Seriously??

Dr North is at the menders today having his Direct Neural Interface realigned (or somesuch) and has asked me to keep the blog warm today. Were he allowed to take his laptop, I am quite sure he would have something to say about this. First off we find a regulator investigating a system it has no regulatory influence over and, surprise of all surprises, finds no need for significant change. Just as well, since finding fault would mean a name-the-elephant raffle.

Next up we get this little gem...

Joaquín Almunia, European Union competition commissioner, told the Financial Times that the bloc suffers from a fragmented market, lacking an integrated payment system, which makes it more difficult to compete effectively with banks from the US or China.

“From my perspective as the competition commissioner, I would not have any problem with observing a process of reducing the number of players at the European Union level. We have a lot – too many,” Mr Almunia said.

He continues...

But he admitted: “In the short term, the problem is the fragmentation of our internal market. The retail market is national still. Mortgages are national. And this is a real problem for Europe.”

What's that you say? I can't hear you over the sound of my irony chip in full meltdown. Not content with robbing us blind and making a pigs ear into the bargain, they can tell us with a straight face that "consolidating the market" leads to greater competition.

Next they will be telling us to invest our pensions in renewable energy. Nah!

COMMENT THREAD

Just the sort of crap

The Huffington Post opened for business in the UK yesterday, offering exactly the diet of low-grade crap that you would expect of its founder.

Strangely enough, I was not invited to the launch party in London. Had I been there, I presume I would have heard the Huff gurgling about a real-time "digital water cooler" - "which embraces the best of the new (immediacy, transparency, interactivity) and the best of the old (fact-checking, accuracy, fairness, and an emphasis on storytelling) - becoming the spark for many interesting conversations".

Anybody who comes up with that sort of guff really should have been drowned at birth, but instead we have a range of clogging luminaries joining the Huff in her race to the bottom. These include the likes of Alastair Campbell, Matthew Sinclair of TPA fame, the gut-wrenching Tracey Ullman, Zac Goldsmith, Jeremy Hunt (rhymes with ...), Roy Greenslade, the great sage Ricky Gervais and - we are told - Tony Blair.

One commenter says, "The HP is becoming an international social news arena. It is good to be a part of it. I like to interact with people that may have a different view", at which point one wonders why he is commenting on the Huff. Another commenter remarks "This is exciting", adding, "Now there is this to check during the day along with the Guardian on UK news and culture", which tells you just about all you need to know.

So far, there are no recognisable British bloggers on her list, the launch edition concentrating on the chatterati trash of the sort you would travel miles to avoid. It is certainly not going to affect this blog, although Huff seems to have pitched it low enough for it to be serious competition for The Guardian and even more so the Failygraph.

Those who want to be up to date with the news, however, would be better off setting up their own custom page on Google News, rounded off with a list of their own favourite blogs. For all the hype, the lightweight Huff brings nothing of any consequence to the table ... which means it may do quite well.

COMMENT THREAD

Booker

On global colding. Global warming? A new ice age? The only certainty is that YOU'RE paying for the hysteria of our politicians, says the headline.

"As our politicians continually impose on us ever higher taxes and other costs supposedly in the cause of 'fighting climate change' — costs that have already helped to increase every family's energy bills by an average £200 a year — they have been carried away by a collective fantasy that has no parallel in history".

"And all this is happening in the name of a theory so fraudulent that the same people who told us the world is about to fry unless we close down all those power stations are now telling us the same power stations may be heading us into a new ice age".

"Truly, the lunatics have taken over the asylum. And short of some massive injection of common sense from the British people, it seems the rest of us are condemned to live in it".

COMMENT THREAD

Where have they been?

The Daily Mail does a piece on the new president of the European Court of Human Rights in Strasbourg. This is Nicolas Bratza, a British lawyer who has never held a senior judge's job.

The tone of the story is what you would expect from the Mail, but what we should not be seeing from a national newspaper is the comment: "His promotion to president gives him a leading role among the human rights judges who are increasingly seen as the real supreme court, making the final decisions over what law must be obeyed in Britain".

This plays into the hands of the government and its "elaborate deception" in setting us its pretend "supreme court" in London, which opened for business in October 2009.

Of course it is not the "real" supreme court – its rulings can be overturned by one of two other courts, each in their own domain superior to what is only our highest domestic court. One is the European Court of Human Rights. The other is the ECJ in Luxembourg.

For a newspaper then to say that the Strasbourg court is "increasingly" seen as the real supreme court is therefore to defy logic and misrepresent the situation. It makes you wonder where the journalists have been all these years, and when they are going to wake up to how this country is now governed.

And that is the reality. Few people in this country actually have the first idea of how this country is governed – how our laws are made, by which bodies, how they are implemented, enforced and then interpreted. At the top of the list are journalists and MPs, who should know better. One suspects they never will.

But when they cannot even get the basics right, they are not a lot of use for much else.

COMMENT THREAD

The European idea

The Huns, according to The Irish Times, are getting a tad irritated with their Danish neighbours, the latter having decided to double the number of customs officers patrolling its borders and conducting spot checks on vehicles, bringing the number to 260.

The Danes say the move, ostensibly to fight organised crime, human trafficking and the drugs trade, is in line with EU law. The number of customs officers on the border with Germany will be increased by a third to ninety, and they look to be a permanent fixture. From 2014. new border huts and licence-plate scanners will be erected.

