Time to turn devolution into federalism

So for St Andrew's day we have the announcement of some more financial powers for the Scottish devolved executive and its regional council parliament.

But surely logic demands that the devolved governments should have responsibility for raising all the cash they spend, otherwise devolution will continue as a parasitic exercise bleeding the English dry.

There will be some debate as the SNP is really pursuing its goal of turning Scotland into a PIGS basket case and will never stop asking for more powers until there are none left or given away to Brussels. And of course as we are finding out yet again the English tax payer still has to fund out the Celtic fringe even when its been granted independence ( see our second bailout of the southern Irish state ).

Better that this is all done on a formal and equal basis, and overseen by the grown ups who will end up paying anyway ( ie the English ).

So how about a federal UK with division of powers and financial responsibilities clearly and fairly laid out. That means an English Parliament and an English government. But then we almost have those right now - its just no one dares say so.

A bit of honesty, clear thinking, and straight talking is needed.

Vacant RedEd spots a bandwagon to jump on

Lets remember that Labour introduced tuition fees ( and they were always going to go up, the initial level was the level they thought they could get away with ).

Now feckless #RedEd has spotted a bandwagon to take his blank piece of paper on to try a shamelessly grovel for votes from naive middle class teenagers and students.

But even the feckless RedEd can't avoid the fact that Labour destroyed the country's finances and "there's no money left". So RedEd, when he's not actively considering perhaps saying something, maybe to the students, admits there would have to be something like a graduate tax.

Frankly there would be virtually no difference.

The questions are will RedEd get the jumping on bandwagon flack any Tory would get in these circumstances ? And will any one point out the plank in Labour's own eye on this ?

And anyway isn't it time someone told the children that things have to be paid for, and by the way the grown ups have taken out a stupendous loan in their name which they will have to pay back for the national debt that will make tuition fees look like a picnic !

Student tuition fees - protesting for a left wing lie

The BBC is notorious for letting left wing commentators of the hook, and they were at their best again this morning (R4Today this morning) when interviewing some student union president or other who was trying the lie that student tuition fees mean education is only for the well off.

1) Education needs to be paid for. Either those who are about to join the middle classes pay for it - or those who don't get to University will have to pay. This point is almost never put to the self righteous left wing talking heads.
2) Anyone who aspires to go to University should be capable of understanding there is no risk to paying these fees with the special government loans. If your education doesn't lead to economic success you don't pay ! That's not putting off the poor - just the stupid. ( Indeed its perhaps a bad deal for the tax payer - but there you have it. )

But of course the real underlying truth is none of this is about students or education - it is about the great left wing fantasy of protesting ( an end in itself ) and politicising a generation who are just gullible enough to think whatever they are told to think and never to question.

Indeed a major criticism of the current education system must be what sort of robots are we turning out who can't get their heads around the basic facts and arguments ?

Now I know there are side issues on how those in Labour special Celtic heart lands don't have to pay for things, but get English taxpayers to allow them to free-load. But that is a separate issue.

Its time the NUS was seen for the narrow bigoted partisan Left wing training institution that it is. And perhaps time to attack it funding and the way it conscripts students. It may also be time to separate political activity in student unions from social, welfare and sports activities.

Michael Gove has shown the way - time to drain the left wing swamp that produces such moronic arguments to deceive people with.

Appeasement is denial just as surely as ignoring debts was

Trouble is brewing and may soon boil over.

Appeasement of Iran and North Korea is getting close to running its course. The mad dog element of both regime's appears to be getting out of control and grows more bold with each show of respect act of appeasement by the west.

Some of the press speculate that the vapour trail of Los Angeles last week was a Chinese ICBM launch, but it has to be considered that it was a North Korean launch as a final warning to stand clear before they start assaults on South Korea.

Just as when politicians let the debt mountain get out of hand there will still be a price to pay - with interest. And that price is getting bigger with each day appeasement continues.

This can't be ducked, but it can be made worse by appeasement.

The problem is that the US is crippled by having Obama as President, and the enemies of the west know this all too well.

Further: I realise this can sound like warmongering - it isn't meant to be. But if your enemies discover you won't defend yourself when pushed you should expect a lot of shoving.

