OK, so how do we pay for it?

You can always tell when politicians are throwing out ideas to see how popular a policy might be when they start bandying words like 'radical' about. Some ideas sound great on the MSM, well at least until you look at the small print and ask how much?
Telegraph.

Labour will fight the next election on a pledge to cut tuition fees by £3,000 as part of a "radical" manifesto
Douglas Alexander, the shadow foreign secretary and party’s general election strategist, said a promise to cut student fees is likely to appear in a “credible and radical” manifesto as part of the party’s promise to cut the cost of living for middle class families.
It follows a call by Ed Miliband in 2011 to cut tuition fees from £9,000 to £6,000.
It comes amid mounting concerns over the health of the tuition fees system. Ministers originally expected that 28 per cent of loans would never be repaid, but that is now thought to be closer to 45 per cent . At 48 per cent experts say any benefits from raising tuition fees are cancelled out, experts say.
Mr Alexander said the rate of default was “very high” and Labour would offer a “better solution” for the country’s finances.
“This seems to be another Con-Dem policy which is simply not working.

The last bit made me smile as tuition fees were introduced by Tony Blair in 1998 and were actually a Labour Party idea in order to pay for the massive new influx of students into university, rather than simply the elite.
Seems Labour as ever wish to rewrite history and whitewash their role in it.
Now reducing student debt and regaining any monies paid to them seems like a good idea, assuming you accept the premise that we should be sending so many of them off to Uni in the first place of which it could easily be argued that we don't. My problem as ever being just how do Labour expect to pay for it? Especially when it's on top of a promise to cut middle class debt (another Labour success story)
It does strike me like it always does with socialist pipe-dreams that they simply expect the money to be found and don't actually give a thought as to what will happen if they start soaking some part of the populace to do it. Pointless going after one of their core support groups, the middle class tend to vote either one of the parties in depending on whether they want a change or not so it doesn't bear upsetting them too much and the rich simply up and leave if you hit them.
So, like Labours previous economic successes leaving the country completely spent out and future generations in hock up to the eyeballs, this has all the hallmarks of magic money tree economics where they'll spend money we haven't got to get the student vote...
When will people wake up?

Another reason to end foreign aid

And legal aid for non UK people too...
Apparently an Ethiopian farmer is using legal aid to sue the British government for giving foreign aid to the Ethiopian government because as with many African governments they are a bunch of thieving despots and have forced him to give his crops and land to them...
Mail.

An Ethiopian farmer has been given legal aid in the UK to sue Britain – because he claims millions of pounds sent by the UK to his country is supporting a brutal regime that has ruined his life.
He says UK taxpayers’ money – £1.3 billion over the five years of the coalition Government – is funding a despotic one-party state in his country that is forcing thousands of villagers such as him from their land using murder, torture and rape.
The landmark case is highly embarrassing for the Government, which has poured vast amounts of extra cash into foreign aid despite belt-tightening austerity measures at home.
Prime Minister David Cameron claims the donations are a mark of Britain’s compassion.
But the farmer – whose case is set to cost tens of thousands of pounds – argues that huge sums handed to Ethiopia are breaching the Department for International Development’s (DFID) own human rights rules.
He accuses the Government of devastating the lives of some of the world’s poorest people rather than fulfilling promises to help them. The case comes amid growing global concern over Western aid propping up corrupt and repressive regimes.

And that pretty much sums up foreign aid as both the UK public see it (mostly) and the idiot compassion bit that the political classes use to salve their conscience and big themselves up in the press. We should not be giving a penny to foreign governments, unless it's a bribe to buy our stuff, we should at least be honest about it. If we are to give aid, it should be done directly for those we are aiding and cut out the thieving kleptocratic governments en route. Mostly though I believe that whilst we have problems here, we should not be trying to sort out problems there...
As for getting legal aid, sorry, no, he's not a UK citizen and should not be given the cash to do so, if a lawyer wants to take on the case pro bono, fine, but you do not get our cash to sue us.
This is the system that the undisciplined leftards and libtards have saddled us with, full of faux compassion for anyone who wishes enrich themselves at the taxpayers expense and absolute hell for an ordinary person to fathom or deal with. This is why they need to be brought down and denied access to the levers of power. Common sense has left the UK and all we have are idiots like Cameron with their compassion and a system that gives cash to those who don't work here nor have paid into the system.
Some days you just despair.

What bloody crackdown?

Some people do come out with a load of absolute bull when it comes down to making press releases where they allow their beliefs to over ride the facts. Take the latest pronouncement by Tory Peer Lord Howell where he accuses the governments crackdown on immigration to have turned us into nasty Britain...
Telegraph.

Immigration crackdown made us 'nasty Britain', says Osborne's father-in-law
Lord Howell, a former energy minister and George Osborne's father-in-law, says gifted immigrants regard the country as 'nasty Britain'
A senior Conservative peer has launched a stinging attack on the Government's immigration policy, saying visa restrictions were creating a "nasty Britain feeling" among foreign students and businesses.
Lord Howell, a former energy minister and George Oborne's father-in-law, said businesses are being put off from coming to the UK because of a "tangle of regulation" while students are close to "despair" at the restrictions imposed on them." The policies are creating a "blot" on Britain's reputation, he said.

This is utter crud, the reason that the restrictions are in place is not to stop the gifted getting in, but the undesirables getting in and then vanishing of which the student visa system is a prime example. If anything the system is still far too lax because the EU has made it possible for anyone with an EU passport to travel here anyway and the Mediterranean countries have a nasty system of giving illegals a passport if they just go anywhere else. As English is a second language for many of them, guess where they come... yep they come to the land of benefits for all.
Until we leave the EU, this kind of abuse will go on.
We need a decent border control which counts people in and people out, we need restrictions on certain groups to make sure they don't outstay their welcome and we need a system in place where if you immigrate and don't pay in, then you get nothing back and your family back home get nothing either.
Yes we should welcome the talented with open arms, but Lord Howell doesn't seem to realise that the talented are suffering because the bloody untalented have taken advantage of the system, not because of some supposed crackdown by the government. There is no crackdown if we are still allowing immigrants in, it's as simple as that.

And how would you do that?

There are times when I think that power or the thought of power goes to some peoples heads. Either that or they think they have a good idea and want to try and force someone else to comply with it, even when that someone else isn't under their power or jurisdiction.
BBC.

A UK industry regulator has called for the law to be changed to require pornography sites to carry out age checks before granting access.
Video-on-demand watchdog Atvod said the government must act to protect children from seeing graphic adult material.
It said credit and debit card operators would be forbidden from processing payments from British customers to sites that did not comply.
But one campaigner said the action would be a "worthless gesture".