In response, Jörg-Uwe Hahn, minister for Europe in the state of Hesse has told the tabloid newspaper Bild that freedom of travel is "one of the most visible achievements of Europe. Whoever makes a mistake here, particularly in the holiday season, is taking an axe to the European idea".

"If Denmark is introducing border controls again during the holiday season, I can only suggest that people turn right around and holiday in Austria or Poland instead", he adds.

Soeren Espersen of the Danish People's Party is calling Hahn an extremist. "I get chills when someone talks about the EU like a religion", he says. And well he might. The last time someone seriously took on board the "European idea", it had some rather unpleasant consequences (pictured).

Mind you, one is a little nervous about a German politician suggesting that his fellow countrymen should turn right and holiday in Austria or Poland, especially when they are also talking about "freedom of travel". They tried that before - even in Brussels (pictured above). And the outcome was not that much better.

COMMENT THREAD

Euroscepticism – but not as we know it

A West Country MP has convened a group of around 100 eurosceptic Tory MPs to urge David Cameron to take power back from Europe, says the Western Morning News.

George Eustice, Conservative MP for Camborne and Redruth, said the group of "moderate" members will seek to exploit frustration among British policymakers who are regularly blocked by European Union law.

The group, we are told, "is keen to distance itself from hardline anti-EU MPs in the Conservative ranks who make relentless yet unrealistic calls, such as immediate withdrawal from the union".

Eustice told the Western Morning News: "We need a radical overhaul of the EU to ensure that it actually delivers where it is capable of adding value but is completely removed from areas like home affairs where it has no reason to be involved."

Reform of the EU was vital to the region given the hundreds of millions of pounds flooding the Westcountry, particularly Cornwall and the Isles of Scilly. He said: "Improving the performance of the EU is especially important to the South West because Britain contracts out its regional development policy to Europe".

"We have to ensure that they deliver the programmes we require of them competently and efficiently", he adds.

COMMENT THREAD

Trawling for truth

A new blog on commercial fishing has started up. Szamuely explains.

COMMENT THREAD

Pre-emptive strike

We are seeing reports of a massive dust storm that has descended on Phoenix, Arizona, drastically reducing visibility and delaying flights as strong winds toppled trees and caused power outages for thousands of residents in the valley.

The wall of dust, we are told, towered over city centre skyscrapers after it swept across the desert from the south, and KSAZ-TV reported it appeared to be roughly 50 miles wide in some spots.

No one has yet blamed this on climate change, but it is only a matter of time before one or other buffoons claim a link. However, a quick search of the US Library of Congress image files reveals many photographs of dust storms, some of which I have reproduced below.

Respectively, they show Oklahoma 1936; Spring 1935 New Mexico; Colorado 1936; Baca County, Colorado 1936; Prowers County, Colorado, 1936; Elkhart; Kansas, May 1937; and finally, a dust storm approaching Lubbock, Texas in 1939.

COMMENT THREAD

Strike, baby! Strike!

Go! Do it ... now! Stay on strike ... close the whole operation down. Who needs BBC News anyway, now that Ambrose is back. Does that mean we're not domed, or is Portugal turning to junk something that should bother us, now that global warming is no longer real? But, perhaps that's just as well.

COMMENT THREAD

Er ... excuse me?

Writes Con Coughlin of the current visit by Euroslime Dave to Afghanistan:

Rather than withdrawing an additional 500 troops next summer, Mr Cameron will tell the Commons today that they will instead be withdrawn at the end of the year. This might seem like small beer to some. But to the commanders on the ground it could make all the difference between making a success of Britain's long and costly involvement in Afghanistan and crawling home with their tails between their legs, as was the case in southern Iraq four years ago.

So British troops came "crawling home with their tails between their legs", from southern Iraq, did they? And, while I would be the last to disagree, I don't recall Coughlin saying that at the time, or shortly thereafter. In fact, on 18 December 2008, we got this:

But then, this is the great military analyst who, in April 2008 was writing:

When the Iraqi government declares war on the British Army, the time has come to pack up and go home. And, if the fiasco of the Iraqi government's recent ill-judged assault on Basra is anything to go by, that moment has arrived.

The "fiasco of the Iraqi government's recent ill-judged assault on Basra" was, of course, the risky but highly successful Operation "Charge of the Knights" which we called correctly at the time, while the British media and the likes of Con Coughlin were floundering. It cleared the Mahdi Army out of Basra and restored peace to the city, after the British Army had failed and retreated to its barracks. It became the defining moment for Iraq.

Yet this is the man lauded by his employers and the world at large as the great sage, the great military and political guru. And now, after getting it consistently wrong, without so much as a blush, he re-invents the record to accord with reality.

And as for his current analysis, if he thinks withdrawing 500 troops from Afghanistan in the winter instead of the summer is going to make the slightest bit of difference, he is in the land of the fairies – where he has always been. Just how do the likes of Coughlin continue to get it so wrong, and still get taken seriously?

COMMENT THREAD

Lost it!

As I recall, there was no debate on the banking crisis. Nor indeed has there been a debate specifically on the Greek euro crisis this year. There is not going to be a debate on the Bombadier job losses. Does anyone still think we should take MPs seriously?

