EU Rushes in a Banking Solution

I note that the EU's come up with some new ideas to stop runs on banks impacting on governments, and therby protect the Eurozone.

It's a bit light on detail, and it's due sometime in or after 2018.  Which is a bit like watching a horse bolt, and thinking to yourself that you really must buy a lock for the stable door next week.

Pentecost

I've had my eyes opened this morning.

We were all gathered together in one place in the Moot House, for the holding-of-hands ceremony prior to the Pentecost Extravaganza. I'm not so keen on the holding-of-hands - ensure everyone uses antibacterial soap before and after - but it does amuse me the way it makes the more uneasy-with-their-feminine-side squirm.

Then there was the rushing of a mighty wind, and tongues of fire appeared. It was all thanks to Young Keith and his industrial wind-machine. Turns out it goes up to "11". Blew four panels out of the Moot House wall and shorted the circuits. At which point the electronic dove cage failed safe and all the doves flew out through the roof lights to safety.

Of course, we'd shut the sluice to make the brook rise, and the Beaker People were standing in half an inch of water when the electrics went on the fritz. Everyone's hair stood on end (except Burton's, who is follicularly challenged) and remained so until the whole circuit tripped.

I walked out of the wreckage of the Moot House and across to the Room of Viewing. I find when things go spectacularly wrong, a bit of telly can calm me down. But saw the news from Syria. And then considered that the celebration of Eurovisual harmony and humanity on telly yesterday - nearly everyone singing American English, like a latter-day Pentecost - was broadcast from a country with a dreadful record on democracy and treatment of its people. Figured the tame Holy Spirit we'd be hoping to encounter isn't the angry hurricane the world actually needs, who lifts up the weak and blows away the powerful.

Walked back outside and the doves have messed all over the 4x4s in the car park. I think maybe it's a sign.

Going to Extremes

The overall story after today's Local Elections will no doubt be a swing from the Liberals and Conservatives to New Labour. That's the logic of mid-term elections with the Government doing unpopular things. In the great scheme of things, a load of councillors will lose their seats to a load of other councillors, but thanks to 20 years of centralisation of control over council funds, it probably won't make much difference.

But there's an increasing amount of chat around the fringe parties - Respect, BNP - the National Front, apparently, in some places. I hesitate to include UKIP in that list because they're almost looking mainstream in comparison.

We live in uncertain times. We watch the Eurozone in crisis. We know the last Government spent a load of money they shouldn't have, but we don't think the current lot know how they're going to get us out of it. And those traditional espousers of lost political causes and floating voters, the Lib Dems, are tied into the lack of vision that the Tories are giving us.

Uncertain times give people the need for simple answers. That's often where apocalyptic comes in. For all the weirdness of the imagery, the apocalyptic message is, at heart, simple. There's bad guys oppressing the good ones. The world's falling apart. It's all gonna end nastily, but the good guys will win out. Stick with us, we're the good guys.

At a time of uncertainty, there's simple hope there. And when there's an oppressive regime, a vicious dictatorship, a dehumanizing system - it's a reminder that these things will pass, and an encouragement to change them.

But the visions of the bad guys are splintered today. Are we dealing with an Islamophobic Western conspiracy, or an Islamic conspiracy against the West? Is it that the bankers, Media and Tories are conspiring to grind us all into the ground while feathering their own nests? Cos if so then Labour was just as enmeshed in that as the Tories - better look further Left. Are we being over-run with Somalis, Poles, Romanians or Pakistanis? Whichever simplistic problem you see will determine the simplistic solution you choose. Or is it that the Evil Europeans are taking our sovereignty, dissolving our borders and allowing terrorists to swim freely in our swimming pools? If so, then Mr Farrage is very definitely your man.

Life is messy, our problems are hard and it's not stopped raining since the Drought started. The simple problems and simple answers may well be attractive today. Let's just hope (and pray, if you do) that they don't look so sensinle at the next General Election.

In Defence of Cameron and Osborne

I really do disagree with Nadine Dorries calling David Cameron and George Osborne "arrogant posh boys".
They were arrogant posh boys 35 years ago. They're grown-up now. That makes them arrogant posh men.

Gift Aid

Tall Rich has published rather a good, fairly simple, guide to the way that Gift Aid works. I say"simple"...

