Cllr. Gavin Ayling

The plans of the EU and Whitehall significantly effect the budgets of Local Councils. The problem is: should Councils spend much time leanring about the EU Regulations that are on the way? If the cost of checking for relevant legilsation is too much, though, the value of doing it may be lost.

Councils are being placed under an impossible burden by Whitehall’s instructions. “You will do this”, “you will do this by this date” and “you must do this without further funding”.

While, in a meeting the other day, I discovered that my colleague had identified £50,000 of savings for Adur (pronounced Aay-Der) I discovered today, while reading for another meeting, that an EU Regulation relating to Food Safety is going to cost us more money.

In that same meeting the other day I discovered that we will have to provide an electronic bidding system for Council housing by 2010 — the cost of which will be met by Council Tax payers, obviously. The choice we have is to do it now with some other Councils or wait until 2010 and do it on our own. So “choice” was the wrong word, then, wasn’t it.

As Daniel Hannan said recently, people like choices to be made locally — their opinions can more easily be heard by a Councillor (two of whom represent 3,921 in Buckingham at the 2001 census) than by an MP or cabinet MP who answers to a whole Parliamentary constituency. Whitehall must stop telling local councils what to do — give Councils the flexibility to do for their people what their people want them to do!

You have to feel sympathy for politicians… They go on the radio and try and defend the indefensible to an interviewer practised in the art of making them look like fools.

Fortunately for Mr Darling the interviewer today was less cruel than she should have been. Alistair Darling was talking about the Act that comes into force in time for the next working week that outlaws non-”objective” age discrimination.

Alistair Darling “would like” the law to abide by common sense. Which is like the fact that I “would like” criminals to be law abiding and that I “would like” addictive drugs not to be addictive. He is either naive or genuinely believes that this Act is well written… Which would be a first for this government.

His indefensible statements, though, came when asked about the minimum wage for under 21s. There is no coherent argument against having the same minimum wage for an 17 year-old as for a 22 year-old. That the minimum wage is an afront to market forces and that 17 year-olds are less likely to get a job on merit grounds is not the point — a fully competent 16 year-old should be paid the same as a fully competent 23 year-old and if the government insists on making laws that protect some wages, they shouldn’t dscriminate based upon age.

But poor Mr Darling had to try to defend this obvious illogical position without having any arguments in his armoury to defend with…

It will be interesting to see how powerful blogs are in achieving an apparently simple aim.

Sign the pledge to campaign against anti-semitism (which is on the rise again): Stop Anti-Semitism.

Dave says, in a comment earlier that “… there are more ways to address [the problem of Scottish influence in England] than a new Parliament“.

First, to be clear, “Scottish influence” isn’t really a fair abbreviation of the problems Dave was referring to. For a more complete idea of the problem, see the Campaign for an English Parliament’s Frequently Asked Questions.

So Dave (and others), let me know if you would, what solutions there are to the democratic deficit in England other than an English Parliament.

What a reflection of the Labour party that when John Prescott commits an assault on a video clip, the conference crowd cheers? Worse, one of the audience said afterwards “What an excellent video — it shows John making clear the Labour message”.

The fact that it was news that a politician apologised, as John did today, is a sad reflection on today’s political class. Let’s hope that he meant that apology and meant it for all the things he did wrong, not just playing croquet and corruption.

I won’t miss Two Jags, and I know I don’t miss his former department. I am disappointed that local Councils are still being told to do things that cost money and that the residents could do without — I am disappointed that the whole of Labour’s Whitehall machine is rubbish, not just JP.

Bloggers beware, there’s a new type of spam that quotes back some of your article and says “I don’t agree” followed by a web address… One was nearly approved today!

Iain Dale commented on David Milliband’s poor showing on yesterday’s Today programme.

I think there are some poignant questions that politicians should answer before we go too far down the route towards becoming environmentalists:

1) Several studies have shown that the cost-benefit ratio of tackling climate change is lower than many other worthy causes for humanity. Would it not be more sensible to tackle those with our hard-earned money?

2) During the late 1940s and the 1950s global temperatures flattened out — this despite the rapid growth of the Japanese, Russian and American economies as well as the development of jets. Should we wonder whether anthropological influences on the climate’s undeniable change are less significant than we think?

3) If politicians on the left seek to control individualism by using environMENTALISM there’s a risk that people will start treating it like a new socialism. We, on the right, must make it clear that avoiding damage to the environment is not a left-wing issue and that the left-wing solutions to climate change are dangerous and, often, counter productive (see the pressure on cars vs. the pressure on aeroplanes).

I have just one question: what’s in it for them?

The EU’s only good feature is freedom of movement of people. How must the negotiations sound to Bulgarians now?

“You can join the EU!”
“Oh great, what are the benefits?”
“Freedom of movement of people; unfortunately there’s loads of expensive regulation and bureaucracy but you get freedom of movement.”
“Excellent, when can we join?” replied the Bulgar.
“1st January 2006 — oh, but you won’t be able to move around freely within the EU.”
“So, could you list those benefits again please?” (warily)

etc.

There once was a time that whenever Shami Chakrabarti would come on TV I would get all angry and criticise (often out-loud) her lefty position and crime-complicit attitudes.

So something’s changed. Either I’ve moved to the left (let’s forget my comments about water shall we — I know I was wrong!) or Ms Chakrabarti has moved to the right, or just stopped being wrong.

I don’t know which it is, but I am happier as a result. I suspect she’s moved to the liberal side of Labour which is what is making her seem more reasonable. That Liberty is helping motorists in the European Court of Human Rights (not an EU court) against the UK government’s demands that people incriminate themselves just makes me like them even more.