COMMENT THREAD

Say no more

COMMENT THREAD

How they all lie to us

Few people will labour under the illusion that government "spin" is anything new, or was invented by Blair and his cronies. But it is not always easy to appreciate how far back it goes, and how entrenched it is in the mechanisms of government.

That much emerges when you read a heart-warming account of a visit by the King and Queen to the East End, at the start of the Blitz, supposedly to see for themselves the sufferings of their subjects, and to show sympathy and understanding. But what in fact you are seeing is a highly skilled spin machine in operation, so skilled that even to this day it is not properly recognised for what it was.

The clue is in this story in The Daily Express (left – click to enlarge - and then click again), second column under the picture of the King shaking hands with the child, with the caption "They'd lost their homes, but could still raise a cheer". It is dated 10 September 1940, three days after the London Blitz started, and a day after the visit.

Particularly memorable is the headline because, according to the junior minister of information, Harold Nicolson, when the King and Queen did go visiting on 9 September, the crowd actually booed them. This, of course, does not negate the headline. Undoubtedly, the royal couple was cheered. But we are not told the whole story.

However, the particularly egregious example of "spin" is not that, but the reference to Anderson shelters (type pictured below). Made of curved corrugated iron bolted to strong supports, the shelters were issued in their hundreds of thousands.

The shelters were supposed to be buried three feet underground in back gardens with eighteen inches of earth piled on top. They were small and cramped, cold, not soundproofed, and tended to flood regularly. And crucially, they offered no protection against a direct bomb hit, or even a large calibre bomb landing close by.

It is with this in mind that we read the report, and find that the King is taken to a site were there just happen to be some Anderson shelters, whence he surveys the scene and, pointing to the shelters among the wreckage, remarks on the protection they had given. He does this so very clearly that his remarks find their way into all the main newspapers.

There is nothing particularly sinister in this, you might think, except that, on 18 September, the King and Queen are again taken to see survivors of "heroic rescues", throughout a tour of three districts of London which had sustained extensive bomb damage.

A special point was made of introducing the royal couple to men and women whose houses had been wrecked by a direct hit. Then, as he had on the 9th, the King made a point of talking up the Anderson shelters, this time saying: "These Anderson shelters are wonderful".

The King and Queen then "listened with interest" while occupants of two unharmed shelters (sic) told them of escapes when the bomb fell only a few yards away. So clear were their comments that they were not only recorded in the national dailies. Even the Glasgow Herald had the quote, while The Yorkshire Post had: "The marvellous escapes from death of men and women whose houses had been wrecked by a direct hit led the King to say: 'These Anderson Shelters are wonderful'".

The The Daily Mirror (p7), however, had already gone one better. Its report had: "Looking round at the destruction, the middle of which were two unharmed Anderson shelters, the King remarked, 'These Anderson shelters are wonderful, wonderful'".

Needless to say, the converse did not apply. When on the night of 9/10 October, an overnight raid wrecked the Anderson shelters in the gardens of Mapledene Road, Hackney, killing the occupants (pictured above), there was no mention of the horror in the press.

When, the following week, the Queen visited the area, her entourage smiling and laughing as they inspected Civil Defence workers (pictured below),  after a further 173 had been killed in a basement shelter , they were not shown the site. Nor did the incident stop Herbert Morrison, in his maiden speech to the Commons as Home Security Minister that day, singing the praises of the shelter.

What you are seeing here was not accidental. It went back to the 1920s, to 1938 and then, in particular to April 1939 when the government quite deliberately set its face against providing deep, bomb-proof shelters for the people of Britain. Not least, it was thought, if people were provided with comfortable, safe shelters, they might stay there and war production would suffer.

Even as late as 12 June 1940, then Home Secretary John Anderson told the House: "I am devoutly thankful that we did not adopt a general policy of providing deep and strongly protected shelters". In this war, he said, "we must avoid at all costs what I may call the deep-shelter mentality".

Two months to the day, the effects of that policy were evident in Portsmouth, when two women - Mrs Robertson and her married daughter, Mrs Mann - were killed when their Anderson shelter was blown out of the ground. This was reported at the time, by the Daily Mirror, one that clearly escaped the censor.

The mistake was not to be made again. Thus, when in a repeat raid on Portsmouth on 24 August, several Anderson shelters were blown apart by the force of the explosions, nothing of this was reported in the press.

With several trench shelters also having been hit - and a works air raid shelter taking a direct hit, killing twenty-four and wounding forty-two dockyard workers - rumours about the widespread loss of life in the city and dockyards led to a belief that German aircrews were deliberately aiming their bombs at individual shelters. For some time afterwards, people were afraid to go into the shelters during alerts.

Clearly, this had to be dealt with and the press had already been enlisted to run a series of "thumbs up" stories, emphasising escapes, miraculous or otherwise, of people sheltering in Andersons. Even on this day, the Daily Mirror (p12) ran an article headed: "Be Wise and be Safe", reporting how the shelters had "again proved their worth yesterday". The report recalled:

One received a direct hit, but the two occupants are alive, although badly injured. Another bomb fell a few feet away from a shelter containing five people. It wrecked six houses and buried the shelter, but the occupants were unharmed. In another instance people in shelters five yards from where a bomb fell were unhurt.

Again in the Daily Mirror, but also in the other national dailies on 28 August 1940, another miraculous survival was aired, this one with a picture. The story was headed: "And They Came Out of it Alive ... " (pictured right - click to enlarge, and click again).