Nothing is simple in the world of tax, which is why there are always loopholes. The previous Government more or less quadrupled tax legislation, introduced tax "allowances" for working families which effectively brought benefits into HMRC, and left as many loopholes as there were before.

But the way in which Gift Aid works for higher-rate (ie over about £43K) taxpayers works is fascinating. The Government has spun it as if it means that these people are taking home more money as a result of giving to Charity. They're not, as Richard's sums show. They're taking home less. The Charity gets all the real benefit. But the thing that irks Little George is that the Government loses out. There's lots of good reasons to give to Charity. One reason is that you really approve of the cause - be it a church, foreign aid, saving confused dolphins, or giving holidays to orphans. Another is that you may think charities are less prone to inefficiency, political interference and general gormlessness than the Government. You may well have a point.

Or you may have bought into the Government's rhetoric of "The Big Society", and decided that if the State needs to pull in its horns after years of quite palpable and enormous waste, then you'll allocate money to those that the Government is hoping will take up the slack - the people that care in the voluntary sector for the homeless, the less able, the old. Well if you did April Fool. The Government want you to support the voluntary sector - and they want your money for themselves as well.

Have you thought of investing in some kind of offshore trust? I hear they're quite popular among some.

Giving Discipleship the Tebow

As if in divine response or validation, I read this morning's article in the Huffington Post - Churchgoing has no effect on 50% of Americans?. (That's 50% of those that go).

This is great news for believers everywhere, as next time the US decides to attack somewhere we can show that it's not Christianity that did it. And Christians in the UK can be assured that of Tony Blair's devoutness and David Cameron's uncertain piety, only one (ie 50%) affected policy. I'm going for Cameron on this one as it strikes me that between Blair's Anglican and Catholic phases, the only difference in his behaviour was that now he's moved from a local church to a multi-national, his megalomania has become international. Since that's just the kind of thing we'd expect of Tony Blair, clearly his affiliation has nothing to do with his behaviour.

Back to the article "three out of five church attenders said they could not recall an important new religious insight from their last church visit." And given that 50% couldn't remember walking away with a "significant new understanding", I'm left wondering whether a significant proportion could actually remember where they were on Sunday morning.

As I say, it's all a great boost to my theory that if you give a man a fish, he'll eat for a day. But if you give a man a fishing-rod, he'll ask if you can nip off and catch a fish with it for him, only there's something on telly.

In another blow to US Religion, I note that Tim Tebow is out. That's a great shame, as i'd hoped he could go all the way. I suppose now either Mitt or Newt will win the nomination, but I really thought Tim was the one who could actually take on Obama.

Migration Watch

I'm not going to beat about the bush. Burton Dasset is feeling most let down over his membership of Migration Watch.

Six months he's been a member, and not one field trip. Still, he's just heard about the publication of the report "Them Poles, coming over here taking Our Jobs", as I believe it's called. And now he understands why they lost interest in the "winter visitor" he phoned them to report, when he explained it was an unusual species of tern.

I notice that Migration Watch describes itself as "non-political". Off-hand, I can't understand how an organisation that counts incoming foreigners and reports that they're taking the natives' jobs is non-political, but I've obviously not thought deeply enough about the matter.

Tearing Open the Heavens

If only you would tear open the heavens and come down!
Mountains would quake before you like fire igniting brushwood or making water boil.
If you would make your name known to your enemies,
the nations would tremble in your presence. (Isa 64:1-2, CEB)

It's easy to scoff (I've found) at yesterday's news regarding little Gove and his issue of the King James. Though I suspect his idea was actually meant well. 400 years of a fine piece of literature are worth celebrating. Even if it's not the earliest, the most accurate or the most readable English version of the Bible. It's just that the idea of Gove writing a few words in the frontispiece blows the whole thing for me. And I'm unsure whether, like the original, the Government is planning to issue the Apocrypha.

But it's also something so kind of retro. It's almost like a recreation of the original concept where the idea was for one Bible to be put in every church in the land. But that's not because they were in need of an English Bible - they'd had those for ages. Rather it was James's way of imposing some uniformity and a bit of respect for those in authority - after all, the Geneva Bible was also available, but it had a habit of referring to king as "tyrants". And writing seditious comments about the authorities in the margins. And you couldn't have that, could you? After all, Job 6:23 (KJV) says " Or, Deliver me from the enemy's hand? or, Redeem me from the hand of the mighty? " - whereas Geneva says "And deliuer me from the enemies hande, or ransome me out of the hand of tyrants?". And you start to guess why James might prefer a more... more gentle reading of the activities of the powerful.

