man, unlike when they didn´t get their Belgian man Verhofstadt to succeed Prodi as Commission President in 2004.
d) The British position - Blair was impossible in the end because the UK is not a member of the Euro or Schengen area. What I find most curious is that there appears to have been the eternal assumption that one of the two jobs would go to the British. Why was this so? If the two jobs are to be shared between small and large states, why were contenders from other large countries not ever taken seriously? The British media spoke a foregone conclusion, and they were right to do so.
I personally believe that the perfect way to keep a Euro-sceptic nation glued to the EU project, especially when one considers the likely entrance of a Euro-sceptic British government in 2010, to be to appoint one of its countrymen to the heart of the project. Europhiles are now rejoicing at the increased British influence and voice at the heart of the EU; I actually see a woman who is committed to upholding the EUROPEAN interest, and shall not answer to any national government. Let´s not forget this overriding fact please. There is no such thing as national influence in Brussels - this can only come from the European Council composed of national leaders. Chairing the meetings of foreign ministers, she won´t be able to increase Britain´s influence - her job will be to influence Foreign Secretaries to the EUROPEAN interest. Point made. The glue is only one way - no increased voice gluing the EU to Britain, but plenty of glue keeping us from wrestling power back from Brussels without a tougher fight. The fact that she is Labour through and through makes the incoming Conservative government´s relationship with the EU even more challenging.
I believe overall that this is a Franco-German ploy to walk the path of least resistance, and to keep the British in line with a plum job. But to close this blog entry quite pointedly there are two remaining things to say - both are linked to this annoying concept known as democracy - but I´m sorry, it must be mentioned. First of all, there is now an unelected Commission, unelected President of the EU Council and an unelected High Representative with responsibility for an "External Action Service" as well as security policy. Do we need any more evidence of the loss of democracy in this project? My mind keeps going back to a comment I read earlier that to be undemocratic, the EU must in turn make its constituent states behave as such - well I think we´ve seen plenty of that since the rejection of the EU Constitution in 2005.
Finally, I´m going to quote from the book immediately turned upside-down and to my left side sitting on the desk. Entitled "The Great Deception: Can the European Union survive?" by Christopher Booker and Richard North, on page 543, in relation to the successful agreement of a European Constitution text, it is stated:
Thanks for reading.
What´s the name of our new EU President again? Van Rumpey? Rumpole of the "new" Old Bailey? Oh, indeed not, damn, it´s actually Van Rompuy! How dare I begin my post with such an error and terrible example of British ignorance to the European project! Well, I might as well keep the error now; it sounds rather funny, and if we can´t keep our humour through these troubled and disturbing times, we have little else!
It has taken me some time to get over the shock of the sudden reversal of the Vaclav Klaus´s decision to fight the Lisbon Treaty. Granted, the overwhelming collective might of the 26 might have been too much, but I fear we lost a perfect and unique opportunity to expose this project for what it is. Not unless Vaclav Klaus is complicit to the project, as conspiracy theorists would claim. I won´t venture there but will try to stick to certain facts.
Let´s examine some of them. He is an ardent Euro-sceptic. He could have fought this until the day they impeached him, thereby exposing the project. Only he truly knows the reason for turning his back on his own principles. We can judge him for that hypocrisy only - in all other things he had no obligation, and thus I´ll reiterate, as I have done before, that we cannot blame Klaus for the fact that Britain has signed away even more of its sovereignty.
The deed is done. The Treaty of Lisbon amending previous Treaty texts, essentially bringing the rejected constitution into reality, comes into force on December 1st. Another sad day just around the corner - the good thing however is that being a Tuesday and close to final exams, I´ll be too busy preparing those and observing World Aids Day to worry too much about the Treaty entering into effect. I won´t need it splashed all over the papers in my face - I´ll quietly contemplate the defining moment; the death of large tracts of British political ideology and culture, in a more tranquil setting, from far far away.
Ushering in the Treaty, we saw the appointment of the new EU President and High Representative (a.k.a. Foreign Minister) yesterday. I am ready to comment on the whole saga. I am glad that those who argued for a Chairman´s role for the President as supposed to global showman won that argument. But to be honest there were evils to be had everywhere. Let´s mention them in turn:
a) By opting for a Chairman´s role for the President, this is surely, to borrow the wonderful headline from an article today in The Independent, the "path to least resistance." Typical EU strategy - condition people to getting used to the situation slowly; the big boys come later.
b) Choosing a President from a small country as supposed to a large one keeps smaller states in line. Belgium is most deserving, as the state that turned itself over to the EU from the beginning, and as the state that could become the sovereign EU if its national government continues along its current path of instability. Is it really crazy to imagine? Sovereign territory is all we need - Belgium would make the perfect Washington D.C., or Mexico D.F. This was a spontaneous thought that occurred to me late last night - and it certainly doesn´t hurt to consider all possibilities - let´s wait for the evidence to manifest itself.
c) The new EU President is a federalist - it couldn´t have been otherwise.
d) France and Germany showed that they still run the show behind the scenes. They got their man, unlike when they didn´t get their Belgian man Verhofstadt to succeed Prodi as Commission President in 2004.
d) The British position - Blair was impossible in the end because the UK is not a member of the Euro or Schengen area. What I find most curious is that there appears to have been the eternal assumption that one of the two jobs would go to the British. Why was this so? If the two jobs are to be shared between small and large states, why were contenders from other large countries not ever taken seriously? The British media spoke a foregone conclusion, and they were right to do so.