"The edge of this bomb crater, 30ft deep, in a household garden near London", readers were told, "is only 4ft from the Anderson shelter. But the two people in the shelter during London's six hour raid - Mrs Clark and Miss Clark - were unhurt. You see Miss Clark in the picture examining the damage to the structure".

Consulting Engineer Ove Arup had an explanation for what was happening. He had been a particular advocate of deep shelters before the war – and had built one for the Air Ministry. Describing a meeting with an unnamed senior civil servant on shelter policy, he recalled being told: "What really mattered was to keep people quiet, to give them confidence in the measures taken and to prevent panic; this psychological or political aspect was more important than the safety of the shelters".

And there it was. Committed to a deliberate policy of providing inadequate shelters, when the policy started showing evidence of being disastrously wrong, instead of dealing with it, the government resorted to the techniques with which we are so familiar. It suppressed information and attempted to "spin" its way out of the situation. In so doing, it fed the press a diet of propaganda and even enlisted the King and Queen in the deception.

As it was then, so it is now. Yesterday, we asked "What is royalty for?" Well, part of the answer was evident way back in 1940. Then as now, they are part of the propaganda machine that keeps the proles happy and under control.

Just don't run away with the idea that "them up there" have any concern at all for your wellbeing. What matters with any policy is "... to keep people quiet, to give them confidence in the measures taken ...". Nothing ever changes.

Extracted from "The Many, Not the Few - the stolen history of the Battle of Britain", to be published by Continuum on 15 November.

COMMENT THREAD

Hidden Europe

Britain's last train making company Bombardier announces 1,400 job cuts, says the Failygraph, as the government decides to award a lucrative carriage order for the Thameslink route to Siemens of Germany rather than to Derby-based Bombardier.

A consortium led by Bombardier had been competing with one led by Siemens of Germany for a contract for 1,200 new carriages as part of a £6 billion upgrade of the Thameslink route, which runs from Bedford to Brighton through London. With most of its other contracts due to finish in September this year, the contract was vital for Bombardier's future.

Of course, transport minister and ex MEP Theresa Villiers says the bid by Siemens, which will build the new carriages in Germany, represented the "best value for money for taxpayers" and claims that the contract would create up to 2,000 new UK jobs.

How very different this was two years ago when our Theresa was outraged by the government's decision to award a £7.5 billion contract to replace ageing high-speed trains on the Great Western and East Coast main lines.

Bombardier also lost out on that one, that time to a consortium led by the Japanese firm Hitachi, called Agility Trains, which included John Laing and Barclays Bank.

Then as now, the government said the contract would "create and safeguard" UK jobs, claiming 12,500 would benefit. But the then shadow transport minister, who just happened to be Theresa Villiers, dismissed this as "typical spin" from the government.

"This announcement raises further questions about Gordon Brown's claims about British jobs for British workers. Geoff Hoon needs to stop the spin and tell the UK's hard pressed train manufacturing industry the real truth about his decision on replacing intercity trains," she stormed.

Then, however, the fair Villiers did not have to confront the "real truth" - the realities of the EU's procurement directives, which prevent British firms being favoured, even if it is more economic in the longer term.

And it rather stuffs IDS's call British for businesses to employ more young Britons instead of immigrants, when the transport secretary is not allowed to give British (based) businesses the work that will allow them to employ them.

So, while "hidden Europe" bites the hand that feeds it, Villiers says not a word about the diktats of her masters. Instead, she "empathises" with the "anguish" of the City of Derby, where Bombardier has just announced the first tranche of 200 job losses. But there is not the slightest thing she will do to stop it.

Aren't we are soooooooooo lucky that Britain is a member of the European Union. What would we do without it?

COMMENT THREAD

A hugely ironic inversion

Holland we are told is on a collision course with the EU over a threat to deport Poles and other eastern Europeans who cannot find work. It is also planning to withhold their state benefits if they do not speak Dutch.

This is nothing particularly new as it has been grumbling on for many months. What gives it added zest, though, is that Poland took over the presidency of the EU last Friday, and holds it for the next six months. It then will be cast in the role of fronting any talks aimed at getting Holland to climb down.

The issue thus has been seized upon by Poland's economic affairs minister Waldemar Pawlak, who has recently declared the development "dangerous". It "could lead to the collapse of the European system of freedom of movement", he says.

Poland's European affairs minister Mikolaj Dowgielewicz is quoted as saying there have been "robust talks" with the Netherlands on the plan. He is quoted as saying that he is surprised a maximum of 200 people could lead to such heated political debate.

Such problems could be better solved at a European level, through community-wide agreements on social security and working conditions, he says.

The Dutch élites themselves have a reputation for being ultra communautaire – and it should not be forgotten that Holland was one of the original Six. That the Dutch should even be thinking of bucking the EU is, therefore, a significant development. That it should be chipping away at the basic treaty, forcing one of the newest members to defend it, is hugely ironic inversion.

But then the Polish EU presidency is revelling in the "exciting challenge" of countering a new wave of euroscepticism and convincing other members of the Union that the European project is a "great thing" – according to the country's prime minister, Donald Tusk.

It should be entertaining watching him try. Perhaps he should start in Athens.

COMMENT THREAD

What is royalty for?