And so Dave's Government have decided that they will reproduce that act of conformity by issuing the copy of the Bible that was meant, among other things, to ensure we knew our place. As I say, I'm sure they're not thinking like that. But that's how James's Government must surely have thought.

Some people believe that authorities think religion is good, because it keeps the populace well-behaved and kindly. Let's face it, the Big Society, if it ever appears, will need to be heavy on support from religious groups. But if the Mighty/Tyrants were really to use the Bible to enforce public conformity, they'd have to remove a few bits. Like anything to do with the mis-use of power. Or money. Or, these days, care for foreigners. Or, most of all, anything that suggests there is a higher authority than the Government. So maybe the ultimate Bible issued by a Government would just be Romans 13. Apart from that, the Bible is a collection of books that is a threat to the authorities. Their rule is flaky, their kingdom temporary and their hopes destined for flames - as everyone that ever tried to cling to power discovered, from Gaddafi to Maggie to Tiberius Caesar - one way or another it all goes west in the end. And we can't depend on their competence forever.

"O that you would tear open the heavens and come down". The world will dissolve in ashes, the 5-year plans indefinitely suspended. The secret police forces will be in the open. The prisons thrown open, the wrongs righted. The tyrants will flee. They all want stability - whether a Big Society where everyone's in it together, another 5 years, a single currency, the next great push, or a boot stamping on a human face - forever. They all want stability because that means they'll always be in charge. But the world's not like that. God's not like that,. The future's not like that. They all come to an end - human, fallible, fragile as they are, no matter if they think they're gods.

I remember a moment of wonder in politics - in 2002. Estelle Morris stepped down as Education Secretary, admitting she wasn't up to the job. The Guardian list a couple more examples.  Oh that other leaders, managers, politicians would admit they weren't up to the job. Then they might do the jobs better, remembering that their downfall is coming, their jobs are merely temporary - and they're not good enough for them anyway.

The irony of Coalition

After telling us for apparently centuries that coalitions are a good thing, I hear some Liberal Democrats are complaining that they're having to support some things they didn't campaign for, or don't like.

Well, yes. That's how it works, of course. But cheer up, Lib Dems - thanks to our electoral system you may not have to suffer this way after the next election.

Getting your priorities right

The news from Germany is that "locally-grown bean-sprouts" may have caused the E-coli outbreak. Which caused a certain confusion in the pub this evening, as people wondered where in the East of England they were growing bean-sprouts. Until we explained that the news report meant, local to Germany. Not local to the TV viewers.


Apparently, "The BBC's Stephen Evans in Berlin says the announcement may cause embarrassment to German authorities, who had earlier pointed to Spanish farms as the source of the outbreak."


Because that's really important, isn't it? 22 people have died. And the most important thing is not, calmly and responsibly, to prevent more deaths. No. The most important thing is to consider whether any public authorities might be embarrassed. 


Stuff the embarrassment. Forget political considerations. When something is wrong, work out why it's wrong. And then stop it. You can be embarrassed later, when people stop dying.

Gaddafi and Blair

You've always got to be concerned when you find out that a respected head of state has been associating with a deranged warmonger, who thinks he holds great power despite having an unelected role.

What did Gaddafi think he was doing, meeting Tony Blair?

And if Tony keeps bringing peace to the Middle East, will there be any of it left?

Wot no Democracy? Feast of St Chad

Today we celebrate the English bishop St Chad. Patron saint of small pieces of paper, people who look over walls, dodgy elections and the left half of my old college chapel.

To celebrate St Chad's day it seemed appropriate that we should hold our Synodical elections later on. And I'm glad to announce that I've been returned with 97% of the popular vote. I know technically I shouldn't have announced the result until after the election has been held, but I was just so keen to share the good news with you.

Now can you all get back to punching those holes in pieces of paper? It's all in honour of St Chad, and I'm hoping we can sell it as cut-price confetti.