OK, first things first, credit and debit card operators may not know (or care) if the site is a porn one, the porn industry were the ones who drove the initial payment online security issues in the first place and would appear to be past masters in the plain brown package approach of using innocuous names on a bill to avoid raised eyebrows from potentially offended partners.
Second, who the hell are these people who think that they have the right to tell other who or what we can spend our money on if it isn't a crime in the first place?
Thirdly, you don't need a credit card to access porn, the internet is bloody inundated with sites that are free and do not require a credit card.
Again and again it all for the children whilst forgetting that the biggest tool to keeping kids away from images that parents don't want seen are actually the parents themselves who can if they wish set up censoring and filtering on their own access points to prevent kids from seeing stuff.
This is simply a pointless gesture by someone who wants a few headlines on the forthcoming paedogeddon if we don't do as they say (and pretty much not as they do)

Farage 1 Clegg nil

I have to admit I was surprised at how well Farage outmanoeuvred Clegg in the first of their debates last night. Granted Clegg put up a good fight, but his defence of Brussels was weak if only because he can't admit as to how far its tentacles reach into the lifeblood of this country. Plus on uncontrolled immigration and corruption he was on very dodgy ground.
Express.

NIGEL Farage emerged triumphant last night with a confident and combative performance in the first of his Euro showdowns with Nick Clegg.
The UK Independence Party leader confounded Lib Dem prejudices by proving he had done his homework on facts and figures and taking on Europhile arguments.
Mr Farage, establishing himself as a major threat to the three main Westminster parties, was rewarded with frequent applause from the studio audience.
And later a YouGov poll made him a clear winner – by 57 per cent to Mr Clegg’s 36 per cent – on who voters thought performed best.
The hour-long LBC radio debate – staged live in London and carried also on TV networks – was the first of two clashes between the anti-Brussels and pro-EU leaders.

Farage was definitely in character as a man of the people and if it is an act then it's a class act and he made Clegg look rather like the political slimeball he is. Farage also showed a far greater knowledge on how much the EU actually costs us and the myriad of rules and regulations that it foists upon us. The only path in the end open for Clegg was denial of facts and figures.
Still, there is another debate to go and I expect the boy Clegg to up his game. I suspect he was harking back to his performance in the last televised debates where he won the first one hands down, though against those clowns Cameron and Brown that couldn't have been difficult. If he can't up his game then his offer of a debate will have exploded in his face.
Some might say it already has...

A bidding war?

Ukip must be rattling some Tory cages out there if you take the media interest in everything Ukip do into consideration. A senior Tory came out bleating that Cameron musn't try to out Ukip, Ukip (impossible Cameron loves the EU) and that Farage['s pictures with a beer and ciggy are all staged...
Mail.

A senior Tory MP has accused Nigel Farage of ‘fake sincerity’ as he urged the Prime Minister not to try to ‘out-Ukip Ukip’ on immigration.
Mark Field warned his party not to get into a bidding war with Ukip on the eve of the televised debate between Mr Farage and Nick Clegg.
He said: ‘If you can fake sincerity, you’ve really got it made. There is a bit of that to the smoking a fag and having a pint of beer’.
Mr Field also accused Ukip – whose leader is regularly pictured drinking real ale in pubs, or with a cigarette – of wanting to stick ‘two fingers up to the entire political class’.

Anyone who wants to stick two fingers up at the political classes is OK by me.
Fake sincerity though? That's what politicians try to do in spades isn't it? It's something that they regularly try to do with press releases and photo opportunities. There was a lot of it going on over the recent floods where politicians would turn up, say a few words on how terrible it is and then leave, relieved to get away from the oiks who live there.
I personally think that the Tories won't get into a bidding war simply because their leadership cannot conceive or concede the so called middle ground which the political classes of all parties occupy and go out to where the voters real concerns are, which is partly the territory that Ukip occupy.
It would mean the Tory leadership leaving their comfort zone and having to break with the EU whose directives their government still rubber stamps without debating them.
As to whether Farage is faking it? I don't know, but at least he does it better than Cameron, Clegg or Milliband who are all bland little EU drones dressed up in different colours but essentially the same.
A vote for a mainstream party is a vote to continue the damned system they love, it's really not worth voting for them...

Gosh, that's surprising... not

Getting tough is apparently not the same for the government as it is for the rest of us, in fact getting tough appears to be simply a matter of words then back to normal. Mind you, when it comes to deporting foreign criminals, their hands are tied, if only because they lack the guts necessary to remove the Human Rights Act.
Mail.

Almost 4,200 foreign rapists, killers and other criminals who should have been kicked out of the UK are walking the streets after a surge in failed deportation cases.
The number of overseas convicts who are being released from jail without being deported has soared by a fifth in the past year, despite a series of promises by ministers.
More than 30 are walking out of jail and into the community every week.

Yep, they talk the talk but can't walk the walk as the lawyers will hold up any deportation for years if necessary and no doubt will even demand that a child molester ought to have his right to a family life, despite his family often enough being the ones that turned them in.
Yes the legal system only applies the laws, but often enough stretches them beyond recognition at times with precedent. Yet mostly that is down to badly written law and there's no doubt in my mind that the HRA is an unnecessary badly written law.
A society run by ordinary people wouldn't tolerate any foreigner who had committed a crime that led to imprisonment being allowed to remain afterwards, they'd be out before they'd even had a chance to place a foot outside prison.
But sadly the political classes are not ordinary people and rarely if ever come into contact with these scum.
Until we rid ourselves of the political classes, we won't get a decent society, it really has become that simple.

Not quite grasping the market...

Apparently some French people in charge of Champagne believe that somehow or other cheap champagne is ruining the image of the product...
Telegraph.

Supermarket cut-price deals are “a parasite on the image of champagne”, according to a trade association representing producers.
Last Christmas, Asda and Tesco sold exclusive label champagne at £10 a bottle – less than half price. The supermarkets also slashed the cost of branded labels, with 71 per cent of the total volume sold at reduced prices.
But the drastic discounts being offered have been criticised by the producers’ professional body, the Comité Interprofessionnel du Vin de Champagne (CIVC). Its communications director Thibaut le Mailloux told Off Licence News (OLN) magazine: “It’s just a marketing ploy. It puts in the head of the consumer that champagne can be made at that price.
“It’s at the expense of champagne. It’s a parasite on the image of champagne. Retailers are shooting themselves in the foot by downgrading the category and making consumers expect a price where producers and retailers can’t make a margin that’s sustainable.
“The message is not to make everything as cheap as possible, but to give balanced offers to consumers.”