In a tiny corner of Quebec yesterday, safely corralled away so that royal eyes would not be offended, was a small but defiant demonstration (pictured), the like of which you will not yet see in the United Kingdom.

What you will see circulating amongst a sub-set of the eurosceptic fraternity, however, is a series of impassioned pleas to "her majesty", couched in diverse terms of asking her to save us from the machinations of our venal politicians, and rescue us from the encroachments of the European Union.

Not once throughout her reign, however, has the queen stepped in to reduce or modify in any way the instruments which have ceded greater power to the construct in Brussels. Yet these have effectively neutered her role as head of state, by transferring authority to a new supreme government.

Now, since we have a sovereign who is no longer sovereign in her own land, one might perhaps stop to reflect whether the banner-holders in Quebec are more accurate than we would care to admit. If the queen no longer fulfils her role as head of state, defender of the sovereignty of the United Kingdom, what is royalty for?

COMMENT THREAD

A mandatory qualification?

Mary Ellen Synon writes about Dominique Strauss-Kahn. Is he a violent rapist or just a sleazy French socialist?

Either way, she says, events that occurred at the Sofitel in Times Square last May ought to leave his political career sunk. As columnist Michael Powell wrote in the New York Times at the weekend: "When the debate is between those who accuse you of rape and those who defend you as a mere disgusting cad, your image problems have not emerged from critical care".

The interesting thing is that a criminal conviction does not seem to be a handicap in the French presidential race. In fact, it seems to be a mandatory qualification.

COMMENT THREAD

I think we knew this

Greece faces severe restrictions on its sovereignty and must privatise state assets on a scale similar to the sell-off of East German firms in the 1990s after communism fell, says Eurogroup chairman Jean-Claude Juncker.

Whether the subsidy-sodden, corrupt and largely inefficient state can get any worse under EU/IMF domination is a moot point. And it will be interesting to see whether the Greeks care enough to do anything about it.

COMMENT THREAD

Nose bleeds

Quite rightly, Booker has a downer on social workers, but even he hasn't had to deal with this, a nine-month custody battle that started last August, when the aunt – who lives in Kirklees - applied to the courts to have her niece and nephew placed with her.

But Hampshire Social Services decided not to place the children with her and the reason given was that the social worker didn't think they could cope with "a different culture".

The worst of it is that they are probably right. Born and bred a Londoner, I've been up here more than 35 years and I'm not used to it yet. And it really is different. I recall in my first year up here, interviewing an old dear on her doorstep, me with me pristine London accent, and her with her broad West Yorkshire.

She suddenly stops and says, with great perspicacity, "Eeee, thee'se not from these parts, are thee?" With the game well and truly up, I admitted it. "I'm from London", I told her. She thought about that for a while – a long while. "Aye, I've 'erd of that", she says, slowly gesturing southwards towards the horizon. "Tis t'other side of 'Uddersfield, int'it?"

Social workers, politicians, and the rest ... they get nose bleeds when they get past Doncaster. It's no wonder they had the vapours at the thought of sending an 'Ampshire lad and lass oop 'ere. Wiv uz strenge ways, we reet put the mockers on ern.

COMMENT THREAD

Our monstrous MPs

The Mail - presumably for Monday publication – is running a story on "absent fathers" who defy orders to pay towards their children's care.

The paper retails the views of the Commons Work and Pensions Committee, which is to recommend immediate suspension of their driving licences and passports, plus curfew orders and new powers to deduct money from their bank accounts.

There were warnings, the paper says, that it would be "madness" to strip "runaway" parents of their licences as it could cost them their jobs and their ability to contribute to their children's upkeep, but – as always – it misses the point.

There is already something very sinister about the state using withdrawal of passports and driving licenses as penalties, for issues unrelated to the holding of those specific documents. But then to suggest that officials should have the power to remove them, without even having to go to court, is monstrous.

That the idea should then come from MPs is staggering. In theory, MPs are supposed to be our representatives, protecting us from the overarching power of the state. But here they are, acting as an arm of the state, recommending more powers for officials.

If ever you needed an example of how Westminster has ceased to be our protector, and turned into our enemy, this is it.

COMMENT THREAD

Forever failing to perform

Water companies are draining the nation's most at-risk rivers dry, causing environmental damage, death to wildlife and the build-up of chemicals that upset fragile aquatic ecosystems, all of which could result in ever-higher bills for consumers.

So says the Independent on Sunday, citing an as-yet-unpublished report from the Policy Exchange – it is not due out until tomorrow.

What the paper deigns to tells us of the report, though, makes for disturbing reading, on several counts. Up front, though, what is worrying is the warning that "the cost of remedy" may be passed to consumers – the typical response to any problem ... we pay more.

I have greater concern, however, about what has not been said. And in this, we have been there before. Back in July 2007, we had Booker reporting once again that implementing EU directives had so far cost £65 billion, then in the context of Baroness Young warning that we faced soaring water bills to pay for the deficiencies in "infrastructure" brought to light by the then recent floods.

In the context of the current concern, the relevant parts of the "infrastructure" are reservoirs and the distribution system. On the one hand, spending on new reservoirs has been pitifully inadequate while, on the other, leakage rates continue to be intolerable.

