We are developing the social individualist meta-context for the future. From the very serious to the extremely frivolous... lets see what is on the mind of the Samizdata people.
Samizdata, derived from Samizdat /n. - a system of clandestine publication of banned literature in the USSR [Russ.,= self-publishing house]
|
Is Britain a defeated nation?
UK Chancellor Gordon Brown has, as we now know, ignored the advice of his civil servants and plundered the private sector pensions industry to fund a massive public spending splurge. More than 800,000 jobs have been added to the public sector payroll since 1997, what might be regarded as a large group of folk with a vested interest in keeping the gloomster and his fellows in office. Vast sums have been spent on education and health, to debateble effect (some good has been done probably but not to the extent that would justify all that money). But one of the proudest boasts of Brown and Blair has been how this effort has reduced poverty since the dark, satanic era of the Conservatives (sarcasm alert).
Thanks to some diligent digging by the weekly UK magazine, The Business, it turns out that the bottom 10% of the UK population have actually got poorer. Last Friday, it was the Times, meanwhile, which won a long-fought campaign to expose the pensions issue. It is nice to see old-style Fleet Street journalism at its best.
It is not turning out to be a great spring for the Scot. Have a happy Easter.
Following the release of the 15 British sailors from Iranian captivity, the Prime Minister Tony Blair has issued the following statement:
“I am sure that I speak for everyone when I say how delighted I am that the Iranian goverment has released our 15 naval service personnel. This has obviously been a traumatic ordeal for all of them and their families and an extremely trying and difficult time for everyone else in involved in this unfortunate episode. Thankfully, common sense and cooler heads have prevailed. I must, however, make it categorically clear that we did not, nor would we ever, make any concessions, strike any bargains or agree any deals in order to secure their release. It is the unwavering policy of Her Majesty’s government to stand firm in the face of threats and to strenuously resist any attempts at blackmail or intimidation of any kind. That said, all that remains for me to do is join in with the rest of the nation in offering up our prayers and thanks to merciful Allah and his last prophet Mohammed, peace be upon him. Thank you.”
<child’s voice>
“Stand still, citizen! Facial recognition software has identified you and made a cross-check with the national ‘Good Citizen’ data base.”
“You have not denounced anyone for…thirty… days… please remember that community policing is a civic duty and reporting people is easy and fun! Just use your mobile phone and send a text SMS to Whitehall 1212 with the name, address and crime of a school mate, family member or co-worker!”
“And remember, if you accumulate ten ‘Good Citizen’ points for denouncing smokers, homophobes, people eating high fat food, anyone making racist jokes in private, people making unauthorised D.I.Y. repairs to ‘their’ houses, anyone using illegal light bulbs, anyone questioning the unanimous and state approved scientific truth about global warming, home schoolers or people who buy banned war toys for ‘their’ children, you will get to appear on the Big Brother reality TV show by having your home’s internal CCTV footage broadcast live for seven days!”
</child’s voice>
From the linked article: “According to recent studies, Britain has 4.2million CCTV cameras – one for every 14 people in the country – which amounts to 20 per cent of the global camera total.”
Welcome to modern Britain.
This story in the Telegraph is no doubt just crazy right-wing paranoia, and we have in fact no need to worry, get annoyed or even become the tiniest bit cheesed off. Oh no. Polly has explained it all for us. To be worried about the surveillance state is a middle-class thing, apparently. All true denizens of a socialist Britain should be proud to carry ID cards and be photographed constantly.
If Polly Toynbee did not exist, we would have to invent her. Not even Ian Fleming could cook up a female villain as good as this woman. Henry Porter, meanwhile, has scathing remarks on his fellow Guardian columnist. Good for him.
Of course, if CCTVs are installed in privately owned streets, shopping malls or other privately owned buildings, I do not have a problem so long as it is pretty clear that such cameras are installed. But that is not quite the issue.
On the one hand, she could be deliberately downplaying expectations:
Hopes for the imminent release of 15 sailors and Royal Marines held in Iran were dampened yesterday when Margaret Beckett, the Foreign Secretary, urged “caution” over the chances of a swift end to the crisis.
But, and on the other hand, I am reluctant to give this woman credit for any degree of calculation that is not immediately connected to the furtherance of her own career. Let’s just say that nobody seems to have any idea as to how long our hijacked naval personnel will have to continue celebrating Iranian culture. That leaves us only with speculation.