 Do you get the feeling that they don't wish their product to be accessible to the peasants?
Now I don't know where the supermarkets got their product from, but I'd be willing to bet that they didn't make a loss out of the deal. They might have used it as a loss leader (unlikely it's not something everyone would buy) but in the end M. Thibaut le Mailloux doesn't quite appear to grasp the ethos of the supermarkets whose task is to sell as much as possible and make as much as possible and by selling champagne at £10 a bottle they appear to have found a market for it rather than have it gather dust on the shelves at £20 a bottle. I hardly need mention that you aren't going to get many wine connoisseurs in a supermarket going over the shelves for cheap plonk either.
Champagne is what it is, a celebratory drink on the whole and its image such as it is, is hardly likely to be damaged by selling it cheap. After all you can buy many just as worthy competitors as cheap which can taste just as good from fizzy sweet to fizzy vinegar depending on the persons taste.
Once again we have some who want the world what they want it to be (even if they price their products out of the market) rather than what it now is.

Farewell and good luck

Today Lady QM and I said farewell to her daughter, husband and their two children. They are off on the adventure of a lifetime having got work in New Zealand and permission for residency granted assuming he keeps working for two years.
New Zealand, a country where they won't let you in unless you can speak English. A country where they won't let you in without a skill they want. A country more or less the size of the UK but with only 4 million people whose lifestyle is far more relaxed and more akin to England in the fifties and sixties than England today with all the trouble the government has allowed to waltz in and tell us how to live our lives whilst having to tolerate some of their foibles because it's cultural. A country where its labour party is all about looking after its citizens rather than trying to replace them. A country where the UK politicians love of the EU is regarded as something to deride as utter folly.
A country that I'm doing my level best to get a job in, or retire too.

Two sides of the same coin

Apparently the BBC's choice of economic specialist, the ex TUC member who is expected to be unbiased of the Tories economic plans had a dalliance with Fascism and the BNP when he was younger. Some people are bigging this up as if it means he was a right winger at some stage...
Telegraph.

When a TUC official was hired by Newsnight as its new economics correspondent, the BBC faced familiar accusations of Left-wing bias.
But Duncan Weldon has admitted that he once had a brief, “witless” dalliance with fascism, having been an admirer of Oswald Mosley when he was a boy.
As a 19-year-old student, he wrote an article for his university newspaper headlined “I was a fascist”, in which he described attending British National Party meetings and taking part in a “violent” demonstration against asylum seekers.
Writing under the pseudonym Sam Healey in the Oxford University student newspaper Cherwell in 2002, he wrote that after attending several BNP meetings: “I was starting to consider myself a Fascist – a patriot – one of the few who understood that in order to regain what we once had, we may have to take distasteful methods.”

Of course the Telegraph fails to mention that Fascism is actually a left wing creed developed by Benito Mussolini from his Marxist roots. The average leftard takes their roots from the various strands of 'international' socialism and the 'we are all brothers' style evinced by that fractured splintered movement. Fascism is a 'national' socialism which places the nation or nationality of its proponents first and foremost. But both are basically of the left and some of their policies you couldn't get a fag paper between.
So when I'm told that someone on the left had a flirtation with Fascism, I'm not terribly surprised, the only reason Fascism has a bad name is because it's proponents lost WW2 and no, Fascism should not be mistaken for Nazism another left wing creed as the two are distinctly different.
That Duncan Weldon went from Fascism to bog standard socialism is no surprise at all, it wasn't that much of a leap.

Keep your friends close...

And your enemies closer.
Apparently Cameron wants Boris Johnson back in the house of commons as he believes he can do more good there...
A good few of us would probably believe that Cameron wants him back in the Commons where he can emasculate him.
Express.

BORIS Johnson needs to return to Parliament so the Conservatives can get a "great striker on the pitch", Prime Minister David Cameron has said.
Mr Cameron said it is up to the Mayor of London whether he completes his term at City Hall until 2016, but that he wants Mr Johnson "on the team".
Running in the General Election next year is "what I think" Mr Johnson should do, Mr Cameron said.
"I want him to get back in Parliament. I think he's great," he added.
"It's a bit like football - if you have got a great striker you want him on the pitch.
"It's up to him. He can complete as Mayor, or he can stay on as Mayor and come back to the House [of Commons]. I want him on the team."
Following mounting speculation about Mr Johnson wanting to become prime minister, Mr Cameron said: "It wouldn't be a great job to have if people didn't want it.

God alone knows why anyone would want to be Prime Minister, have you seen what you have to work with? Backstabbing politicians, obscuranting civil servants and an out of control public sector.
Yet for all that I do believe that Cameron want Johnson back where he can keep an eye on him as the Mayoral role give him far too much power and publicity. Back in Parliament Cameron can apply the thumbscrews of the whips, outside of it, Johnson has his own publicity machine and can generate his own headlines hence being far more popular than Cameron himself (not particularly hard I must admit)
Johnson may well lead the Tories one day, but he really needs to keep Cameron at arms length at least until the 1922 Committee have done their work in removing him. After that untainted by the current regime he may stand a chance, until then he's better off out.

The man's an idiot

I read this in the Mail this morning and whilst I always have reservations about their agenda, this little gem confirmed my own suspicions about the type of politician Millipede E is. After watching his budget response speech yesterday I had to wonder just what the hell he was on, I know off the cuff speeches about something which is kept under fairly close wraps other than the odd bit of misinformation and throwaway hints is difficult, but the absolute mess he made of it suggested that he had been completely caught out...
Mail.

Ed Miliband’s Budget response flopped yesterday because he had based it on misleading predictions on Twitter, according to Ed Balls.
The Shadow Chancellor said Labour’s leader had to tear up large sections of his speech when rumours of what George Osborne would announce in Parliament proved false.
He said Mr Miliband hastily inserted jibes about Education Secretary Michael Gove’s attack on Etonian influence in Downing Street.
Mr Miliband was widely criticised for spending 16 minutes reading out political attack lines while barely mentioning the content of the Budget. Mr Balls was similarly derided for his response to the Autumn Statement in December.

That's right, he had written pages of a speech based on a twitter rumour...
Twitter, the last bastion of celebrity gossip and 150 word leftard thinking in which the truth is often only present by mistake. The social media that more or less proves the maxim that a Lie can be halfway around the world before the truth has even got its boots on. Where people are prepared to believe anything based on their own prejudices and go on to forward it to various followers without actually checking to see if it's true.
Yes, Millipede E based his entire budget speech on a twitter rumour and expects to (and possibly may)  become our next prime minister.
Ye gods what have we done to deserve this?

Interesting if flawed poll

Interesting little poll found at Not a Sheep's place.

As he points out it's a bit limited and slightly flawed in that there's not enough depth to the questions.

