Tuesday, November 28, 2006

Compromising one's principles #94

Iain Dale has a shock horror story up about UKIP using the EuroParliament email facilities (for which read "using a webmail address that might have been sent from EU facilities but could just as easily have been sent from a laptop at home").
UKIP appears to be using European Parliament email facilities to persuade Conservative councillors to defect to them. Oh the deep irony. Nigel Farage is emailing Tory Councillors via Jeffrey Titford MEP's European Parliament email...

I'm told there hasn't exactly been a rush of replies... Well, not ones that I could print.

Well, one would imagine not. One could hardly the Tories to stick to any sort of principles when power is so nearly within their grasp, could one?

It must be a source of real sorrow for someone like Iain, who is very much a free-trader and anti-EU, that his party's official policy is to remain within that corrupt organisation. Let's just have a quick reminder of what the Tory Party Chairman, Francis Maude, said, shall we?
It is not the Conservative Party's view that we should be out of the European Union; it is our view that we should work with others... partners... to reform it, to make it more appropriate, more decentralised... More appropriate for the modern networked world that we're in, rather than relating it back to the old block Europe, block world, that it was born into.

The party that I belong to may be a bit of a shambles at the moment, but at least no one can say that I am betraying my principles for a shot at personal power, eh? Many of our politicians have said that they want to reform the EU and it hasn't bloody well worked has it? Because the EU doesn't want to be reformed; the other countries in the EU don't want it to be reformed.

So, one can conclude that Maude is either deceiving himself or the Tories who he hopes to keep onboard. Personally, given that Maude has been in politics for a while and must know the realities of the situation, I conclude that he is trying to deceive the voters.

When Iain finds himself a seat, will he stand on an anti-EU ticket, I wonder? Will he tell his political masters that he is standing on an anti-EU ticket? Will he sign up to the Better Off Out Campaign.

I cannot see any real problem with Brussels-based UKIP staff using a EuroParl email address. Sure, it would be better to use a UKIP address but, knowing the staff as I do, I suspect that the use of EuroParl address was down to technological ignorance more than anything else; certainly, all the staff do have their own UKIP email addresses.

I can't quite see why Iain has such a problem with UKIP, really. Can it be some kind of residual guilt? Or is it that Iain was dismayed by Farage promising that UKIP would put candidates up against Conservative candidates even if they were signed up to Better Off Out? Ah, what a tangled web we weave, when first we try to square what we believe with something that our masters don't, eh?

And, of course, today's revelations that Cameron has been in "secret talks" with the head of the unelected EU Commission, from whence our laws do flow, will come as a further kick in the nuts element of joy to all of those EUsceptic Conservatives (you know, those ones for whom there is no place on Cameron's front bench).
David Cameron has held secret talks with the head of the European Commission over tackling climate change, a sign that he is prepared to work with Brussels on his green agenda.

Despite his reluctance to mention Europe publicly, the Tory leader showed that in private he was willing to talk extensively to José Manuel Barroso, The Times has learnt. The discussions, at Mr Cameron’s office in the Commons, ranged over how the EU could combat global warming as well as other issues facing Britain.

Well, there we are, chaps; just in case you thought that there was any way in which we ruled ourselves, it turns out that the potential leader of Great Britain is, in fact, consulting the leader of a corrupt, unelected, murdering organisation on how best our potential elected government should run our country for us.

Not that Dave is selling us down the river, oh no. I'm sure that Mr Barroso will be more than happy for Spam to slap more taxes onto us in the name of "averting climate change". And how nice of Mr Cameron to discuss "other issues facing Britain" with Mr Barroso. It's all very chummy, isn't it?
Mr Barroso, the public face of the Brussels bureaucracy that is detested by many of Mr Cameron’s MPs, said the meeting showed that the issue of climate change rose above domestic politics.

Yup, the ignorance, gullibility and sheer, naked greed of politicians crosses all borders, doesn't it?
The former Portuguese Prime Minister, who will be in London today for talks on green issues with business leaders, told The Times that the first meeting between the two men was part of a dialogue about “making Europe work”.