I personally believe that the perfect way to keep a Euro-sceptic nation glued to the EU project, especially when one considers the likely entrance of a Euro-sceptic British government in 2010, to be to appoint one of its countrymen to the heart of the project. Europhiles are now rejoicing at the increased British influence and voice at the heart of the EU; I actually see a woman who is committed to upholding the EUROPEAN interest, and shall not answer to any national government. Let´s not forget this overriding fact please. There is no such thing as national influence in Brussels - this can only come from the European Council composed of national leaders. Chairing the meetings of foreign ministers, she won´t be able to increase Britain´s influence - her job will be to influence Foreign Secretaries to the EUROPEAN interest. Point made. The glue is only one way - no increased voice gluing the EU to Britain, but plenty of glue keeping us from wrestling power back from Brussels without a tougher fight. The fact that she is Labour through and through makes the incoming Conservative government´s relationship with the EU even more challenging.
I believe overall that this is a Franco-German ploy to walk the path of least resistance, and to keep the British in line with a plum job. But to close this blog entry quite pointedly there are two remaining things to say - both are linked to this annoying concept known as democracy - but I´m sorry, it must be mentioned. First of all, there is now an unelected Commission, unelected President of the EU Council and an unelected High Representative with responsibility for an "External Action Service" as well as security policy. Do we need any more evidence of the loss of democracy in this project? My mind keeps going back to a comment I read earlier that to be undemocratic, the EU must in turn make its constituent states behave as such - well I think we´ve seen plenty of that since the rejection of the EU Constitution in 2005.
Finally, I´m going to quote from the book immediately turned upside-down and to my left side sitting on the desk. Entitled "The Great Deception: Can the European Union survive?" by Christopher Booker and Richard North, on page 543, in relation to the successful agreement of a European Constitution text, it is stated:
"These hundreds of pages wove the recipe for a system of government as complex as any the world has ever seen. It´s real ingenuity, as had been the case since the launch of the ´project´ half a century before, lay in the extent to which it left all the outward institutions of national governments in place, while hollowing them out from within. It was a system of government which, while preserving some of the outward forms of democratic accountability, through the presence at its centre of elected politicians and through the European Parliament, was in fact almost wholly unaccountable to the peoples in whose name it would be claiming to act."
The new European Constitution enters into effect on December 1st.
Thanks for reading.
Wednesday, 28 October 2009
Diana.......
If there's someone who knows how to cheer me up, bring light into one's spirit, and help me to refocus when those moments are necessary, it must be Diana. I have two of them in my life, but it is of just one that I speak today. She reminds me of where I have been, where I am, and where I am yet to go.
She tells me that I am powerful, my mind is strong, and don't let emotions rule logic. How she knows the root of my being. Have I become like an open book? Am I easy to read?
I am writing this as I listen to her wisdom and advice......."if you got the brains, use them........" She reminds me of why I am here........She tells me I am going to be involved in something big.........and there are indeed significant moments to come.....the moment of a new consciousness. That's why this blog is called "The Joy of Being."
She tells me that I am powerful, my mind is strong, and don't let emotions rule logic. How she knows the root of my being. Have I become like an open book? Am I easy to read?
I am writing this as I listen to her wisdom and advice......."if you got the brains, use them........" She reminds me of why I am here........She tells me I am going to be involved in something big.........and there are indeed significant moments to come.....the moment of a new consciousness. That's why this blog is called "The Joy of Being."
Thursday, 15 October 2009
Support Vaclav Klaus - say no to the Lisbon Treaty!
Have spent the past couple of hours this evening reading about the Lisbon Treaty Developments. What a joy to see a facebook group and an online petition - sign me up! We must show our support to President Klaus during this most tense and extremely challenging sitution.
The fact is Ireland said no - that is democracy. The fact is that most EU member states know that their populations would reject it. So avoid a referendum by doing a re-package - all whilst distracted and running to hide under the economic crisis umbrella.
Support Vaclav Klaus!!
The fact is Ireland said no - that is democracy. The fact is that most EU member states know that their populations would reject it. So avoid a referendum by doing a re-package - all whilst distracted and running to hide under the economic crisis umbrella.
Support Vaclav Klaus!!
Tuesday, 13 October 2009
Lisbon Treaty Developments
After hearing the Irish vote yes to the Lisbon Treaty on October 02nd, we are now seeing some very interesting developments in Europe.