I am surprised just how close the Tories and Ukip are on various issues, but a tad alarmed as to how close on others the BNP approach me, considering they are essentially a left wing mob, I suppose it's their anti-EU and immigrant stance that brings them close, though there's no way in hell they'd get my vote unless they were the only independent choice.

Link.

Guess it's Ukip then...

Sick

The Human Rights Act, one of the most odious pieces of legislation foisted upon us by the previous Labour government and naturally supported to the hilt by the Lib Dems as it's necessary to have it and remain in the EU. No one in a civilised society believes criminals should have no rights, but the HRA gives them exactly the same rights as a none criminal and this is where the trouble starts...
Express.

A SUDANESE rapist who preyed on girls as young as 13 is suing Justice Secretary Chris Grayling over “frustration and anxiety” caused by a delay to his parole hearing.
Adil Aboulkadir, 38, was jailed for a minimum of four years for his part in the abuse of three vulnerable girls.
He was said to have led a gang of five Darfur refugees who groomed victims aged 14 and 13 in Dartford, Kent.
Aboulkadir had already launched a series of taxpayer-funded ­legal actions which could cost Britain more than £250,000 and block moves to deport him for years.
Now he wants damages, saying his human rights were violated because he had to wait seven months for a court date to argue for his freedom.
Taxpayers paid £125,000 for a legally-aided lawyer and ­interpreter during the gang’s trial at Maidstone Crown Court in 2008. Aboulkadir was convicted of rape and sexual ­activity with a child. But he convinced the High Court that his rights were “arguably” violated by a failure to consider release immediately his minimum jail term ended.
He was freed 16 months ­after the four-year tariff expired. Since 2013 he has been in an immigration centre, fighting a bid to deport him.

I actually feel rather sick at having this monster in the same county as me...
Any sane system would have had him deported the second he left prison, any decent system would have had the child rapist take a bullet in the back of the head the moment he was found guilty of his rape jihad. But no, our system gives the monster a chance at milking the taxpayer because the system hurt his feelings by taking too long.
This man should never have been allowed into the UK, he should not have been allowed to remain, but the lunacy that is the HRA which the government won't remove so in love with the EU that it is gives this scum the chance to stay here and possibly be a risk to other children.
This is socialism in action, this is why the left should be regarded in the same light as Nazis, simply unable to be trusted with what's decent and right.
This guy needs hanging, as do his whole legal team and all the politicians who voted for and desire to keep the HRA on the statute books...

That long?

Seems in a perfect day, most blokes would spend four hours making love and three and a half hours working...

Mail.

Men would spend more than four hours having sex and only three and a half working during their 'ideal day' according to a new survey.
Research has found that men would divide their ideal day spending four hours and 19 minutes making love, three hours and 36 minutes working, with three hours and 22 minutes set aside for seeing friends and family.
They would also spend two hours and 38 minutes eating and drinking, while grooming would only take up 29 minutes.
The study also found that men would spend the rest of their remaining time on their ideal day sleeping.

I don't know where they found these men, but three and a half hours working? Where's the fun in that?
Yes I've had some fun working, but generally the fun is an adjunct to working and related to the banter and occasional practical joke with those I work with. Work itself and doing a good job gives me a sense of satisfaction, but not to the extent that I'd include it in a perfect day...
Spending time watching my favourite team win yes... work? Hell no. 

You what?

Now this might be a joke in poor taste, but as this is a politician we're talking about, it seems a little unlikely and if so shows a grasp of reality that's seriously skewed...
Mail.

George Osborne was accused of ‘insulting’ middle-class voters last night after claiming that making them pay higher tax rates is ‘good for them’ because it makes them feel successful – and more likely to back the Tories.
Conservative MPs were stunned when the Chancellor made the explosive remark at a secret meeting at his Downing Street office, the contents of which have been leaked to The Mail on Sunday.
The disclosure came as Mr Osborne is poised to announce a Budget boost for the low-paid by raising the threshold for income tax to £10,500, while rejecting pleas to stop more middle earners being dragged into the 40p tax band.
MPs at the meeting reacted with horror when he told them: ‘Let’s not forget there are advantages in more people paying tax at 40p.
‘It means they feel they are a success and joining the aspirational classes.
'That means they are more likely to think like Conservatives and vote Conservative.
'If they are paying 40p tax they have a greater interest in cutting Government spending because they are paying for it. All the polling evidence suggests I am right.’

Now I suppose there could be some idiots out there who might regard reaching the 40% of your earnings stolen margin out there a sign of success, I meant it does mean you're getting past £40K+ .
But only a politician would think along the lines of those people welcoming having 40% of their earnings being grabbed by the government and pissed up the wall on various projects.
People might very well have an interest in cutting government spending, but only if they see the direct results of this and those results are not yet forthcoming, particularly as what they gain in the proposed tax relief is pitiful. Nor whilst those on minimum wage still pay tax are those tax cuts going to be enough.
Also a politicians idea on cutting government spending is never going to match my or others ideas on cutting government spending. I'd get rid of foreign aid, quango's fake charities, gut the NHS and others of middle managers and cape the rate at which town halls can pay an executive at that of the prime minister.
But no politician will do that in the mainstream parties, they just joke about people being glad to reach a higher tax bracket...

A question of balance

The BBC is always telling us that it has to show balance in its reporting, believing that somehow if it gets complains about bias from both sides of an issue then it has struck that balance. Truth it has to be said not featuring in their quest for balance. Over the years though it has become increasingly obvious that what the BBC perceives as the middle ground is somewhat to the left of what most people believe is the middle ground hence the BBC's often uncritical view of what the Labour Party says or does. By staffing itself with left wingers, the BBC's bias became almost a self fulfilling prophecy...
Telegraph.

A new row about alleged BBC bias has broken out after one of the corporation’s flagship news programmes hired a union official to report on the economy.
The BBC’s Newsnight programme announced on Friday that it had appointed Duncan Weldon, as the programme’s Economics Correspondent.
Mr Weldon was until recently the senior economist at the Trades Union Congress. He also used to work for Harriet Harman, Labour’s deputy leader and wrote a blog.
The announcement was made on Twitter, the social media networking site, by Ian Katz, the programme’s editor and a former deputy editor ofThe Guardian.
Mr Katz described Mr Weldon as “one of most exciting and original economic thinkers around”. Mr Weldon replied: “A huge thank you to everyone for their congratulations. I'm pretty excited & looking forward to getting started.”
But the Conservative party said it was outraged by the appointment which it sees as further evidence of Labour bias at the corporation.
Officials are still fuming after the corporation appointed James Purnell, a Labour Cabinet minister under Gordon Brown, as its director of strategy and digital last year.
One Tory source said: “Arthur Scargill or Len McCluskey would have been a more objective appointment. This is a ‘Grade A’ BBC stitch up.”

