Longrider

Geoff “Buff” Hoon is criticising the Lords over their refusal to budge on the ID cards Bill. He refers obliquely to the Salisbury convention.

“But it’s always been recognised, indeed said to be a convention of the constitution, that once a government puts into its manifesto a particular proposal, then the House of Lords would not stand in the way of that proposal becoming law.

“That’s one of the problems we have with ID cards. We set that out clearly in the manifesto last May - it was voted for by the British public.”

What this disingenuous wastrel is omitting to mention is that the Salisbury convention was brought about because the government of the day (Clement Attlee’s Labour government of 1945) had a clear mandate from the electorate. To state, as he does, that the British people voted for ID cards and that they have a similar clear mandate is a blatant lie. Only 37% of those who voted; that is, 22% of the electorate, did so for this government. Their “mandate” is a result of a flawed electoral system, not because the British people want identity cards. If he wants to play with the figures; around 60% voted against ID cards. That’s hardly a mandate.

Also, the Lords are simply holding this mendacious regime to its manifesto commitment - that in the first instance the cards (and registration on the NIR) will be voluntary. Hoon is dissembling in the same way as the rancorous thug when he suggests that forcing people renewing passports to register is, by any stretch of imagination and the English language; “voluntary”.

“It seems to me right now that the House of Lords should accept the will of the elected chamber - the House of Commons - and recognise that those people in the House of Commons, elected by a majority, set out in their manifesto that this should become law and now the House of Lords should give way.”

Ultimately, they will have no choice as the bastards will use the Parliament act. But, better to hold out and force them to do that, than give way. Then, at least, the Lords will be giving a clear message: “Not in our name”.

Neil Harding asks “must politicians disappoint?” Good question. Not one that I’m too worried about as politicians have never disappointed me; they have always managed to live down to my expectations. :whistle:

Andy Burnam responds today to the Henry Porter article in the Observer last week.

I find it hard to believe that Henry Porter has read the Identity Cards Bill. (’This ID project is even more sinister than we first thought’, Comment, last week). If he had, he would be aware of the safeguards built in to the scheme to protect personal information.

Given Burnham’s strange claims for this bill, it often appears that he is the one who has not read it. He goes on to point out that:

The scheme will not track your life’s activities. ID cards will be used when it is important to verify identity. That is not an everyday occurrence for the majority, while the use of credit cards and mobile phones, logged in itemised bills and statements, occurs daily.

Uh… now who hasn’t been reading the bill? It specifically states that every time the card is used, that checks of the stasi database National Identity Register will be recorded. Not to mention the sweaty baboon home secretary on the third reading of the bill having this to say:

Moreover, we all now face many occasions on which we need to prove our identity, whether to open a bank account, to take out a mortgage, to claim a benefit, to pass through a border control, to get a Criminal Records Bureau clearance or many other basic transactions of our day-to-day lives. I believe that an up-to-date identity cards system will make all those transactions easier for the individual and will also be beneficial for the state.

One of the bastards is lying – which one is it?

I note that, like other opponents of the scheme, Henry Porter fails to offer his readers any alternative means of safeguarding their identities.

That’s right, Andy, you scurrilous little nincompoop – that’s because you and your rancorous thug of a boss are not prepared to discuss anything other than the insidious bill currently before parliament. There is no point proposing alternatives while the egregious home office is not prepared to listen, let alone discuss them.

Identity fraud is a growing threat and we know that it enables other crime, including terrorism.

So? And? Are you trying to tell us that your scheme will have any effect on this? It won’t. We know it and you know it. If anything, the inevitably insecure stasi database National Identity Register will provide a honey-pot for identity thieves.  If there was any evidence that you are a mendacious little rapscallion, this is it.

Fortunately, the Google bots managed to archive my blog before it all went tits-up. The outcome is that I’ve managed a 100% recovery. Although the problem was mostly my fault in the first place, I’m feeling pretty smug that I managed to get it all back – even if it was a massive headache in the process.