Add to that, the inherent incompetence and inefficiencies of the water companies, and their "obscene bonuses" and it comes as absolutely no surprise that we have a dysfunctional industry that is forever failing to perform, and coming back to us with its hand out for more money.

Another thing we must observe is that the great experiment in privatisation – the jewel in the crown of the Thatcher regime – is looking less brilliant as the years go by. Certainly, the "gem" of water privatisation is looking more like tacky paste, with no prospect of any improvement. Once again, it seems, we've been had.

COMMENT THREAD

No longer news

It all started with this, written in concert with Booker. After almost exactly five years, it ends with this and an online advert for second-hand Snatches. If I could afford it, I'd buy one as a reminder, just to make sure people do not forget.

But the heat has already gone, the interest dissipated. Today, Booker's piece on the Snatch gets three comments (at the time of writing). The one on windmills gets forty-four. Even my piece barely got any comments.

Furthermore, some newspapers didn't even bother to report the story. Many that did got it wrong. Now there is no political advantage to be milked from it, dead soldiers and forgotten wars are no longer news.

COMMENT THREAD

Count the teaspoons

We are agreed. The Tories are running scared. With the collapse of the Lib-dims and the increasing instability of their coalition, they are confronting the prospect of an early election. And they have also realised that the Cameron strategy of attracting Lib-dim voters to the fold is not going to work.

All of a sudden, therefore, they need the eurosceptic vote. And after years of ignoring and scorning, they are making a pitch for it.

They've been at it before, of course – if one recalls the Feeble Finklestein back in 2009, but more recently we've had Oborne, Brogan and then Hilton, followed by Useless Eustice (pictured). Now, we have Iain Martin adding strength to the ranks of those who would have us believe that the Tories are suddenly coming over all eurosceptic.

Nor is this the first time that Martin has descended to tosh-level, but there is now too much of a pattern to believe that all of this is accidental. We are entirely in agreement in believing that there is the smell of a structured campaign here – evidence of guiding minds.

Such is the thickness of the bubble wall behind which these "born-again-eurosceptics" operate, however, that they really do believe that they can overcome the recent legacy of Cameronism, and his broken promise on the Lisbon referendum. They really do believe they  can capitalise on the increasing mood of euroscepticism in the country.

In this, though, they can rely on the continued lacklustre performance of UKIP, and the willingness of Farage to sabotage his own party, plus the efforts of "Uncle Tom" operations such as Open Europe and the EU referendum campaigns. All these are being enlisted to steer the wobblers in the direction of the Tories as they try to build a constituency that will get them back into office when the coalition goes belly up.

The interesting thing, though, is that all these born-againers are fighting their main battle through the MSM. They should have listened to the other Hilton, who observed - if somewhat prematurely – that the election will be fought on the web. And there, to the likes of Wittering for Witney and many others, the Tory ploy is so transparent as to be risible.

Englands Freedome echoes the theme, and so does The Snowolf. Very few on the web will need reminding that the first rule of politics – and especially when it comes to the European Union – is "never trust a Tory".

If the Tories are trying to tell us that they have suddenly become eurosceptics, it is time to count the teaspoons. When they come over all friendly, the response offered in the caption of the second cartoon (above right) seems appropriate.

COMMENT THREAD

That's democracy?

After a heated five hour debate, the final decision on the future of the tram project, to pursue a line to St Andew Square, was made on the basis of just sixteen Lib-Dim votes - a party which picked up just 627 votes in the Inverclyde by-election, with the candidate losing his deposit.

Furthermore, the "debate" was conducted without final details of a contract settlement being publicly known. With interest, the local authority will end up shelling a total of £420 million more of taxpayers' money, if it opts to repay the amount at £14 million a year over 30 years.

This brings the total cost of the new truncated scheme to a least £920 million (the details are very hazy about interest payments on the core £500 million). The 8.5 mile airport-St Andrew Square section of the line will thus come in at £1,700 an inch. This is only slightly less than the M74 extension, although cost per traveller mile is undoubtedly greater.

The point, though, is that there are many such examples in Westminster, and at local authority level. Elected and appointed officials are totally out of control. By no stretch of the imagination can this be government for the people, by the people. The very idea is absurd, yet there are many people (mainly politicians) who will tell you, with a straight face, that this is a democracy.  It isn't.  How can it be, when there is no mechanism for control?

That democracy can be conferred simply by graciously allowing the people to elect (some of) their rulers is one of the biggest frauds in the history of mankind.

This is their idea of democracy (above) ... using the fig-leaf of elected office to by-pass the will of the people, and impose more costs on them that none, individually, would approve. We must start with controlling the money ... and move on from there. The only democracy is direct democracy. The rest is a sham. To believe otherwise is delusional.

COMMENT THREAD

The tramlines of Referism

As the saga of the Edinburgh tramway continues, we now hear that councillors have decided on what they consider to be the least worst option – throwing more money at the project, rather than cancelling it.

Considering that cancellation will have cost taxpayers £750 million, the councillors seem to have come up with a completely new set of figures which allow them to claim that another, new, washes-whiter truncated scheme would only cost £774 million, and make an operating profit of £2 million a year. Whether that includes servicing the debt is not specified.

With a scheme that was supposed to cost no more than £500 million when it was approved, and is now running three years behind schedule, the public could be forgiven for taking a rather jaundiced view of the judgement of their civic leaders, the council being run by the Lib-Dims, who share power with the Scots Nats.