It's a bit like going to a communist for an objective overview of the capitalist system really. You can hardly expect a balanced view from a man who has based his ethos on what passes for socialist economics (the type of economics that doesn't work after the money runs out)
If you really want to see what a real economist with an actual grasp of reality as opposed to wishful thinking thinks I suggest reading Tim Worstall in the side column of this blog, particularly the labels marked ragging on Richie in which he regularly takes to task a left wing economist.
If the BBC wish to avoid accusations of bias (something they don't seem too) then choosing a trades union representative, to comment on the economy as run by the Tories (more or less) does not seem to be the way to do it.
You'd think that getting someone in to report on the economy you'd choose someone who is markedly neutral with regards to politics.
That the BBC have chosen otherwise tells you all you need to know about them.

Seems there's hope for the young

One of the odd maxims around which I think goes back to Churchill says that “If you're not a liberal at twenty you have no heart, if you're not a conservative at forty you have no brain.” mostly based around the view that real life and having to pay your way soon knocks the idea of paying for someone else's follies or life style out of all but the most brain dead leftard.
Still as with a lot of things a generation will look at what their parents or grandparents did or do and change their ways... if only at times to be contrary.
Mail.

Young people want to see tougher punishments for convicted criminals, a new poll has revealed.
More than seven out of ten of those aged between 18 and 30 want early release for those serving life sentences to be scrapped, while six in 10 believe prison conditions are not tough enough.
Surprisingly, they are also more likely than older people to support hard-line sentences for teenagers.

Seems a lot of the young are actually catching up with us so called right wingers, if only because they see where the idiocy of libtard/leftard thinking has brought us. Granted they'll mature, however it may just be that their views harden and veer more towards a true just system rather than the namby pamby all must have prizes and no one must lose idiocy that has pervaded the thinking of the left to the utter detriment of society as a whole save for certain pets of theirs who get all the best deals anyway and are ignored as it's a 'cultural' thing.
As to whether it will do a great deal for the UK in the long term, only time will tell as more and more young people are divorcing themselves from the political system and wish nothing to do with the chancers who seek their votes.
This could lead the way to some sort of extremist demagogue leading us to an even worse society, but that's a chance we'll have to take and it would probably be better than some sort of left wing anti-paradise.
Either way I foresee interesting times ahead.

None of our business

Apparently the people of the west's reluctance to engage in wars in foreign countries will encourage our enemies to exploit us according to a top Army general...
Telegraph.

A “moral disarmament” in the West that has resulted in a reluctance to engage in conflicts will be exploited by Britain’s enemies, the head of the army has warned.
General Sir Peter Wall said a decade of “politically awkward campaigning” over Iraq and Afghanistan has led to an appetite to “defend on the goal line”.
But adversaries will take advantage of such “reticence” and may have already changed their expectation on how the UK will react to provocation, he warned.
Although he did not name Russia, the comments come at a time when President Vladimir Putin is testing the West’s mettle in a tense stand-off over Ukraine.

You'll have to pardon me the suspicion that if we aren't involved in armed conflict that Sir Peter Wall might well be out of a job...
The thing is though yes we know we have enemies and another of my suspicions is that the government invited the bastards in to live amongst us in the form of islamics. If we are to be in a war then I want the army here to deal with those whom I just know would love to turn us into one of those misogynistic, homophobic barbaric shitholes they believe are the best possible worlds in the form of a shariah run state.
Unlike Sir Peter Wall most of the UK public are now coming to the conclusion that endless wars with distant foreign states are really none of our business. The Ukraine is none of our business, Iraq was none of our business, Afghanistan should have been levelled back to the stone age (save only that might have been an improvement) for their involvement in training terrorists and then left alone to get on with things and levelled again if they tried something stupid again.
These countries are not worth the loss of life of a single soldier, their problems are not our problems unless they directly attack us, hell we shouldn't even bother with aid as all it does is keep the utter bastards in charge rich and on top rather than encouraging their people to rise up and get rid of them.
No, Sir Peter Wall is wrong, they can plot but our response should be to ignore them unless they directly attack us and then our response should be to level their infrastructure to give them so many problems at home that they'll leave us alone.
And hell no should we take in their refugees.

Truth hurts

Not too far from me in Kent there are a series of stables and stud farms for horses, there's a little industry going here to breed a product that (some) people clearly want and presumably enjoy. I gather it's both expensive to do and I'm told horses are a costly hobby both to keep and maintain. I also realise that people do not like to think of the actual mechanics of the industry so to speak, for in essence an industry it is...
Mail.

A star jockey prompted outrage yesterday by playing down the death of a horse during a big race.
After spectators and TV viewers watched in horror as Our Conor suffered a fatal fall at the Cheltenham Festival, Ruby Walsh said the animal was replaceable.
The 34-year-old Irishman said: ‘Horses are horses. You can replace a horse’.
The comments by Walsh, who has twice won the Grand National, provoked a furious response from animal rights campaigners. They described his words as callous and lacking respect for the horse.
Mr Walsh, who reached a record 40 wins at the Festival after a double-victory yesterday, added: ‘It’s sad, but horses are animals, outside your back door. Humans are humans. They are inside your back door.
‘You can replace a horse. You can’t replace a human being. That’s my feeling on it.’
The comments sparked fury from animal rights campaigners and are likely to reignite the debate over whether horse-racing is an unnecessarily cruel sport.

Now as to whether horse racing is a cruel sport or not, I simply do not know. I suspect some horses may enjoy being raced but that in many places it's reached the stage where the money is far more important than the actual pleasure and a bit like Olympic athletes the fun at the top is replaced by the dedication to get there and remain there and the horse is simply one of the tools of the trade.
That said, Ruby Walsh is correct, the way horses are bred means there's always another one ready willing and able (the stud farm not the horse) to be supplied to a jockey. Yes horses are living and deserve to be treat with respect, but from the viewpoint of the racing industry they are a replaceable product in the way that a cycle is a replaceable product in the Tour de France.
I'm pretty sure that the animal rights groups out there would love to close the racing industry down, I doubt they've considered what will happen to the stud farms or their product if they succeed though. I suspect they'd be outraged at the massive cull that would occur if they got their way, though somewhat less outraged at the loss of jobs and livelihoods for the people involved.
So, they can be outraged all they like, truth though is that Walsh is correct and words are simply just that, words, they may believe them to be callous, but I doubt the horse cares, only people care about words and they are often enough incapable of dealing with the truth.

Maths or Reading doesn't appear to be your strong point does it?