Si vous voulez faire un imbécile de vous-même, pourquoi ne pas donner l’ assaut à hors d’une réunion parce qu’un délégué veut employer l’anglais parce que c’est la langue des affaires? Monsieur Chirac de pas en avant. La France sera fière de vous…

En anglais…

If you want to make a fool of yourself, why not storm out of a meeting because a delegate wants to use English because this is the recognised business language? Step forward Mister Chirac. France will be proud of you…

Via The Devil’s Kitchen, this

Timmy’s got a stalker…

Well, blow me, so he has. I can’t help wondering, though… I know blogging can get a bit incestuous and we do tend to use each others’ work to provide inspiration from time to time. But a whole blog set up for the proposes of fisking another blogger? Now, is it me or is that a bit weird? Obsessive, even? DK’s assessment that this is stalking is pretty close to the truth, I think, and it causes a little shiver to amble slowly down the spine. One of Tim’s commenters, JonT refers to such people as parasitic wankers. Far be it for me to try to outdo him. Call a spade a spade… 

Worstall Watch seems to think Timmy picking up on grammar is worthy of a whole post. A post that is, itself, grammatically flawed. As for the rather silly commenter who seems to think using “fora” rather than “forums” is worthy of a snide remark; I use the term “fora”, too. It is the correct plural form of forum. So what? Criticising those who use the correct form is merely inverse snobbery. It’s pretty childish, too.

I dip into Tim’s blog most days. Do I then want to wander over and see what Worstall Watch has to say about his meanderings?

Well, given that most of the entries are lacking in content and contain variations of the phrase:

“Not a great deal to say about most of them again.”

The answer is short, monosyllabic and it ain’t in the affirmative. This really is one to miss. :dry:

Hat tip to John for this little gem. A “think-tank” called Demos wants to rescue the community spirit of the suburbs according to this Grauniad piece:

This week, however, the think-tank Demos will launch a “save the suburbs” campaign, seeking to revitalise pleasantville by re-embracing the traditional pastimes of the ‘burbs: car-washing, Tupperware parties, communal gardens and the Women’s Institute.

Oh, puuuhleeeese! I live in what they quaintly call the suburbs. I know a couple of my neighbours by name. Sufficiently, that is, to pass the time of day with. I don’t know what they do for a living nor what their interests are. Their knowledge of me is similarly scant - and that’s the way I intend to keep it. Anyway, this from the Demos press release:

The blue print for suburbia makes a number of recommendations to ‘save suburbia’ including more communal spaces for Ramsay Street-style barbecues and setting up car-washing circles.

Hasn’t anyone told these people that Ramsay Street isn’t in the UK and isn’t real? “Neighbours” is just a story; these are not real people with real lives, living in the UK suburbs. What colour is the sky on the planet inhabited by this think-tank? It sure ain’t the same one I’m living on. :dry: This mythical community spirit is just that; mythical. Okay, in adversity, people might start spontaneously talking to complete strangers, but, by and large, the British are a nation of conservative introverts. We just don’t “do” community spirit. Neighbours are people who happen to live in the same vicinity - it is all down to chance. Friends are the people with whom we will actively socialise; are those with whom we have an affinity and we choose to share their company. The two are not necessarily the same. Unless you believe the tacky Neghbours theme tune…

“Neighbours… Should be there for one-another… That’s when good neighbours become good friends”

Sick bag, please…

We keep to ourselves and mind our own business. So, if Demos thinks we will all spontaneously indulge in community car washing circles, communal gardens or the terminally terrible Tupperware parties, they are onto a loser before they start. Any attempt to drag us screaming and kicking into such community activities is doomed, thankfully, to abject failure.

What is it with these people who seem so determined to busybody about in our lives? The suburbs are what they are - why not just leave them alone? :dry:

Oh, my God! I’ve just had one of those inverse Eureka moments. Wordpress has the facility to display the permalink structure in a logical manner - i.e. so that it makes sense; date and name based, rather than a series of numbers. I’d set it to that. When I reinstalled Wordpress, it defaulted back to the original setting. Fer cryin’ out loud… That’s why the friggin’ links didn’t work.

Mrs Longrider was spot on…