Of course any prelonged conflict in Korea will be an almighty mess - for details see Max Hasting's book on Korea, from the UK point of view a forgotten war. Given current military commitments the UK could probably only contribute the odd submarine and ship and a squadron of- saved at the last minute probably after talking to the American's - Tornado strike aircraft.

The results so far

Of 146 responses to my straw poll on AV

I'll have a look between the responses of those in different parties shortly...

Summary See complete responses

Which way would you vote if the AV referendum was today ?
	Yes to AV 30 21% No to AV - keeping FPTP 99 68% Spoil the ballot 5 3% Don't know 10 7% I'm not able to vote in the UK 1 1% People may select more than one checkbox, so percentages may add up to more than 100%.

If there was a general election now who would you vote for
	Labour 24 16% Conservative 41 28% Lib Dem 20 14% UKIP 37 25% Green 12 8% Nationalist (SNP Plaid EDP etc ) 5 3% Other 7 5% People may select more than one checkbox, so percentages may add up to more than 100%.

What result do you expect from the referendum ?
	Yes by a large margin 9 6% Yes, but just 36 25% No, but just 44 30% No by a large margin 56 38% People may select more than one checkbox, so percentages may add up to more than 100%.

Number of responses without dates: 1

Number of daily responses
	People may select more than one checkbox, so percentages may add up to more than 100%.

AV referendum straw poll

Ireland with 20-20 hindsight

Its worth reading this summary of govt spending plans in Ireland from 2007 in the context of the current Euro crisis.

Its easy to spot what's wrong, now. What troubling is all the politician language that goes around state spending and its vague justifications.

Frankly the same happened here, and we don't yet know the consequences.

H/T Finfacts.

Thinking about AV

Assuming Labour haven't managed to kick the whole thing into the long grass ( haven't checked since I got home of the shenanigans in the house of Lords ) then we have less than 6 months to go till the Alternative Vote (AV) referendum.

AV was dreamt up as a method of getting the Lib Dems to support the political careers of firstly failed Labour politicians, and then not quite succeeded Conservative ones.

The rather better organised #No2AV campaign have a whole raft of reasons why AV is a bad idea - not least is the election of #RedEd as Labour's new supreme leader.

But I'm still tempted by AV.

The #No2AV camapign are right about their many objections on grounds of justice, however I am stuck with the facts that various views I hold, that are majority views, don't result in the policies I'd want. ( Eg EU departure and an English Parliament - not to mention a proper immigration policy not undermined by a deeply flawed Lib Dem cabinet minister ).

How does this happen ? Well its party politics combined with the First Past the Post (FPTP ) voting system. The two main parties don't really allow their members to determine policy, or even their candidates ( yes that points arguable - but we all know its mostly true ). They rely on the fact that we hate the other sides ideas enough to back anyone who can beat them.

For example it very likely that a lot of card carrying, door knocking Tory party members vote UKIP at Euro elections, but not at general elections. Based on calculations about the voting system.

If we had AV people would vote differently, I think. And the truth is we are just not getting what we want with the current system.

So AV might be more monstrous and unjust that FPTP - but it might make up for this by being a method to bypass the party machines and for the population to rebel.

This line of reasoning is new to me. A few years ago I would just have seen the AV referendum as a way of ensuring a left of centre government in perpetuity, or at l;east the Lib Dems being king-makers for ever. But I'm not so sure now.

Right now I'm still finely balanced. Most of my party will vote no, and I may do so. But I'm not happy with the lack of influence that the democratic leavers of power offer right now, so perhaps a more unjust voting system that changed the balance of party politics might be a greater good.

This juror is still out on this issue...but of to do a little research tomorrow.

Now what, or who, could a fleet of Tornado bombers do that Harriers couldn't ?

Its perhaps worth wondering what changed the govt's mind, allegedly, late in the defence review. ( And perhaps who changed it - my guess the US ).

The Tornado GR4 is a strike weapon for serious inter state warfare ( yes you can deliver high explosives on the Hindu Kush - but so can DHL ), against a serious air defence system and air force you'll want something other than a mach 0.85 one engined Harrier.

