It need hardly be said that it would be wrong – economically and morally – for taxpayers in other countries to step in. It was a mistake to rescue the banks from the consequences of their own errors, and that logic applies in spades to whole countries. Still, the EU has every right to make its own mistakes. What it has no right to do is to expect the United Kingdom to pay a proportion of the bill. We kept the pound. It’s not our problem.
"With only days to go before Copenhagen we mustn't be distracted by the behind-the-times, anti-science, flat-earth climate sceptics. We know the science. We know what we must do.”
Gordon Brown 03/12/09
''I don't think it's healthy to dismiss proper scepticism...Science grows and improves in the light of criticism... There is a fundamental uncertainty about climate change prediction that can't be changed"
Prof John Beddington, Chief Scientific advisor to the UK Government 27/01/10
I am not a scientist and could not with any certainty make a case one way or the other (although I would concede that there seems to be more evidence in favour than against the theory).
However at a time when the public are ever more sceptical, the IPCC are admitting serious exaggeration and research bodies are shown to be "hiding the decline" it is ridiculous and irresponsible for our Prime Minister to be writing off everyone even remotely sceptical of the theory or the predicted effects of it. This situation is only worsened when his Government's Chief Scientific advisor is in stark disagreement with him.
Gordon should retract these comments and refrain from making them in the future. The theory may be proved one way or the other in the future but that is not the case so far and until it is no public office holder should be making such brash and potentially insulting claims.
I am not a particular fan of Barack Obama. I probably would have picked him over McCain but that is about as much praise as I'm willing to grant him: he wasn't as bad as the other guy. It is therefore a great surprise that, for the second time in a single week, I think Gordon should learn a lesson from him.
That lesson can be seen in this video:
Two lines from that interview jump out at me as in stark contrast to our Gordon:
1) There is a tendency in Washington to think that our job description ... is to get re-elected. That's not our job description.
2) I'd rather be a really good one term President than a mediocre two term President.
I'm not sure I can even picture Gordon expressing similar sentiments let alone actually believing them. It seems clear to me and I think a significant majority of the public that Gordon cares about nothing else except winning the next election. Obviously almost every politician in history has succumbed to this to varying degrees but none that I can think of have such a chronic case as Brown.
The obvious implication that Obama is making is that an elected official, especially the highest elected official in the country, should care more about doing what is right for that country and it's people than any other concern (especially electoral advantage). I cannot see any way in which Gordon can claim to follow this principle. If he did he would not have:
1) put off making the cuts necessary to reduce the deficit risking Britain's international financial reputation, competitiveness and attractiveness to investmen
2) offered benefit rises and a bonus tax in what anyone can see was nothing but crass electioneering
3) waited until effectively the last possible moment to call an election
4) refused a promised referendum on the Lisbon treaty because it wouldn't have gone his way
5) engaged in a vicious, nasty and irrelevant class based election strategy
I could list many more but I'm fairly sure those five illustrate my point adequately.
Gordon Brown would prefer to be a mediocre two term PM than a really good one term PM but he doesn't even have that choice. Realistically now he can choose between being an abysmal one term PM or an abysmal one term PM who still escapes with some dignity remaining. Unless he calls the election immediately he will surely be remembered as one of the worst we have ever had.
In the last few years the general response to any problem facing this country has been to reach for legislation. I would suggest however that this is unnecessary in almost every case. Not only this but when governments make a deliberate effort to "fix" a problem they more often than not fail or cause a string of unintended consequence often far worse than the original problem.
I thought therefore I would start a series of posts detailing how the free market, in response to pressure from the consuming public, can, has or will solve the issues and problems facing the nation. I shall start small with a problem that seems to come and go fairly frequently onto the political agenda: food waste.
It seems at least every few months the latest figures of how much food we waste hits the headlines followed by a stream of bandwagon jumpers trying to crack down on it. The most frequently attacked cause of this is the demon known as Buy One Get One Free or the rather unappealing sounding BOGOF. The last flurry of this came in Spring last year. First the EU issued a directive to ban them. Soon after (and rather predictably) the Lib Dems called for them to be banned. And finally the Government followed suit in their Defra Food 2030 plans.