So, who thinks that the RN personnel will be released:
A. Before the end of this month?
B. Before the end of this year?
C. Within 2 years?
D. Within 5 years?
E. Within 10 years?
F. Within 20 years?
G. Never?
Over the weekend, news got out – thanks to the diligence of journalists at The Times (of London) that UK finance minister Gordon Brown was warned back in 1997 that removal of tax relief on pension funds’ equity dividends would create a massive future problem. It did. More than 5 billion pounds a year have been snatched from corporate pensions as part of Brown’s tax-and-spend binge over the past 10 years. Tens of billiions of pounds have been taken from pension schemes, forcing firms to shut down the final-salary pensions and significantly reduce the likely benefits people will get in retirement. Of course Brown cannot be entirely blamed for this. We live longer, and the fall in the stock market in 2000, and the sharp rise in the cost of bonds, hit pension funds hard. But Brown did a huge amount of damage. His tax raid aggravated the stock market losses, and by forcing firms to steer more money to schemes, hit investment and growth. He has not expressed one whit of regret, and now, exposed as the dogmatic man that he is, Brown’s lickspittles are now lying about the arguments put to them at the time by big business groups such as the CBI. Former CBI Director-General Adair Turner, a decent man, has called the government a bunch of liars. It appears that the CBI and other groups, supposedly charmed by the recent cuts to corporation tax, but also realising that smaller firms got clobbered by the March budget, are furious at the Treasury’s dissembling on the pension tax issue.
Brown’s chances of becoming Prime Minister took a palpable hit this weekend. The gloomster may still be in 10 Downing Street by the end of this summer, but at least the British electorate have had another chance to see what a devious and foolish man Brown is.
The broader implications of all this should be obvious to regular readers of this site. By undermining private sector pensions and long-terms savings, Brown and his supporters increase reliance on the state, much in the same way as David Lloyd George and others torpedoed the Friendly Societies in the first decade of the 20th Century by his pension and welfare changes. (There is some debate on whether Lloyd George was aware of the effects of his actions). Aneurin Bevan, that over-rated demagogue of the 1940s, deliberately shafted the independent, non-state medical services that had already began to serve Britons, including poor ones, before the Second World War. Wherever one looks, one sees evidence of socialists/so-called liberals acting to wreck patterns of private privision or non-state mutual support. It is shameful, and the consequences for civil society are immense.
Just think of how, had the Friendly Societies and the rest been allowed to flourish. We would now have a broad and deep savings culture, enormously strong, and underpinning a culture of self reliance and personal responsibility. And people like Gordon Brown, never performing an hour of honest toil outside the halls of government, destroyed it.
The British government has issued a formal apology for Britain’s conduct during the Second World War.
Speaking from the House of Commons, Foreign Secretary Margaret Beckett described Britain’s conduct in the 1939-1945 period as “shameful”:
We recognise that British military aggression between the years of 1939 and 1945 led directly or indirectly to the deaths of many, many people in Europe, Asia, Africa and elsewhere. It is time to acknowledge this fact and to apologise for it.
The opposition Conservatives roundly condemned the Foreign Secretary’s remarks as not going far enough and being “too little, too late”. They urged the Government to issue a further apology for all the environmental damage inflicted on the world by British forces during the war and since.
In Germany, a spokesman for an association of SS veterans described the apology as “a good start”.
The Human Fertilisation and Embryology Authority (HFEA) has increasingly wielded its regulatory powers in recent years, as infertility treatments have become more common and diverse. Some of the regulator’s decisions have been criticised as arbitrary or inappropriate, using an ethical calculus to coerce parental choice when it is not required. Their latest intervention is controversial, though based upon clinical outcomes.
At present, multiple embryos are implanted in the womb to increase the probability of a successful birth. This has potentially undesirable consequences if the health of the mother or the children is impaired. Studies have monitored infertility treatments and demonstrated these drawbacks.
Half of the mothers of IVF twins give birth prematurely and the babies are below the minimum ideal birth weight of 5lb. They run a much higher risk of dying, lung and heart problems, having cerebral palsy or developmental difficulties and facing chronic conditions as adults. Many spend time in special neonatal care units in hospitals. Mothers who conceive more than one baby after IVF are far likelier to suffer a miscarriage or dangerously high blood pressure than women who have one child naturally.
This should be viewed as additional information that clinicians would take into account when advising their patients and making a diagnosis or a recommendation. If the regulator had drawn attention to these studies and noted that inspectors would wish to see these taken into account during diagnosis, no observer could criticise such diligence. However, we live in New Labour Britain, home of targets and micromanagement:
Shirley Harrison, the HFEA’s chair, will this week defend the decision to put medical safety above the rights of childless women to choose how many embryos are transferred. She will cite research showing that having just one embryo implanted does not reduce a woman’s chance of conceiving.