Assuming we haven't lost leave of our senses and planning a suicidal war against Russia ( or even worse China ) - who else is left on the target list over the next few years ?

The real victims of the hijacked student demo are the Chinese

Watching the BBC's all to predictable reporting of the left wing thuggery in London today when agitators hijacked naive students into the disgrace we saw today it occurred to me who the real victims of their selfish and self righteous indulgence were. The Chinese people.

The BBC does its best to make trouble for David Cameron on his visit to China ( where he is fighting for the economic future of us all by the way ). They complain that this or that dissident wasn't mentioned and no denouncement of China was made by David Cameron.

But remember the Chinese looked to London today and saw the party headquarters of the governing party being threatened by a rabble of anarchists and naive students. What do you think they concluded ? Of course they will have thought the UK is far too lax and that the result of democracy and freedom of protest are the self destructive behaviour seen today.

So not only were left wing students campaigning to get poor non graduates to pay part of their fees through taxation, but they put back the cause of democracy and freedom in the East also.

They should all hang their heads in shame - if only they had the sense to feel shame.

It was Labour that cancelled the Sea Harrier and made reinvasion impossible

Again we have the selective amnesia of left wing supporting BBC reporters giving a false impression on radio reports this morning.

Lord West ( a govt. minister under Gordon Brown ) is banging on about the scrapping of the remaining ground attach Harriers in the context of our being unable to retake the Falkland Islands again.

What he's not telling you is that the scrapping of the Sea Harrier by Labour removed from UK Carrier operations the only half capable air defence and air superiority fighter available. This decision alone effectively stopped any future operations to retake the Falklands. ( The ground RAF ground attack harriers in the Falklands suffered painful loses as the had to press aggressive attacks against targets that could and did shoot back. )

Remember - if a new Argentine invasion were successful they would have two airfields ( one with full air force facilities and able to operate fast jets with large range ) to operated their recently modernized air force from against our vastly reduced Navy with only the air defence that type 45 destroyers could provide. Frankly we couldn't retake those islands even with ground attack harriers on Invincible class carriers.

Before that point Britain would have suffered its biggest defeat since Singapore and our Govt would have fallen.

This time the Argentines would be properly prepared to strangle our very long and poorly defended supply lines.

In short lose the airbase at Mount Pleasant and recovery by conventional military action would be impossible - with or without ground attack Harriers.

About the only useful role of Harriers slender to be already deployed to the Falklands so that destruction of our runways would not mean complete loss of counter invasion strike capability. ( Remeber this is all about deterrence of attack - on which subject it was unfortunate that the coalition forwent the first use of nuclear weapons against a non-nuclear power as that removes another uncertainty from Argentine military planning. )

Things are, as you see, not even close to as reported by the BBC.

The long and short is, as in Crete, lose the airbase and lose the islands. Everyone understands that which is why its so precarious. The Argentine military will know it needs to have a plan which will lead to the denial of the Mount Pleasant airfield from day one without a warning build up of forces. A special forces attack and stand off missiles would seem to do the trick - and Argentine military equipment is rumoured to have been found on beaches not far from the airbase. Thus one morning the British people will wake up to find the Falklands can't be resupplied or defences bolstered, but the end of the week they will have the surrender of the Falklands and the fall of the UK Govt to cope with.

It will take a lot more than three RAF Typhoons to prevent this and the current Harriers being retired would not impact the invasion unless they were ground based in the Islands ( which would be by far the best use of them ! ).

See also Decision to scrap Sea Harrier comes back to haunt, Threat to the Falklands and Sea Harrier over the Falklands

BBC Admirals urge rethink on Harrier and Ark Royal cuts

Further: My guess is the Admirals real target is the preserve the fast jet capability of the Fleet Air Arm - which whilst the FAA is a very admirable organisation ( indeed one of the UK's best and could teach the RAF a lot about running a tight ship - couldn't resist the pun ) it is a selfish motive that does not serve the country.

It is also possible that this is part of the low level snipping that Labour are trying to carry out to question and take the gloss off every Coalition decision.