Libya Suspended from Human Rights Council

The UN Human Rights Council has suspended Libya from the Human Rights Council.

The Amnesty International report in 2010 reported arbitrary detention of those opposed to regime, discrimination against and sexual harassment of women, and breaches of international law.
In 2009 Amnesty reported the outlawing of opposition political groups and the mass-expulsion of asylum seekers.
In  its 2008 report, Amnesty reported that the children of foreign fathers and Libyan mothers were not entitled to free state education. Amnesty was not allowed to visit the country. It reported that the disappearances of dissidents in the 70s, 80s and 90s had never been tackled.

In 2007, Amnesty reported the killing of 12 demonstrators at a protest. 6 foreign medical workers were sentenced to death for allegedly spreading HIV - they were released a couple of years later. Asylum seekers were frequently beaten, and deported without a hearing.

Well done, UN. Just in time, I'd say.

BBC, Belgium and Imperialism

I have been alerted to the double-standards that the BBC apply in their way of referring to foreign place names. Since I have included the word "BBC" in the title of this posting, I had better swiftly explain that "foreign" is not in any sense meant to be pejorative. Although the Asturias principality of northern Spain, for example, is "foreign" to me - it is not "foreign" to the Asturians, who no doubt think of their fine region as "home" and are rightfully proud of its long and interesting history, its sidra production and diet rich in sea-food.

But I digress. The Asturians, noble as they are, are not the subject of this morning's comments. No, it is rather  the BBC's odd way of referring to places that are abroad. In these enlightened post-imperial times, they call Bombay "Mumbai", Madras "Chennai" and Peking "Beijing". The first two of these being interesting judgement calls themselves - as "Mumbai" is so-called in Maharathi and Gujarati, yet "Bombay" in Hindi and Urdu - while Chennai and Madras are the shortened names of two locations in the modern conurbation, one of which has been favoured over the other.

And yet - the noble and brave people of Poland are quite clear that their capital city is called Warszawa - with the pronunciation of the "w"s as "v" in that fine Polish way, no doubt. To the people of Greece's capital city, their town is spelt Αθήνα - yet not a sign of that from the BBC, either written or spoken. And the capital of France, while spelt the same, is pronounced "Parree". Yet no recognition from the BBC - when for genuine authenticity and respect of the French,  newsreaders should pronounce it correctly while shrugging their shoulders, and perhaps sneer a little in that Gallic way. Oddest of all is the German football team, normally referred to as "Bayern Munich". When for the sake of consistency they should either be "Bavarian Munich" or "Bayern München" - the latter, of course, being the way they call themselves.

But today I am more concerned with the BBC's naming of towns in northern Belgium. Flanders, as the BBC call it, although Vlaanderen would fit better with their policy with regard to Asian or African areas. But then, the Flemish (or Vlaams?) are better off with a vaguely anglicized name of their region than what the BBC does to their place names.

For consider - the town of Brugge.   Even a Google search sends you to the Wikipedia entry for "Bruges" - so why would the BBC get it right? Or Antwerpen - referred to by the BBC as "Antwerp". Or Gent. Which the BBC insist on calling "Ghent".

There are 6.2 million Flemish-speakers in Belgium and 3.3 million French-speakers. I ignore the allegedly bilingual Brussels/Bruxelles (or, for the Flemish, Bruxelles/Brussels). So why does the BBC insist on giving the whole country French names? They don't call Liège "Luik" and pronounce it "lœyk".

I would argue that the BBC are engaging in a deliberate policy of belittling the Flemish. Knowing that the French-speakers traditionally held the political supremacy in Belgium, and fearful of encouraging the conservative North, who speak an arcane Germanic tongue rather than the flowing French that resembles the beautiful Latin that BBC executives learnt at their schools. The BBC are clearly engaged in propping up an ancien régime (or oude regime, as the Flemish would properly call it).

It is time to say it loud and clear - BBC, keep your nose out of Belgium. Your unwarranted involvement in the politic-linguistics of that country have been found out. And if you want to be consistent in your naming of places, just refer to everywhere that's not in the UK as "abroad". It would be in keeping with our proud island traditions, and treat everyone "abroad" equally.

Death of Mary, Queen of Scots (1587)

Today we remember the execution, not so very far away in quiet Fotheringhay, of Mary, Queen of Scots.

