eurealist.co.uk

non partisan comment on the European Union and Westminster politics

 

Setting the Political Agenda

Eureferendum post says that the political elites have removed many subjects from political discourse.

For instance; “the way different issues are put in separate boxes and treated as if they were entirely unconnected issues. Thus, while “right-wingers” are no longer prepared to talk about “Europe” but will talk about taxes, no one is putting two and two together and suggesting that, if we left the EU, our government would be able to slash taxes without having to cut any of the “services” which we apparently hold so dear.”

“What seems to be happening here is a new and important development in that the chattering classes seem to be able to define (or are seeking to define) what is and what is not “political”. If something is defined as political, then we (and the political commentators) are allowed to talk about it. But, if the chosen ones don’t consider an issue “political”, it is simply excluded from the debate, any input being either ignored or dismissed as “banging on”. By this means is the debate shaped and controlled.”

By separating the issues from the main influence on most of them, the EU is removed from democratic debate and the resulting debate becomes practically meaningless. What is the point of a political party deciding what policies it is going to offer the voters at the next election, when those policies if implemented will be viewed from an EU perspective and will have to be in line with EU objectives. If the EU perspective is not part of the debate in the first place the policies will either be made within EU Rules or will have to be changed in order for them to become acceptable.

In the latter case this in practice means we cannot trust the politicians to even attempt to deliver on many of their proposals, because they do not want to be seen to be reneging on election promises we can look out for a very bland series of policy statements come the next election, we will be asked to vote for this one or that because he is nice guy, whom we should trust to do the right thing.


“The smart way to keep people passive and obedient is to strictly limit the spectrum of acceptable opinion, but allow very lively debate within that spectrum – even encourage the more critical and dissident views. That gives people the sense that there’s free thinking going on, while all the time the presuppositions of the system are being reinforced by the limits put on the range of the debate.”
Noam Chomsky


Technorati Tags: , , ,

Filed under : Political Humbug
By Ken
On October 2, 2006
At 2:52 pm
Comments : 0
 
 

ENGLISH VOTES ON ENGLISH MATTERS

The Campaign for an English Parliament has just issued a full report on the devolution process, going by the title of

DEVOLUTION FOR ENGLAND

A CRITIQUE OF THE CONSERVATIVE PARTY POLICY

ENGLISH VOTES ON ENGLISH MATTERS

The report details the devolution progress to date and explores some of the problems that have been created by the New Labour devolution process.


The report argues that The Government’s devolution programme had two fundamental guiding principles:

distribution of governmental power from the centre to constituent parts.

distribution on the basis of nationhood.


Importantly it says that England was completely left out of the devolution programme.

Which is perhaps not entirely surprising considering, according to Jim Naughtie who informs us time and again in his book The Rivals, Gordon Brown was the engine behind the whole devolution campaign. „It‟s Gordon‟s passion,‟ Naughtie quotes Tony Blair as saying in 1997. „So we‟re doing it”

Instead Scotland now enjoys the best of both worlds.

It remains firmly in the Union with its status and power within it enhanced, and with increased subsidies from the English taxpayer, yet it is independent of the rest of the Union and its government in areas of really major governance.

We are not talking about minor matters. Scotland now has full self-government in the most major areas of public policy:

education, health, local government, social work, housing,

training, agriculture, fisheries and forestry, sport and the arts,

economic development including the administration of

European Structural Funds, tourism, many aspects of transport,

the legal system and law and order, most civil and criminal

law, prisons and the fire services, and various lesser matters.

It is not just an astonishing degree of independence within a Union which is denied to its other constituent nations; it is also one in which one of those other nations, namely England,

subsidises most generously.

Of the £45.3 billion spent in Scotland in 2003-4 only £34 billion was recovered in taxation.

The £11.3 billion difference, which works out at £2200 per head of population in Scotland, was paid by the UK Parliament.

If tax revenue from North Sea oil is excluded, namely £4.3 billion, there still would have been a £7 billion gap, which equates to a £281 surcharge on every English taxpayer.

One has to hand it to Brown and co. They have pulled of the biggest and brightest coup in the Union’s 300 year history.