One of the signs of a failing state is the government funding its own activities via the public sector to the detriment of the private sector (the part that actually generates income) so despite a so called wage freeze it comes as no surprise to discover that the public sector still is growing and on average earns 15% more than an equivalent job in the private sector (not to mention the pension and job security perks)
Still the figures from the Office of National Statistics (ONS) were seized upon by the TUC as proof that the public sector earns less than the private sector.
Express.

PUBLIC sector workers still earn more than private sector staff – despite three years of austerity-driven wage restraint, official figures showed yesterday.
On average, state-paid workers get nearly 15 per cent more pay, according to the Office for National Statistics.
The ONS based its data on its Annual Survey of Hours and Earnings, which looks at one per cent of all tax returns.
Its calculations did not factor in the self-employed, overtime pay, pensions, company cars or health insurance.
On average, public sector workers in 2013 were paid £16.28 an hour – 14.5 per cent higher than the private company average of £14.16.
Comparing median pay – the middle range of pay rates being sampled – public sector workers got 35 per cent, or £3.67 an hour, more than private sector staff.
TUC general secretary Frances O’Grady said: “Not only do public sector workers now earn less than staff in the private sector, they also face greater job insecurity as hundreds of ­thousands are set to go in the coming years.”

Yes, Frances O'Grady seems to believe that 15% more or in certain instances 35% more actually means that the public sector workers are being paid less. One wonders what her school report card said for maths, probably something along the lines of 'could do a lot better' or somesuch.
Whilst there are some areas in which we need a public sector, you do have to wonder why we need one quite so large (although the EU has something to do with it) still it sucks the taxes from the areas which make a profit and distributes it to those who do not and in some cases are not good value for money.
Politicians often talk about pruning public sector spending, I maintain that taking a chainsaw to it (particular middle and higher management) would be the preferred option as they seem to be costing us an awful lot in order to see we get value for money.
Still it is interesting to see the leftard spin on getting paid less whilst actually being paid more.
For given values of interesting....

397,000 reasons to leave

I'm not opposed to immigration (on my terms) nor am I opposed to the free movement of labour, what I am opposed to is the economic migration of immigrants to gain access to the UK's benefits system which under EU law we have to provide to EU citizens in exactly the same manner that we provide our own unemployed.
Express.

THE growing popularity of Britain as a haven for economic migrants has been exposed in figures showing the lives of almost 400,000 foreign-born residents are funded by the taxpayer.
New Home Office statistics reveal that 397,000 non-UK nationals received handouts in February 2013 – a rise of nearly 110,000 from 288,720 in the five years since 2008.
But the true number could be even greater as the details are not yet available for the past 12 months.
Ukip spokesman Tim Aker said: “This shows the Government has virtually no control over our borders.
“It shows how broken our migration system is – and the longer this is allowed to go on the more chaotic the situation will get.
“We need to be outside the EU in order to have full control over our borders so we know who is in the UK and who is deserving of benefits.”
It was revealed that net UK migration rose to 212,000 in the year to September 2013, pushing it further away from Prime Minister David Cameron’s target of below 100,000 by 2015.

The government aided and abetted by the previous government  has no control whatsoever over immigration, just look at their pathetic attempts to remove illegal immigrant criminals. The floodgates were opened under Labour in an attempt to rub the 'rights' nose in multiculturalism the socialist wet dream that has proven to be a nightmare as taxpayers are becoming increasingly angry about paying for those who come here and do not work, indeed have no intentions of working. Every day it seems some bloody twat of a politician comes on the MSM declaring something has to be done about immigration knowing fine bloody well that owing to our EU membership there's absolutely sod all they can do without it. They talk the talk as opinion polls tell them it's a voter concern, but they cannot walk the walk as the leadership of their party are EUphiles to the bloody core.
Yes I know Ukip are not everyone's cup of tea and they do have a hell of a lot of oddballs who appear at times not to know how the EU actually works... or indeed real life.
But if not Ukip, then who?
There is no chance the Tories, Labour or especially the Lib Dems will ever allow us to leave the EU.
Vote for them and you vote to perpetuate the nightmare they've created for us...

Watermelon lunacy

The Green Party in Brighton have come up with a wizard proposal to help criminals reintegrate into society once they are released form prison. They believe that having committed a serious crime that leads to a prison sentence should not be grounds for eviction from a council house...
Express.

COUNCIL chiefs have provoked fury with a “crackpot” proposal to save convicts’ council homes until they get out of prison.
Criminals would be allowed to walk straight back into their state-funded council house after serving their sentences, under plans from Brighton councillors.
They hope the controversial move will help offenders to “reintegrate” back into society, although they admit it could make the seaside town a “preferred destination” for villains.
Details of the Green-run council’s plan have angered campaigners at a time when there are thousands of hard-working families on Brighton’s council house waiting list.

It's pretty much a classic leftard move as evinced by the socialist movement in the UK where the rights of the criminal are always put ahead of the victim or in this case people in Brighton who have committed no crimes and are on the waiting list for a property.
I don't know what it is about politicians and the legal systems pandering to criminals, perhaps it's a case of like sticking to like. All I know is that it's causing people to switch off from politics if they don't move away from mainstream parties.
In a decent society you'd want to make sure crime does not pay, does anyone think we live in a decent society any more?
No we live in a society where the political classes are thieves and rogues, where the judiciary will twist the law to make sure the victims get no justice and where the indigenous populations rights are stripped away in favour of those who have come from elsewhere.
And then they wonder why people get angry and people will not engage with the system...

Jobsworths

The world is a weird place, give someone a modicum of power and a few rules to hide behind and  common sense just goes out the window. Sure humans are territorial, but you'd think if a crime had been committed then a rule would not be supplied to tell someone to their fasce that due to the Data Protection Act you can't tell them who stole your property...
Express.

STAFF at a GPs’ surgery have refused to name a mother who brazenly stole an expensive pram – for “data protection reasons”.
Police hunting the crook have been reduced to trying to trace her by releasing a CCTV image, despite the fact that her name is well known to employees at the practice.
The woman turned up at the surgery with her own child in a cheap pram.
But she left with the infant in mother-of-two Hayley Skidmore’s £300 pushchair, a limited-edition black Maclaren buggy.
When police arrived surgery workers immediately recognised the thief on CCTV.
But in a move branded “ridiculous” yesterday, they refused to tell officers the woman’s name saying it would break data protection and patient confidentiality laws.
Miss Skidmore, 26, of Cadbury Heath, Bristol, who was at the Cadbury Heath Health Centre on February 5 with her son Lewis, aged one, said: “I think it’s vile that a mother could do that to another mother. I’m still in shock about it.
“The manager told me she had been told not to reveal the name because of the Data Protection Act. I don’t understand it. Obviously the woman who stole my pram was there for an appointment but giving her name to police would have nothing to do with her private medical information – it’s about a crime.
“She should be prosecuted. She shouldn’t be allowed to get away with something like that.”