We recall that two cousins, who should have been tied by bonds of familial affection, were instead separated by religion, politics and ambition. And that religion, politics and ambition caused the death of Mary after, intentionally or not, she encouraged plots against her cousin.

And so we will spend today recalling all the times that religion, politics or ambition have broken the natural bonds of love between friends, within family (I hope you're reading, Mr Miliband), or between  colleagues and within societies and teams (likewise, Senor Torres).

This could take a while so we're doing it in shifts. We've got from now till 3pm lined up just for religion as the causes of division. And even then we've split the Moot House into 3 for "Personal Experiences" and "English" and "World" history.

This is a solemn day, and not one for levity. So we're holding the "Was Mary Really Guilty" vote in the TV room.    Where we'll also be re-screening Gazza's goal on a permanent loop.

Results of the Husborne Crawley By-election - Reaction

Marston Moretaine (Beaker Democrat)  (46 votes)

Having previously been cheated out of the constituency at the General Election, I am of course disappointed that I have obtained far fewer votes than last time. However this is a natural response on the part of the electorate to the austerity programme that the Coalition has been forced to put in place. When we stood seven months ago on a platform of free University education, cuddling fluffy bunnies and closer European integration, we were not to know that we would actually end up in government and have to do real governing and stuff. Since we never thought we would have to deliver on any promises, I don't see how we can get the blame for doing the opposite to what we said.

Ardwulf (Conservative Beaker) (3 vote)
It was obvious that I had no chance in the first place. So what the heck. I've been in Portugal mocking the natives during the campaign.  Thanks to the boss for turning up and looking like he cared. It looks like the Beaker Democrats are heading for a pasting, so that's the main thing.

Rorgwild (New Beaker) (93 votes)
That I have won this by-election proves that, in the last seven months, the political scene has totally changed in a way that it won't over the next four-and-a-half years. The electorate has spoken, and New Beaker will clearly be elected in a landslide at the next General Election. Frankly, David Cameron might as well resign now.

The Grand Guinea Pig (Guinea Pig Party)  (1 vote)
Weesh weesh pht pht pht weesh.

"Mad" Ed McMad (Monster Raving Loony Party) (0 votes)
We're mad, we are. Really mad. Why won't anyone be my friend?

Single Transferable Loser

You know how it is. Christmas (as in the period from 1 December to Boxing Day) has come to an end. And you're left in "Christmas" (the period from 27 December to lunchtime on New Year's Eve). So yesterday evening, some of my friends and I got together, had a bottle of the Archdruid's favourite Beaker Mead, and played the game where you spin a bottle round, and whoever the bottle points at has to come up with a stupid idea.

This morning I woke up, thought about the ideas of last night, and realised that, without noticing at the time, we had in fact come up with a Think Tank. So we're calling it "Thinking" Beaker Folk.

The quote marks were the Archdruid's idea.

So today I'm glad to announce the following suggestion for improving the democratic process, and simultaneously reforming the House of Lords. I'm calling it "Single Transferable Loser".

Put simply, each constituency has an election the same as usual. And the winner, on the First Past The Post system, goes to the House of Commons to represent his or her constituency, just as they do now.

But the radical bit is - the second-ranking candidate in each constituency gets to go to the Upper House, the House of Lords having been abolished.

You see what that does? It achieves the following:

• It provides a moderating influence on whoever wins - because if one party has a majority in the Commons (remember those?) they won't have one in the House of Seconds - by definition.
• If there's a massive swing to the left-wing (or to libertarianism) - then by virtue of that swing, the House of Seconds will probably have gone the same way on the swing as well, reflecting the will of the people.
• The people of the House of Seconds will be relatively whip-free - because they're losers, let's face it, and unlikely to be allowed to stand again.
• The British like a plucky underdog, and they'll get the chance to be governed by a whole bunch of them.
• Tactical voting will have less point - as if your choice doesn't get into the Commons, there's a good chance they'll get into the Seconds.
• The country will be freed of another 650 politicians wandering the streets wondering what on earth they can do for a living. Let's face it, they're not up to much else other than being in Parliament.
• Lord Sugar will be merely "that bloke off the Apprentice" again.
• The Parliament Act will still apply, so the people we really wanted can still push through laws over the dead bodies of the Seconds if they have to.

