Tuesday, 1 September 2015
So Osbourne announces that he's going to spend more than £500m on the Royal Navy’s submarine base at Faslane, the home of Britain’s Trident nuclear deterrent. This will create more than 6,700 jobs in the area with many more helped as side suppliers. So that's good for Scotland, right?
Well, 'No' according to the SNP and the Scottish CND wankers.
The SNP say that the Scottish Parliament opposes the replacement of Trident and basing nuclear submarines at Faslane. They also point out that the vast majority of Scottish MP are SNP and the oppose it and that 45% of the Scottish people voted for independence which would have included moving nukes out of Scotland.
Well that's all very well. The Conservatives made the pledge to replace Trident in their manifesto and won a UK majority based on that manifesto. 45% is not a Scottish majority. 57 Scottish MPs in Westminster is also not a majority and they are welcome to vote against the proposal. The Scottish Parliament has no powers over UK defence. So as far as I am concerned they can just fuck right off!
As for the Scottish CND, they put their spokesman on the BBC yesterday morning. He reckons that expanding the base for conventional weapons would still create the same number of jobs - which is bollocks. When pressed to say what those jobs would be, he clearly had no idea. And, of course, if we disarmed than Faslane would be closed, causing mass unemployment in the area. But according to CND that's OK because scrapping our nukes would make us safer FFS! Do I really have to explain why that's nonsense?
Personally I don't think Trident needs replacing, but the fact is that the government has a mandate to do it. The SNP certainly don't have a mandate to scrap it for the reasons I have explained. If they wanted independence then they should have voted for it and they didn't, did they? So end of...
And if the SNP / SCND do succeed in scrapping the base, I suspect their local support might just wane a bit in the wake of mass unemployment. As far as I can see it's just another proof that Scotland can't survive economically without English money. If they could, then they wouldn't have just delayed their 2016/17 spending plans until after the Autumn Statement, would they?
Monday, 31 August 2015
More bloody silly stuff about the EU this week. Here's my top three...
(1) The FCSC guarantee scheme that protects our savings deposits up to £85,000 is being reduced to £75,000. Why? Because the EU says it has to be €100,000 and the exchange rate has moved. So as long as we meet the equivalent of €100,000 what's the problem? Well the EU says that unless it is reduced then it gives us an unfair advantage in attracting depositors because our guarantee is better than the rest of the EU. I say "Good. Tell 'em to get stuffed"
(2) Andy Burnham says that we should allow more migrants to come across from Calais because it will help Cameron in his renegotiations. What renegotiations? They've as good as told us to fuck off already...
(3) Theresa May says that open borders means free movement of labour across the EU and that was the original intention. She reckons that EU citizens should therefore only be allowed to come to the UK if they have a job to come to.
Actually, that last one seems pretty sensible to me, but not as sensible as getting the hell out altogether.
Oh, and that Ban Ki Moon can sod off as well. He's not welcoming migrants into his country...
Sunday, 30 August 2015
Saturday, 29 August 2015
Let's face it, 1984 was not the best book ever written but it did provoke a few thoughts. Another, in my view better work, was Ray Bradbury's Fahrenheit 451 which dealt with a similar theme - the manipulation of the people by the single party state.
My worry is that we now have the single party state in the United Kingdom.You might think that I referring to the rise of the SNP in Scotland when I say this and, to an extent, you would be right. The SNP landslide has produced a political state where no other party has any real significance north of the border.
What worries me more is the state of play south of the border. Thanks to the Scottish situation there is no chance of any single political party other than the Conservatives of holding a majority. Indeed the maths of the last general election has shown us that even the SNP and Labour together cannot form a government.
The advantages of this scenario are that at least a single party holding power can get things done. Coalitions simply don't work effectively. The experience of the last 5 years has shown us some of the drawbacks, but if you want to really see how things get bogged down then look at countries like Italy where there are so many names on the ballot paper that there is never an effective coalition in power.
Non-Scottish UK is now in that situation. No-one can challenge the Conservatives. Thankfully, Cameron is not Thatcher. In my opinion, Thatcher was a great PM but she was constrained by having effective opposition. One wonders what she might have done if when found herself in number 10 today?
Effective government is constrained and balanced government. It is not about absolute power. Absolute power corrupts absolutely.
Friday, 28 August 2015
Take, for example, Near Field RFI Connection commonly known as contactless. Some bright spark incorporated it into credit and debit cards to avoid the necessity of placing the card into the reader and entering a PIN number. This is, of course, massively inconvenient so now you just wave your card at the reader and it takes the money.
Fantastic! A perfect example of technology being used to do something totally unnecessary just because it can be done. But I digress because here comes the problem we didn't know we had. Crooks can simply wander up to you with a reader and steal your money just by standing next to you. What shall we do? Well, thankfully we've identified the problem and come up with an appropriate solution.
Enter the RFI proof card wallet to keep your contactless cards in. Brilliant! Cards we don't wan't using technology we don't need protected by special wallets that would otherwise be unnecessary.
All yours in a selection of colours for a mere £9.99 or 2 for £14.99. I kid you not.
Wouldn't it have been cheaper and easier just to give the user the option of a Chip and PIN car instead? Oh, but I forgot the other marketing man's mantra : it's all been done for your convenience...