The final country that needs to ratify the treaty for it to come into effect is the Czech Republic. Its Parliament has already ratified the document, but the President, Vaclav Klaus, is against the treaty and does not want to sign. Without his signature it cannot come into effect in any of the 27 countries.
This is a tense political situation because he is now facing pressure from the entire EU to sign - and there are reports that the Czech Government may force him out of office to enable the treaty to come into effect! This is absolutely incredible and the sheer thought that the EU would go to this level to get this document ratified sets an extremely dangerous precedent indeed. In actual fact, the very THOUGHT of it is as bad as the deed itself. Will the EU just not take no for an answer?
I am essentially pro-European but overall a sceptic. However I feel my Eurosceptecism barometer rising by the day and I don't know if I am beginning to advocate withdrawing from the Union altogether. I still feel that this would be extreme, however not too out of proportion with those extreme thoughts we hear coming out of Brussels today, as the Czech Prime Minister is "summoned" to Brussels for the second time in seven days.
I have been reading a host of articles today, and from what I can gauge I would like to congratulate President Klaus in his resolve. He wants to stand firm against this treaty and I believe that he is trying his very best to stall for time until a British referendum is possible. President, I thank you on behalf of the British people desperate for a vote on this issue, and for exposing this tyranny in the mainstream.
Klaus has also given us Brits the assurance that no election will now be called before the law demands it in May/June 2010, so no nasty early election calls from Brown to try and ride high on a brief wave of fake popularity.
However, us Brits need to heed Kalus's words when he said that it is unfair to expect him to do something when we had our chance and did nothing. He is right - we should have protested against this more vigorously.....to the point of forcing a vote of no-confidence in the Government! Why not? If so many are against it, why didn't we show it?
Two of the three articles I am referencing below to finish today's post are in Spanish, and one in English. The first discusses the background to the whole Klaus-stalling-the-Lisbon-Treaty-issue. The second look at the possibilities for B-liar to be President. Finally, the third references a VERY INTERESTING telegraph article written in June, where even the Irish Commissioner (who admitted in 2008 that he had never read the Treaty) said that given the chance, most countries would reject Lisbon. How much more do I need to say?
End of post, and may I stop banging my keyboard in frustration at this wholesale destruction of British democracy, and democracy in general........
1) How Klaus is stalling the Lisbon Treaty - Good luck!
2) B-Liar to be President?
3) Even the Commissioner knows that everybody would say NO!
The final country that needs to ratify the treaty for it to come into effect is the Czech Republic. Its Parliament has already ratified the document, but the President, Vaclav Klaus, is against the treaty and does not want to sign. Without his signature it cannot come into effect in any of the 27 countries.
This is a tense political situation because he is now facing pressure from the entire EU to sign - and there are reports that the Czech Government may force him out of office to enable the treaty to come into effect! This is absolutely incredible and the sheer thought that the EU would go to this level to get this document ratified sets an extremely dangerous precedent indeed. In actual fact, the very THOUGHT of it is as bad as the deed itself. Will the EU just not take no for an answer?
I am essentially pro-European but overall a sceptic. However I feel my Eurosceptecism barometer rising by the day and I don't know if I am beginning to advocate withdrawing from the Union altogether. I still feel that this would be extreme, however not too out of proportion with those extreme thoughts we hear coming out of Brussels today, as the Czech Prime Minister is "summoned" to Brussels for the second time in seven days.
I have been reading a host of articles today, and from what I can gauge I would like to congratulate President Klaus in his resolve. He wants to stand firm against this treaty and I believe that he is trying his very best to stall for time until a British referendum is possible. President, I thank you on behalf of the British people desperate for a vote on this issue, and for exposing this tyranny in the mainstream.
Klaus has also given us Brits the assurance that no election will now be called before the law demands it in May/June 2010, so no nasty early election calls from Brown to try and ride high on a brief wave of fake popularity.
However, us Brits need to heed Kalus's words when he said that it is unfair to expect him to do something when we had our chance and did nothing. He is right - we should have protested against this more vigorously.....to the point of forcing a vote of no-confidence in the Government! Why not? If so many are against it, why didn't we show it?
Two of the three articles I am referencing below to finish today's post are in Spanish, and one in English. The first discusses the background to the whole Klaus-stalling-the-Lisbon-Treaty-issue. The second look at the possibilities for B-liar to be President. Finally, the third references a VERY INTERESTING telegraph article written in June, where even the Irish Commissioner (who admitted in 2008 that he had never read the Treaty) said that given the chance, most countries would reject Lisbon. How much more do I need to say?
End of post, and may I stop banging my keyboard in frustration at this wholesale destruction of British democracy, and democracy in general........
1) How Klaus is stalling the Lisbon Treaty - Good luck!
2) B-Liar to be President?
3) Even the Commissioner knows that everybody would say NO!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