Making Europe work for whom precisely? I'm sure that the EU works very well for Mr Barroso. And it works very well for our politicians; the only decision that they have to make these days is "how big a payrise shall we award ourselves this year?"
The meeting was kept quiet by Mr Cameron’s office because it came shortly after he said that voters had lost faith with the Conservatives in the past because they kept “banging on about Europe”.

No, they didn't. They lost faith in the Conservatives because the stupid fuckers couldn't seem to actually agree a policy on the EU and various cuntfuck, arsehole, corrupt and venal "grandees"—such as Ken "Cunt" Clarke and Michael "Tarzan wouldn't deign to shit on his head" Heseltine—kept contradicting the party line (which was hardly that bloody strong anyway).

People lost confidence in the Tories because the Tories couldn't seem to decide what, exactly, it was that they stood for. And it is precisely the same reason that Cameron is not soaring ahead in the polls now; it is because Spam is either lying to his loyal Conservative voters or he is lying to the general public.

Look at this fucking government! Look at the enormous fuck-ups that they have made! Look at the massively increased tax burden and the very public acts of pissing money up the wall! The Tories should be a million miles ahead in the polls. Instead, they can barely muster a 6% lead and most of that has come from the LibDems. This is pathetic.
Asked whether he was surprised to find Mr Cameron willing to engage with the EU, given his eurosceptic image, Mr Barroso said: “I think that everybody who is reasonable and rational understands that [member states] cannot do it alone. The question today in the 21st century is not to be for or against Europe. It makes no sense. The question is how can we make it work.” He said it was obvious that Britain, Germany or France could not tackle climate change alone.

Well, no, quite right. However, it might be a good idea even to attempt to understand the fucking science behind it (which the politicians patently do not) and it might be a good idea to acknowledge that, without the participation of China and India, there is fuck all use in having an EU concensus.

Given that countries are going to have to attempt to make treaties with China and India over this (assuming that you think that carbon compounds are, in fact, having any important effect on the enviroment), why on earth would we, in Britain, with our carbon outputs (possibly) producing 0.05% of global warming, really need to negotiate with anyone? Why on earth should we be in the vanguard of countries being taxed to hell? And why, in the name of all that's unholy, should we do it and get shafted by the EU countries through their stupid carbon trading scheme?

If Cameron really thinks that carbon emissions are a problem, then maybe he should try Pigouvian taxation instead. And that is something that the EU would not embrace and it is certainly not something that we need them for. Strange Stuff examines why Pigouvian is best.
Pigouvian taxation on the other hand makes no assumptions about how much carbon production will maximise happiness across a society. Everybody is free to produce as much carbon as they like, but they have to pay for the damage it causes. It is about forcing everybody to take responsibility for the damage of their own actions. Each individual weighs their own individual circumstances and decides what will make them happiest. In this they will always have far more information about their individual desires and circumstances in order to make a better informed decision than any centralised authority ever can, and since the negative externalities have now been internalised, thanks to the Pigouvian tax, that is included as well.

So which is better comes down to who you think can make the decision better. Is decision as to the amount of carbon produced by a society best done socially by the government, or individually by the citizens? As a Classical Liberal I prefer individuals taking responsibility for their own decisions, and so on this occasion I think that Pigouvian Taxation is better than Carbon Trading. As a confirmation there is the Neil Harding Test. Yep, looks like I was right.

But, of course, I'm forgetting that the Tories are about as conservative as NuLabour these days, aren't they? I'm happy that Iain Dale can square his personal beliefs with current Tory HQ thinking, but I am afraid that I cannot.

So fuck 'em.


Anonymous said...

If we must have green bootboy fascism then taxes are the way to go according to Ruth Lea in the Telegraph yesterday. Although she says that the future is uncertain and some risks have to be guarded against, she writes that "much of the talk of the scientific consensus of climatic apocalypse is climatology's equivalent of snake oil." Couldn't have said it better myself.

Anonymous said...

Would be a good idea if UKIP stood in more local election wards. Preferably those with a low majority for the party-formerly-known-as-The-Conservatives.

NHS Fail Wail

I think that we can all agree that the UK's response to coronavirus has been somewhat lacking. In fact, many people asserted that our de...