I'm pretty sure the Data Protection Act is only to prevent access to confidential records, not prevent identification of a theft on the premises. However it does appear that the staff are using a ruling to prevent the police carrying out their duties by simply giving them a name. I don't believe the patients records will need viewing, simply a means to find the thief rather than rely on video evidence.
However interpretation of the Act and its consequences does appear to give jobsworths a whole new level of power to play with and refusing to cooperate is a hallmark of a jobsworth in action. Never mind common sense, rules is rules and my interpretation of them makes me a little tin god, or so I believe they think.
I suspect the police will find the woman, it may be too late to save the buggy of course, it might have been sold on. Yet they could have had it sorted within hours, not days or weeks.
Yet because a manager decides that a name, is covered by the Act, rather than the record, someone has to suffer.
Welcome to the UK....

Well you would say that wouldn't you?

There has recently been a spate of Tory attacks on Ukip, mostly down to nerves about the upcoming EU elections and Ukip sweeping the board where Tory seats are concerned. Still this one takes some beating in the histrionics stakes...
Mail.

Some members of the UK Independence Party are ‘literally akin to the Nazis’, according to a Tory MP.
In an incendiary attack ahead of the European elections, Robert Halfon said the anti-EU party had played a helpful role in ‘cleansing’ the Conservatives of people with extreme views.
Mr Halfon, an ally of Chancellor George Osborne and Tory chairman Grant Shapps, cited the example of UKIP immigration spokesman Gerard Batten, who believes that British Muslims should sign a special code of conduct rejecting violence.
Mr Halfon, who is Jewish, said: ‘To me there are two kinds of UKIP – the [former defence spokesman] Godfrey Bloom guy who’s like a cross between Sid James and Bernard Manning, and then there’s a much more sinister element, like the MEP who said every Muslim has got to sign a declaration of non-violence, which to me is literally akin to the Nazis saying Jews should wear a yellow star.
‘I genuinely find it abhorrent and frightening.’

You'd think a Jewish person would have extreme caution about citing the yellow star that the Nazi's made Jews wear as using it in this case is both derogatory to Ukip, but also dilutes the effect for Jews. Now I don't believe Ukip are right to expect muslims to sign a code of conduct, if only because their quran supersedes any document that conflicts it and the quran is choc full of violence and how to treat the infidel once you're on top.
It does seem strange that a party full of thieves would attack another party for its extreme views, most of which are misrepresented. The recent furore about a woman Ukip candidate being a case in point, trying to make her out to be racist and a bigot when at the end of the day she stuck up for freedom of choice of the individual in that people ought to have the right to refuse to serve anyone they like, it's their problem if they lose business, but underlined a basic freedom the state has removed in its desire to force us to comply with its own standards.
Goodness knows Ukip aren't perfect and some of its members are naive as well as ill informed about the EU, but the question that you need to ask is 'if not Ukip, then who?' No other political party has a hope in hell of breaking the hold of the big three and removing us from the EU.
The desperation of the Tories is evident if that's the best Mr Halfon can do....

The 'should' word

You can spot an authoritatian by the language they use, they'll move from could, would or should directly to 'must' and drop in all sorts of reasons as to the where's and why's of it from 'for the sake of the children' to the ever perennial 'it's bad for you' something that's rolled out for everything from alcohol, salt, water, sugar, fatty foods etc.
Telegraph.

Sugar consumption should be halved to help reduce health problems such as obesity and tooth decay, the World Health Organisation (WHO) has warned.
The WHO set out draft guidance advising a dramatic reduction in sugar intake amid growing evidence that it contributes to chronic diseases.
The move follows calls by some leading scientists and campaigners for the current recommended daily limits on sugar intake to be halved to 5 per cent of an individual’s overall calorie consumption – the equivalent of six “level” teaspoons a day for the average adult.

It's almost like they use a template to make a move on any product they disapprove of or feel that people enjoy a little too much. Thing is your body needs sugar for quick release energy, granted there are problems with over-indulgence, but those ought to be dealt with by the person over-indulging once they realise they have a problem. It's the same principle with alcoholism, the alcoholic has to realise they have a problem and want to do something about it.
In the case of kids, it's the job of the parents to deal with healthy diet, that some parents don't is either down to laziness or economics, it's often far cheaper to buy the unhealthy processed food than something healthy due to the fact that processed foods require various items in them to prolong shelf life which means a lot of companies will look to their profits and not sell anything that won't spend a decent amount of time on the shelf.
Trying to force someone to comply is a regular trick of the state, education is the key here. Raising the price and hectoring people simply gets their backs up, expert warnings when read properly often aren't, they're simply the desire of the authoritarian to control people.
Until people are educated and want to do something about their diet, nothing will happen.

Tax, it's their solution to everything

Tax is the blunt instrument politicians bring to every problem, real or imagined. Tobacco, fizzy drinks, cars, party funding, you name it, sooner or later they'll want to tax it... for our own good of course...
BBC.

A sugar tax may have to be introduced to curb obesity rates, the chief medical officer for England has said.
Dame Sally Davies told a committee of MPs that unless the government was strong with food and drink manufacturers, it was unlikely they would reformulate their products.
She said she believed "research will find sugar is addictive", and that "we may need to introduce a sugar tax".
The food industry said it was working on reducing sugar in products.
Speaking to the health select committee, Dame Sally said: "We have a generation of children who, because they're overweight and their lack of activity, may well not live as long as my generation.
"They will be the first generation that live less, and that is of great concern."

Translation, we may have a problem with the slaves not living as long, answer tax their favourite foods, it won't work but it'll mean more cash for fact finding trips to the Bahamas's.
It really ought to be none of the governments business what we eat save only in hygiene regulations making sure it's safe to eat and not poisonous. Unfortunately the government is paying taxpayers cash to fake charities like Sustain (advises the government on the food and farming industry) to tell it to do something it wants to control and make it look like its impartial advice.
If the government wants to do something about health, it could drop the ridiculous amount of unnecessary courses on the national curriculum, religion, race studies, sexual studies etc and make the kids run around the non-existent sports fields they all sold off.
Exercise will do far more for kids than diet, at that stage in their lives as they can burn off all the sugar. Good diet is only really important for adults, particularly those who aren't of a sporting bent.
Still as far as the government is concerned an advisor is telling them to tax more. That's all they want to hear.

The biter bit

I read with a profound sense of satisfaction this morning that one of the architects behind the governments internet censoring filters had been arrested for viewing child porn.
Mail.