I realise that in these circumstances the Seconds Chamber will be just as unpopulated with people who understand the real world and have had real jobs as the current House of Commons. So in addition to those elected on the Second Past the Post principle, we would "top up" the House of Seconds with the following, whom we would describe as "Talented People":

• All Nobel Prize winners with British Citizenship
• All living Sports Personalites of the Year
• All winners of the Turner Prize
• All winners of the X-factor

We feel in this way, expertise will be kept in the Second Chamber, and if bishops, friends of the Prime Minister or superannuated politicians wanted to be involved in politics, they could enter the X-factor just like everybody else.

For those who are interested in the numbers, the House of Seconds, excluding the Talented People, would look much as follows based on May's General Election figures:

Party	Total
Blaenau Voice	1
Con	190
DUP	4
Green Belt	1
Ind	2
Ind CHC	1
Lab	149
Lab Co-op	10
LD	242
PC	6
Respect	1
SDLP	2
SF	4
SNP	29
TUV	1
UCUNF	6
Grand Total	649

(numbers crunched from the Grauniad)

The secret of Ed

Speaking as the former Minister for Unnecessary Spending - a post I had to rescind when I took the Chiltern Hundreds due to my non-membership of either Conservative or Lib Dem parties came to light...

I've been watching Ed Mililband very closely up to the point when I was removed from the House. And I've been pondering ever since. And now, having run his voice through a digital analyser and his facial expressions likewise, I've realised what the problem is.
When you listen to his voice, and you look at him - it's obvious once you know. Either because he promised his mum he'd be tidy, or because his partner has "explained" to him that he is going to change that certificate whether he likes it or not - don't you think maybe his tie is just a little bit too tight?

The great Tuition Fees Conundrum

Young Keith has a real dilemma.

You may remember that, back in May, he managed to pull off the unlikely achievement of becoming Minister for Unnecessary Spending despite being a member of neither of the coalition parties. He now has a terrible dilemma. If he just goes and votes for the Tuition Fees bill, the Tories will assume he can't be a proper Lib Dem. Whereas if he agonizes over it before abstaining or voting against, the Lib Dems will know he's not really a Tory. Since he is dependent on both sides thinking he is a member of the other party, his cover will be blown and he will have to resign. And I don't like that since I'm currently making a fortune renting out the Lilac Room to him as a second home.

In the event there was nothing for it but to feign injury. And when I say "feign", I do of course mean "suffer". I encouraged Young Keith to join Drayton in attempting some tight-rope walking, and after an unfortunate landing on the back of a pew, Young Keith isn't going to be marching through any lobbies any time soon. Still, that three weeks of bed rest will give him the chance to catch up on expenses. It's an ill wind.

The Lib Dem's lost Majority examined

Thanks for all those that emailed in asking if I had thawed out yet. The Archdruid said they had flooded in. Although admittedly she had that "in quote marks" look when she said it.
Anyway, while recovering from yesterday's near-hypothermia, I've been watching BBC 24 and listening - if that is the right word - to Twitter. And I've been doing some calculations.

I've assumed - and surely this is a reasonable assumption - that people tweeting or saying in interviews that they've been betrayed by Nick Clegg, or who  are otherwise angry with the Liberal Democrats - must be people who voted from them in the General Election.

And then I've made a certain allowance for bias in Twitter for clergy in the Church of England - who tend to be Liberal Democratic, possibly because they're used to making fantastic promises for the future without any real danger that anyone will listen to them. And aware that the current political situation is for a Lib Dem vicar akin to the Kingdom of God suddenly arriving on a Sunday morning in Advent, when you've just spent the last ten minutes of the sermon explaining that the Parousia isn't going to be a literal event.
And then I've extrapolated across the country.

My conclusion then, based on these assumptions, is that at the General Election, the Liberal Democrats won a  resounding majority.

And now I have a conundrum. Either there was widespread electoral fraud at the last election, on a scale
unknown outside certain banana republics. Or a lot of people are claiming to be angry with Nick Clegg, with no right to be  because they didn't vote for his party.

I don't like situations like this. They're hard to resolve, requiring an understanding of human nature that I have no right to claim. So I think I'll go and add up an asset register. That always soothes my mind.