Breaking ranks, though, is the SNP's deputy city council leader Steve Cardownie. He opposes the scheme and has proposed a referendum, to allow the public to make the decision on the future of the tramway, rather than proven inadequate who run the council.

Needless to say, the idea has been rejected by the ruling élites. Cardownie says he was "obviously disappointed" by the decision, adding: "All options had a price tag but we maintained that the Edinburgh public should determine which one they preferred".

In a crucial statement, he then says: "We think it's inherently undemocratic not to give the Edinburgh people a voice in this matter. It's their money which is going to bridge the funding gap and it should have been up to them to decide".

And therein lie the tramlines of Referism. Cardownie is very clearly acknowledging that the confidence trick of allowing the public to elect their rulers – from a very limited gene pool – is not sufficient to confer democracy. What really matters is the power to control how the money is spent.

Control over the money is always at the root of power, which is why the EU is currently seeking ways of raising taxes independently of the member states. It is also why, if we are ever to have a functioning democracy, we the people must have a formalised right to decide on how much money is raised, and how it is spent.

However, referendums on individual budget items would be expensive and complex, but an annual referendum on the global budget is a good alternative, and a change that would be easily implemented – the general idea of an annual referendum having already been piloted successfully in respect of Council Tax. That is Referism ... an idea whose time has come.

COMMENT THREAD

Unreality

You can feel there is something wrong ... it is in the air. This is not the calm before the storm, not the calm before anything. Just flat, like the world stopped and everyone is frozen in a tableau of immobility. Crazy? Dunno. Just something odd is going on, and I can't put a finger on it.

Certainly, if the world (or our bit of it) hasn't stopped, it has slowed down. The grown-up bit of the Failygraph is telling us that the manufacturing sector expanded at its slowest pace in almost two years last month. Factories have reduced hiring and new orders fell, "reinforcing concerns about the health of the broader economic recovery".

And it isn't just us. China's factory sector grew at its slowest pace in 28 months in June as new orders expanded less quickly. Weaker global demand and tight monetary policy at home is - we are told - pinching production.

But we are not just talking about material things. Sanity is taking a break as well. Via Calling England, we have George Eustice MP telling us in the Guardian content partner that "We now have a genuinely eurosceptic Prime Minister who is better placed to deliver than any of his predecessors, including Thatcher".

Eustice, one might recall, stood unsuccessfully as a candidate for UKIP in the South West of England during the 1999 Euro Elections, going on to work as campaign director for the anti-euro "No Campaign".

He became head of press under Howard during the 2005 General and was then press secretary for "Call me Dave" from June 2005 until the end of 2008. Taking part in Dave's successful anointment to the leadership of the former Conservative Party, he has been rewarded with a nice safe seat at the Tory pig trough.

Having qualified for an early lobotomy, his conversion to a full-time moron is now complete, yet his words, instead of being greeted with snorts of derision, actually get house room in what has become the fantasy world of British politics, where normal life has been suspended.

But it's not even – or only – that which makes you wonder whether you are on the right planet. For sure, the latest dose of corporate greed doesn't help, when you see five directors of the publicly owned Scottish Water sharing in a one-off bonus pay-out of more than £450,000 for "meeting performance targets".

Chief executive Richard Ackroyd was handed £78,900 as part of the deal, meaning he took home £420,000 in total last year. Finance chief Douglas Millican and "asset management director" Geoff Aitkenhead both got bonuses of £103,000 to top up their total pay of £230,000.

Yet a spokeswoman for Scottish Water insists that the business is "unique" and that the salaries were below those of directors at water firms south of the Border. So that's alright then?

This is almost as mad and bad as the news that Northumbrian Water is subject to a takeover offer, worth up to £2.6 billion, from the Chinese group Cheung Kong Infrastructure Holdings, owned by Li Ka-shing, Hong Kong's richest man.

To an already surreal situation, we add the EU. With even the Irish Times recording that the proposed multiannual framework rise is "a step too far", and the Daily Mail complaining of a "deluded Brussels", the BBC chips in with a happy little piece, telling us all how Brussels is going to cut its costs.

Needless to say, the "colleagues" think the rise is wonderful. Verhofstadt, a former Belgian prime minister, described the commission's proposals as "ambitious, coherent and radical", adding, "I am pleased the commission has shown the courage to do this".

Courage? Is this a new name for suicide? And if it is, what does one make of Barroso, who says: "This is an extremely serious, credible proposal", yesterday dismissing the immediate barrage of condemnation, by airily declaring: "to say 'no' to something which was only adopted two or three hours ago is not serious or credible". Could we get Li Ka-shing to buy the EU?

Such is the mood, though, that when we see the headline "Greece aid 'likely released after EU talks Saturday'", one immediately thinks that its 96-hour bail period must have expired - which is why, presumably, Theresa May wants emergency legislation.

We are even losing our grip on the weather is not climate front, with the Met Office deciding that weather is climate, after all, when it suits its book. "It has been impossible to say these events were part of a bigger picture – until now", says Steve Connor in The Independent. No mention of the record snow pack though.

Thus are the warmists completely unaffected by the news that some of Britain's most beautiful landscapes are blighted by wind farms that will not generate enough electricity for the future.