Take a look at Shami’s response to the Danish cartoons and you will see a studied response that is just perfect.

This post has been written by Miss Anon and posted on her behalf:

It’s all very well for people to have a heated debate about the influx of Romanian, Bulgarian and Polish workers ‘invading’ this country but for years we’ve welcomed Australian students, travellers and workers giving them two year Visas; we’ve allowed French, Italian, Spanish and Dutch people to work in this country without ever thinking that they are different. That these countries have been in the EU for a long time has meant that we never consider their movements here an issue.

Can we really tell how many French immigrants have come to this country knowing they have a home in both countries. Are we concerned, really, that some people have their cars registered in France and are effectively immune from parking tickets over here? I would say no.

Yesterday the Daily Express wrote an inflamatory article about the price of cheap flights from eastern Europe with an indignant tone… The cost of flights from Romania and Bulgaria will be £8 from when they join on the low cost operator, Wizzair. But why the uproar? We’ve had these low cost airlines from Spain, Portugal, Italy, etc for years. Why don’t we have a similar debate about Spaniards or Greek students? All these people use our NHS, for example and students don’t need to pay for healthcare.

Could it be that there is debate because we think of eastern Europeans as slavs; do we think that they are somehow more dangerous or nasty than people from southern Europe? If we’re going to have an EU where people are able to move freely around, then they should be allowed to move freely around — otherwise what’s the point?
Miss Anon

Samizdata have a post about the apparent abandonment of Conservative (read: capitalist) principles over foreign aid and domestic taxation.

I believe that capitalism is the way to solve the world’s ills, but not by having capitalism here and then shipping the proceeds abroad, as Cameron suggested. Rather we need capitalism in India (rather than the socialism that appears to be growing there) and then there will be no need for so-called ‘aid’.

It was interesting on Radio 4’s Beyond Belief yesterday that all the commentators were in agreement — the solution to the Third World’s perpetual poverty is capitalism.

Let’s hope Cameron realises that that’s the solution to our nation’s problems too.

Bill Cameron asks whether Barroso is trying to turn us against Turkey’s accession to the EU…

And I have another question: If the UK government goes against the principles of the EU and refuses Romanian and Bulgarian workers the right to come here, when will that restriction have to be dropped according to the agreements?

If it happens under the next administration, whoever that may be, it would be very damaging indeed.

Update: (16:21, 26 September) I wrote this post in a hurry and, after re-reading and after receiving complaints, I’ve tried to clear up what I meant in the comments!

The Yorkshire Air Ambulance donation page for Richard Hammond has now raised £182,285 and the YAA have decided to purchase another helicopter!

What’s depressing to me, though, is that that amount of money is enough for only 50 days of operation.

Top Gear’s been postponed indefinitely which is typical, but I think it probably is appropriate not to show the programme while Richard’s still recovering. Now, this isn’t supposed to suggest I only want him to recover so that I can have my favourite English TV programme back on: get well soon Mr Hammond — the TV screen is dimmer without your teeth.

Until recently my answer to that question would have been an unequivocal “No” and I still believe that that is the case amongst the party’s membership.

But when David Cameron made his speech in Scotland the other day, he attacked quite blatantly the legitimate concerns of his largest voting bloc.

The thing is, I really don’t know why he did it. There’s absolutely no logical value in making a poisonous speech that make angry a proportion of 85% of the population in order to placate a proportion of 11% of the population.

I am Conservative, and despite the tone of the speech, I will remain Conservative and proud of it: Cameron’s tone on everything else is table setting before the Conservative meal. But he’ll only manage to maintain this attitude so long. The Conservative Party is almost alone in the United Kingdom as a reasonable right-wing party. But if that were to change then I am sure the majority of blogging right-wingers would jump at the chance to join that new party.

I have written before, too, about the Campaign for an English Parliament and, quite frankly, I do not understand opposition to it. I’ve not yet received anything more logical than emotional responses to the question: Why don’t Conservatives in government support it? I know that a large proportion of the membership of the Tory party do and I know that the membership won’t leave the party over this one issue; but Cameron must know what dangers he is running with his membership. The EU was a big ask of the membership under Major; England is Cameron’s EU.

So why this outburst? Pox Anglorum’s excellent post that absolutely must be read.

Jeremy Clarkson makes the licence fee worth complaining about less. He regular says “Due to the unique way the BBC is funded…” which is enough for me: I’m already laughing without knowing which punchline or reason for his outburst.

So when Alan Drew tells us on his blog that Mr Clarkson has written a piece on Mr Hamster’s crash and recovery, you’ll know its entertaining.

And in the same way as his appearance makes me watch the BBC, Mr Clarkson’s piece has prompted my first reading of The Sun in quite a long, snobby time.

Every so often I look at my blogroll and I think to myself “Do you know what, you’ve not clicked that link in ages”.

So today I visited Non-trivial Solutions and found it hasn’t been updated since April. It is so sad that blogs die like that. So if you notice a broken or dead blog on my blogroll, please do let me know — it will give room, perhaps, for yours!

At the moment there are very few local people reading my blog. This is, to be honest, my fault.

I’ve released two newsletters since my candidacy was announced and I did not add the web address to that. I’ve spoken to many constituents and not mentioned it once. It isn’t even on my Councillor contacts details held by the Democratic Services department of the Council.

So, while I know you don’t really care, this is a statement of intent: To make this blog known in Shoreham generally, in Buckingham Ward specifically and to make it a resource for those who live in the area.

That doesn’t mean anything will change here, though!