It was of course all completely unnecessary. Unless you believe in a government knows best, paternalist state then the Government should only act on issues that are important enough to their electorate. Fortunately the electorate usually overlaps fairly heavily with the consuming public. This means that while the government should take notice of the public they will not be the only ones. Producers will also be paying keen attention in order to find new ways to attract consumers to their products rather than those of their competitors.
This is exactly what has happened with this example. Tesco has noticed that throwing away so much food is important enough to their current and potential customers and so they have come up with a solution. Rather than scrapping BOGOF which would have hit their customer's wallets in an already difficult time they have simply delayed the "one free". Under new plans if you buy one item then you can either take the second at the same time or pick it up the following week. The so called BOGOF later plan will no doubt drive more people through Tesco's doors as well as reducing food waste and undoubtedly forcing the other supermarkets to follow suit.
So there you have it. Rather than legislating to solve a problem it is far easier to let the market do it for you. The same result is achieved but you do it without making life harder for poorer families or wasting millions drafting and enforcing the legislation. Win-win.
If you have any suggestions for future instalments in this series send them to toryoutcast@gmail.com or twitter them to me here. Also if you're on Facebook then why not become a fan of Tory Outcast here.
Churchill was right. We should wish European union well – so long as it does not seek to cross the Channel. Certainly I have no ill will towards our friends on the mainland, but I think it is time the British dog got out of the federalist manger. I could live happily on the mainland as a foreigner. I believe that we should have a treaty relationship with other European nations covering matters of mutual interest, but that our Parliament should remain fully sovereign.
He probably shouldn't have said "great place to get mugged" but other than that fantastic. The public are best placed to scrutinise our government and it is their right to do so and to hold them to account. Another example of the internet being an incredibly democratising force.
"I think that when people look at this constituency and what was happening, the voters were clearly torn between their anger and dismay at what has been happening over MPs’ expenses, something that we are trying to clean up"
Anger and frustration crop up in both but can you really imagine Gordon showing such respect for the wishes of the people if he was facing similar circumstances? Whatever else you think of Obama and his healthcare plans it seems clear to me that he knows what is right in this sort of situation.
Meanwhile Labour think it's acceptable to deny the public their say on the Lisbon treaty. They think it's acceptable to leave the residents of Glasgow North East without an MP for 5 months to avoid electoral embarrassment. They think it's acceptable to use the Parliament act (normally reserved for cases of National emergency) three times in 5 years including using it to force through a ban on fox hunting. They even think it's acceptable for an unelected Prime Minister to continue in office to the full end of his term and become the second longest serving unelected PM of the century.
Gordon needs to take a leaf out of Obama's book and show even the vaguest amount of respect for Parliamentary tradition and convention. He now only has 5 days.
The head of the biggest bank in Britain demonstrates in a single (slightly inarticulate) sentence the folly in raising taxes to such extraordinary levels. A government must understand that raising tax rates does not necessarily increase tax revenues and in several cases may reduce them. Remind me again what 50% of nothing is...
Mr Geoghegan is about to move to Hong Kong as HSBC intend to shift their focus to Asia. I very much doubt they will be the last. Flatten the tax system and decrease the rates to both increase revenue and remove the disincentives to success and enterprise. Failure to do so will only worsen our situation and our international competitiveness.
Now very much an ex-tory I try to break the growing trend of angry sensationalism in the right wing blogosphere and instead attempt to offer a more considered calm approach to the issues of the day from a libertarian, pragmatic perspective
I am not a scientist and could not with any certainty make a case one way or the other (although I would concede that there seems to be more evidence in favour than against the theory).
It seems at least every few months the latest figures of how much food we waste hits the headlines followed by a stream of bandwagon jumpers trying to crack down on it. The most frequently attacked cause of this is the demon known as Buy One Get One Free or the rather unappealing sounding BOGOF. The last flurry of this came in Spring last year. First the EU issued a directive to ban them. Soon after (and rather predictably) the Lib Dems called for them to be banned. And finally the Government followed suit in their Defra Food 2030 plans.
Meanwhile Labour think it's acceptable to deny the public their say on the Lisbon treaty. They think it's acceptable to leave the residents of Glasgow North East without an MP for 5 months to avoid electoral embarrassment. They think it's acceptable to use the Parliament act (normally reserved for cases of National emergency) three times in 5 years including using it to force through a ban on fox hunting. They even think it's acceptable for an unelected Prime Minister to continue in office to the full end of his term and become the second longest serving unelected PM of the century.