The Department of Energy and Climate Change (DECC) has released figures which show a six percent drop in the amount of electricity produced by Britain's onshore wind farms. The department blames a drop in wind, revealing that 2010 was the calmest year this century, with onshore wind producing only 1.9 percent of all electricity in 2010, compared with two percent the year before - despite an expenditure of £5 billion.

Perhaps it is this feeling of going backwards which has Dutch junior foreign affairs minister Ben Knapen worrying that the "visible mess" surrounding voting in the European song festival has "reduced support for the European alliance". So there you are, it wasn't Greece and the euro, after all.

But none of this, and much, much more, actually explains the feeling. Something is up. Everything might look normal but, like Ed Miliband, but it isn't. A great cloud of invisible unreality has descended ... and who knows now what will happen. But, just maybe, Subrosa has stumbled on the cause of the problem.

COMMENT THREAD

Churnalism almost wins out

From the press coverage of the Snatch Land Rover litigation, on which a judgement in the High Court was handed down yesterday, you would think that the case against the MoD had been lost. It hasn't. The campaigners trying to bring the Ministry of Defence to book, for knowingly fielding dangerously vulnerable equipment in Iraq, have won a qualified victory.

The impression that the case was lost comes from the misleading headline on the BBC report (above), but this owes its origin to a similarly misleading report from the Press Association, which completely misrepresents the situation.

The essence of the flawed report, which has been replicated hundreds of times in local and national media, is that "a High Court judge has blocked attempts by families of four soldiers killed in Iraq to seek compensation from the Government".

The soldiers concerned were Pte Phillip Hewett, of Tamworth, Staffordshire, Pte Lee Ellis, of Wythenshawe, Greater Manchester, and Lance Cpl Kirk Redpath, 22, of Romford, Essex, all of whom were killed in Snatch Land Rovers, and Corporal Stephen Allbutt, 35, who was killed by "friendly fire" after his Challenger was hit by another.

Relatives, we are told, said the MoD failed to provide armoured vehicles or equipment which could have saved lives and should pay compensation. MoD lawyers, on the other hand, "said decisions about battlefield equipment are for politicians and military commanders and asked the High Court to stop compensation claims going forward". Then, says the report, "Mr Justice Owen ruled in favour of the MoD".

However, to project – by juxtaposition – that the judge accepted this particular MoD argument is simply false. As a spokeswoman for relatives' lawyers made clear, this was the MoD relying on the principle of "combat immunity", which removes any liability for exercising a "duty of care" in combat zones.

Here, the judge broke new ground. He refused to accept the principle, allowing Courtney, aged 10, daughter of Pte Lee Ellis, to proceed with a case of negligence. Similarly, the Challenger "friendly fire" case has been allowed through.

Where the Press Association had got itself confused is that there were two separate legs to the case. The first was the group of relatives, including Sue Smith, mother of Pte Hewett, who were not dependents, collectively seeking to make the MoD "... accountable for allowing their loved ones to go into combat in vehicles that were manifestly unsuitable for the job".

Because they were not dependents, they have no claim under common law and cannot seek damages for negligence under duty of care provisions. Before anyone can pursue a claim, the law requires them to prove they have suffered financial loss, which the relatives cannot or will not do.

Thus, this group of relatives have instead proceeded under Human Rights legislation (ECHR) and, since even that requires compensation to be claimed, the cases have been lodged in terms of the relatives seeking damages. However, as the entire group have constantly pointed out - articulated by Sue Smith - they are not interested in the money. This, in any case, is likely to be minimal, and soaked up by legal fees and repayment of legal aid. The relatives simply want the MoD brought to book.

Now, it is the ECHR leg of the case that has been blocked - on the grounds that the deceased soldiers were outside the jurisdiction of the UK at the time of their deaths because they were not in the UK nor on a British Army base. Therefore, it is held, the ECHR does not apply.

That the ECHR case would be rejected was actually an expected development, especially after the Jason Smith case. When I spoke to Sue Smith after the judgement, she was not at all dismayed. There are other, different cases being heard which may settle this point – or these cases themselves may end up in Strasbourg.

But on the negligence issue, ground really has been broken. And, for once, the loss-making Guardian has got it right, a distinction shared by the Belfast Telegraph. Both note that, relying on the principle of "combat immunity", the ministry had argued that this was a complete legal defence for incidents that took place in war zones.

The judge, says the papers, disagreed. In The Guardian, he is cited as saying: "There can be no doubt that the [MoD] is under a general duty to provide adequate training, suitable equipment and a safe system of work for members of the armed forces". Thus Courtney's claim, plus claims by Cpl Allbutt's widow, Debi, and Dan Twiddy and Andy Julien – two soldiers injured in the Challenger - could continue.

Before all the misleading publicity, a ministry spokesman had declared that: "The courts have upheld our arguments on Article 2 of the ECHR. We will be seeking leave to appeal against the decision about liability claims for equipment provision".

Latterly, Sky News got the news mostly right – but still with a misleading headline. The Mirror became a late entrant, correcting its earlier story - as did the Mail, while The Sun continues to get it wrong. Interestingly, the Failygraph does not carry a report at all.

Nevertheless, the manoeuvring continues. Those who lost their lives in Snatch Land Rovers – as well as the Challenger set - are one step closer to getting their day in court. Unfortunately, due to the bulk of the media and its churnalism, most people will never realise what has happened.

COMMENT THREAD