One of David Cameron's closest aides has resigned after being arrested on child pornography allegations.
Patrick Rock has been closely involved in drawing up Government policy on internet porn filters.
He quit after the Prime Minister learned he was at the centre of a police probe over images of child abuse.
Detectives from the National Crime Agency searched No 10 and examined IT systems and offices used by Mr Rock, deputy director of the Downing Street policy unit.
Mr Rock was a protege of Margaret Thatcher and has held a series of senior posts in the Conservative Party. He has been close to Mr Cameron for many years.
Described as the Prime Minister's 'policy fixer', the unmarried 62-year-old had been tipped as a leading contender for a Conservative peerage only weeks ago.
His arrest and resignation from Downing Street, where he has worked since 2011, will send shockwaves through the party's high command. The Prime Minister is said to be 'extremely shocked'.

Not that I'm in favour of child porn or have any desire to watch it, but I very much believe thar the government would sooner or later use the filters it wants to screen out other stuff that they don't want us to see. It's mostly because I believe the government simply cannot be trusted to not look out for its own interests in that it would prevent us from viewing anything about expense abuse coupling their internet filter with the Hutton report.
It is in the governments interest to keep us ignorant of what's actually going on in the world from corporatism, the EU,  islamism, immigration, scandals and suchlike and the internet porn filter is merely the thin end of the wedge in my opinion.
I do hope the guy (if found guilty) gets a severe sentence, but I doubt it will prevent the government from extending its tentacles into every aspect of our lives rather than insisting that it's our job to deal with problems including that of reporting child porn and making sure our kids don't see it by monitoring their web access.
People really need to get it into their heads that the state is not and never will be their friend...

Utterly illiberal

I often have a go at the left for its various illiberal tendencies, its generally a target rich environment as their anti-establishment beliefs often lead them into alliances with people whom most would regard as monsters. But the left are not alone in their desire to make the world a better place by enslaving or controlling us all, step forward Boris Johnson, a possible leader of the Conservative Party.

BBC.

Muslim children who risk radicalisation by their parents should be taken into care, Boris Johnson has said.
Writing in his weekly Daily Telegraph column, the London mayor said such children were victims of child abuse.
Mr Johnson said they should be removed from their families to stop them being turned into "potential killers or suicide bombers".
A "fatal squeamishness" had developed over intervening in the behaviour of certain groups in society, he added.
But he said there was a need to be "stronger and clearer in asserting our understanding of British values".
He warned that some young people were being "taught crazy stuff" similar to the views expressed by the two men who killed Fusilier Lee Rigby on a south-east London street.

And innocent until proven guilty goes straight out of the window and the spectre of a child catcher straight out of Chitty Chitty Bang Bang becomes a distinct possibility.
Dear lord, can't he see just how wrong this is and how likely it will turn other muslims from simply espousing their nonsense to actually carrying it out?
Certainly I believe that their is no place for islam in a civilised society and my preferred choice would be for them to make a choice to drop it or leave. But under no circumstances would I ever advocate taking their children off them, I cannot think of a more likely circumstance to switch them to jihadi mode and Boris would have given them the perfect excuse.
Remove them or convert them, but for gods sake do not antagonise them like this, you wouldn't like it done to your children and there's no proof that the children will accept the teachings of their foolish parents.
Honestly, it's an idea worthy of the illiberal left...

We don't need a ban

Why is it with politicians that their first response to a problem is to reach for the ban hammer? It never seems to occur to them that there are other solutions, solutions that would improve the rights of people. Then again giving people and companies additional rights is not on any politicians agenda.
Express.

MUSLIM women should not be allowed to cover their faces in public as there is no formal requirement in their religion, a Tory MP said yesterday.
Philip Hollobone was putting forward a Bill seeking to prohibit the wearing of face coverings, in particular the Muslim veil and balaclavas.
Presenting his Face Coverings (Prohibition) Bill, the Kettering MP expressed regret that his campaign had “come to this”.
Speaking during the bill’s second reading, he said: “But there’s growing concern amongst my constituents and across the country about the increasing number of people who are going about in public places covering their faces and this is causing alarm and distress to many people.”
During the debate, passport control officials were criticised for “waving through” a woman without asking her to remove her full-face veil.

What is actually needed is the right for people and companies to refuse entry and to serve anyone wearing a full face covering without having the race industry charge into battle in full cry. You see I don't really care what people wear in public, but when someone is on someone else's property then their right to see just who they are dealing with has to top my right to wear what the hell I want.
It should also be the general policy of the government vis its departments and local government with regards to schools, libraries and other services. Same with banks, building societies, shops, right down to peoples homes.
It's a simple right to give, the right to refuse entry to your premises of  anyone you cannot see the face of and it would soon resolve the problem of those who think their right to wear a face covering trumps all other rights, particularly as it isn't a religious requirement in any shape or form merely a cultural thing that is being used to advance the barbarism that is islam.
So Hollobone has it wrong, he's attempting to remove a right, rather than enhance them.
But that's typical of politicians...

Silly

What is it about ecoloons and leftards who believe that the rules as such do not apply to them? Countless times you read about illegal acts and protests carried out by the two groups (often acting as one) to try and stop perfectly legal activities. No I don't mean legitimate and legal protests but violence and acts of sabotage aimed at their opponents and often enough the police.
It's like they see the law is for other people....
Mail.

After fleeing a city tower block in search of the good life, Matthew Lepley and Jules Smith spent five years sleeping in a tent and living off the land in a bid to build Britain’s greenest home.
Armed with an axe and hand tools, they pieced together scrap metal, tyres and wooden crates until a one-bedroom cabin – complete with compost toilet – rose out of the muddy field they had bought.
Now the couple have been served with an enforcement notice to tear it all down – because it was against their eco-friendly beliefs to apply for planning permission.

The planning rules are there for a purpose, granted they are often used and opposed and twisted out of shape for various reasons and certainly we only use something like 3% of the land in this country for building purposes, but they are there for a reason. Often enough it's to prevent people building near water courses (and polluting them) or having a disastrous effect on the land. Sometimes it's that someone wants to build something completely out of character with the neighbourhood (giving rise to Nimby's)
Still you'd think that the possibility of having your home torn down because you don't believe in planning permission may just have occurred to the two idiots here?
Now I have no problem on people doing something like this if they want, but unless we live in a libertarian society, you have to follow the rules and one of the most basic is get permission to do it. Granted planning laws are a joke and very intrusive, but they are there and no despite their claims, they don't soak up excess electricity and paper to do so. Certainly they would have soaked up a lot less than the appeals process the couple used to try and overturn the decision.
Still it was bloody silly to ignore something that would cost you your home.