Not only is there the gross political and constitutional injustice of the English Question

and the West Lothian Question,

There are also the financial aspects.

As we have seen, Scotland does not pay its way. Only by reason of the immensity of the grant being paid by the Exchequer out of its UK revenue to the Scottish Parliament can it afford to provide

the educational, health and social benefits it now enjoys which are not being made available in England.

There are free eye tests for all regardless of age, free personal

and social care for the elderly, highly specialist cancer

treatments available across the whole of Scotland, free bus

travel throughout Scotland and free central heating installation

for pensioners, and free prescriptions for 19-25 year olds.

Scottish university students do not pay either tuition fees or

top-up fees which in England can be as much as £3000 a year.

They don‟t pay them even if they are at an English university.

No EU students (except the English, Welsh and Northern Irish)

pay them either. English students at Scottish universities

however must pay £3600 yearly in tuition fees for four-year

degrees while Scottish (and EU) students pay nothing in

advance and just £2000 after graduation. In addition there is

the -now notorious- Barnett Formula, brought in in 1978 to

check the rise of Scottish nationalism and the SNP

(interestingly the same argument used with UK MPs to sell the

devolution legislation of 1998). By reason of that Formula

alone, each Scottish person is in receipt of at least £1300 more

per head expenditure than English people (Public Expenditure

Statistical Analyses 2005). The Formula‟s advantages over

England enjoyed by Scotland are of course enjoyed by Wales

and Northern Ireland as well in varying ways, although

Scotland‟s devolution setlement outdoes both.

The Report then explainsThe West Lothian Question” and “The English Question”

And “THE CONSERVATIVE PARTY POLICY” (EVoEM)

Before a critique of the policy “DEFECTS OF THE POLICY”

“EVoVM has two practical difficulties. The first is deciding which MPs will be entitled to vote on which bills.” The second practical difficulty is deciding which constituents will be affected by any particular bill.”


CEP argue that EVoEM will not adequately address either the West Lothian Question or the English Question but will in fact bring
UK government into a state of confusion and ridicule and possible chaos. Neither can EVoEM ever be an adequate forum for the people of England or an effective champion of their concerns. Or give England its own representation within the European Union.

Instead of a way of holding the union together EVoEM contains the seeds of the break-up of the Union. It will introduce into the House of Commons an essentially divisive, indeed destructive, element which does not exist at present.

The Union Parliament is the Union Parliament. EVoEM would turn it into something else: a part time Union Parliament and a part time English Parliament,and will not provide England with its own Executive.



Technorati Tags: , , , , ,

Filed under : The British Constitution
By Ken
On
At 10:03 am
Comments : 0
 
 

A Conflict of Rights

Within the next few months Sexual Orientation Regulations, are to be introduced following the EU Equality Act 2006, this will make it an offence for anyone providing goods, services, facilities, education or public functions to discriminate on the grounds of sexual orientation. But the Equality Act also outlaws discrimination on the grounds of religion or belief.

So what happens when one person’s liberty not to be discriminated against conflicts with another’s to express a contrary opinion and practice the rules of their religion?

There are faith groups who consider the regulations to be an infringement of their liberty to observe the convictions of their faith. Who see this not as a creation of equality, but merely the transfer of discrimination from one group to another

Although the Government has indicated that it is prepared to grant an exception from the regulations for “organised religion”, evidence of recent police action shows that their interpretation of the new laws is likely to be very strict, and only apply to actual religious services within the religious buildings.

The Lawyers Christian Fellowship has proposed an amendment to guarantee in law that adherents to Christianity, Judaism and Islam would not be forced to “promote, assist, encourage or facilitate homosexual practices”. That would mean that in day to day life they would be allowed to ignore the law.

But then why should churches have the right to do something for which the rest of us would face prosecution? Is religious opposition to homosexual behaviour any more reasonable than an atheist’s objection?

As the Telegraph says “These are the murky waters that we enter when we seek to enshrine more and more “rights” in legislation. The lawyers are about to have a field day”.



Technorati Tags: , , , ,

Filed under : Some Basic Rights
By Ken
On
At 7:39 am
Comments : 0
 
 
 

Bad Behavior has blocked 952 access attempts in the last 7 days.