Doctors will retain the freedom to use their clinical judgment to decide if a woman rated a ‘poor responder’ to fertility treatment should still get two embryos. Clinics will be told to reduce the number of multiple births through IVF over time from 25 per cent to somewhere between 5 and 10 per cent.
This is a decision that should rest between the doctor and the patient. If the patient is aware of the risks and responsibilities, they may then take the difficult decision required in this matter. It is not up to HFEA to usurp clinical practice and private judgement in this matter.
It was deplorable that the woman hostage should be shown smoking. This sends completely the wrong message to our young people.
– Patricia Hewitt denounces Iranian treatment of a member of the fifteen captured British navy personnel. Is there a more perfect illustration of the misplaced priorities of Blair’s Britain?
(Via Tim Blair, who notes “as always with such a blindingly stupid quote, be alert to the possibility it’s too stupid to be true.” Perhaps regular Hewitt-watchers would not see the need for such caution.)
I have always regarded it as reliably axiomatic that government departments are named after whatever it is they are trying to put a stop to. One need look no further than the Department of Education for practical proof of this principle in action.
For the same reason I have always regarded it as a blessing that the legal system has been administered by something called ‘The Home Office’. For all of its indisputable shortcomings, I took great comfort from the fact that we do not, nor have we ever had, a ‘Ministry of Justice’.
Until now:
New department: the Ministry of Justice
A Ministry of Justice will be created to provide a stronger focus on the criminal justice system, and on reducing re-offending.
This new ministry will take over the staff and responsibilities of the Department for Constitutional Affairs, and the National Offender Management Service (NOMS), including the prison and probation services, and have lead responsibility for criminal law and sentencing…
The Prime Minister said the new Ministry of Justice ‘will take the leading role in delivering a fairer, more effective, speedy and efficient justice system.’
I rather think that a more realistic appraisal will be opaque, incompetent and, above all, self-serving.
They may as well just go ahead and set up the Ministries of Truth, Prosperity and Freedom and I daresay that, in the fullness of time, they will.
I suggest that you read this before you sit down to eat breakfast and not afterwards, lest you spend the rest of your morning mopping semi-digested coco-pops off the kitchen floor. Here are a few tasters:
I’m in tune with the ‘I can’ generation
Wow! Is that anything like the Pepsi Generation? Like, totally kewwwwllll. Not to mention hot, hip, happening, in the groove and sexeeeeeee.
That is why social and economic change today require government leadership and profes sional innovation, as well as mass mobilisation.
Certainly, sir. Corporal Tremayne reporting for duty, sir (salutes).
In public services, an “I can” service will continually ask: how can we devolve power, funding and control to the lowest appropriate level, while maintaining high national minimum standards? Can teachers and children inject more creativity into what is learnt, where and how?
Well, ‘I can’ tell him what the ‘lowest appropriate level’ is for funding and power.
This is not a zero-sum game between government power and citizen power; it is a genuine partnership that breaks down the divide between producer and consumer.
Eh?
It doesn’t get any better than that. This man has penned a whole mainstream editorial vision every single syllable of which is complete bollocks. I have to ask myself whether he actually believes this horse-manure or is he just saying these things because he thinks that this is what the public wants to hear? What world does he see through his eyes? Does he actually see hordes of shiny, happy, clappy ‘I can’ people exalting at his feet and begging him to lead them to the Promised Environment? Is he so twisted by lies that he can open wine bottles with his fingers or he is so spaced-out on his own propoganda that he has drifted hopelessly away from anything that could reasonably be described as the real world?
Perhaps one of you ‘I can’ types out there can tell me.
|
Who Are We? The Samizdata people are a bunch of sinister and heavily armed globalist illuminati who seek to infect the entire world with the values of personal liberty and several property. Amongst our many crimes is a sense of humour and the intermittent use of British spelling.
We are also a varied group made up of social individualists, classical liberals, whigs, libertarians, extropians, futurists, ‘Porcupines’, Karl Popper fetishists, recovering neo-conservatives, crazed Ayn Rand worshipers, over-caffeinated Virginia Postrel devotees, witty Frédéric Bastiat wannabes, cypherpunks, minarchists, kritarchists and wild-eyed anarcho-capitalists from Britain, North America, Australia and Europe.
|