( Will edit this latter - no doubt typos etc are over this pda typed post )

Published with Blogger-droid v1.6.5

Europe

There seems to be an attempt to declare the EU a non-issue with Conservatives in the press right now.

They are wrong and David Cameron would be making a bad mistake to think otherwise.

Published with Blogger-droid v1.6.4

Legends of the fall

There has been a slow trickle of articles in the UK hinting at US decline, and its in danger of turning into an avalanche.

These aren't the usual anti-American type articles of the type that made up the popular Bush cowboy hating period of the left a few years ago.

They are articles that foretell US decline and maybe fall as the true nature of the debt in the US and its trade imbalance becomes impossible to deny any longer. See James Warner today as an example.

I've blogged this week that the UK/France defence agreement needs to be seen just as much int he light of US decline and EU plotting for a Euro Navy. Other articles explain how the UK may have opportunities in the coming US weakness and decline.

Of course American's can see this coming, or at least some can. Hence the US Tea Party movement. The US tends to win the battles that it recognises and puts its shoulder to and perhaps American's are waking up to the damage of deficit and debt denial ( of the type that our left wing media continues to crave - and of course many Labour party member's recommend - no idea what Labour party policy actually is this weak, but now thankfully they're irrelevant ).

But a fall is coming.

The US will soon have no ability to launch astronauts. The US will soon have to retire carrier battlegroups and carry out the sort of defence review the UK has just had. The US will soon need to have its "withdrawal east of Suez" moment as it gives up on being the worlds only superpower. And the rest of us are going to have to live with the consequences, and we will learn the hard way what the US has been doing for us all these years.

I personally would bet on Americans bouncing back - but they will need to face up to the horror of the debt they have incurred and the misery of repaying it first. ( Just as we may yet have to do. )

The story of the Fall of Pax Americana has started and who knows what legends we will witness over the next few decades.

University degrees haven't suddenly got more expensive - but they do need to get more effective

Its worth remembering that all the current fuss is about funding, not buying.

I have to confess to being uneasy about how the middle class is being set up as the fall guys for some of the provisions required to bribe the Lib Dems into coming along to join the rest of us on planet fiscal reality.

But in principle those who chose degrees and study them should also pay for them. After all who else will or should pay ?

What worries me is that I suspect many top Universities are really charging rent on the names and the access to top employers those names provide ( combined with the self reinforcing alumni effect in recruitment ).

Could better University level degrees be delivered at lower cost and in a shorter time ?

Yes of course ! ( no pun intended. )

However would those degrees perform their real function as the sorter for the next step on the career ladder ?

As things stand probably not. And that is the problem with these reforms.

Like the split between rail track and operating companies a similar split is required for tertiary education if its performance is to be improved in academic terms, rather than as a form of ensuring that certain groups hold access to the top careers and jobs. ( Though I should say that I refute that its just a zero sum game here - better use and education of our population in relevant fields will improve the lives of everyone and the economy ).

For example, it should be possible for anyone to sit Oxford degree level exams - without having to pay for their tuition. Perhaps someone else can provide that part better and at lower cost.

Indeed the exams should be arranged so someone could finish an Oxford degree in two years rather than three - if they are able.

This is the truly radical reform, and perhaps one I've heard hinted at if not directly mentioned by David Willets before !

But without this reform the effectiveness of our education system won't improve and some people with ability and drive won't get their chance ( aka social mobility will stall yet further than it did under Labour ).

See also some reflection on the second great change in University funding - Labour's student fees by GuyTheMac. ( The first was of course student loans ! )

Back to Suez

So what to make of the latest Anglo-French defence treaty ?

Apart from the obvious stuff about cost cutting and aircraftless carriers it seems to me there is one clear message, and its one that isn't hitting the media just yet.

That message is that the strategic thinkers in French and UK govt have looked into the crystal ball and seen a possible world where the US can't be relied upon.

The key part of what's going on is the close cooperation on Nuclear issues. This is in part providing an alternative to the more dependent nuclear relationships both the UK and also more secretly France have with the US.

The US has slowly manoeuvred the UK into complete dependence on US technology - not that we haven't happily gone along with it. But now something about the US must be worrying our masters.

Is it a US in decline ? A US preoccupied with the challenge of China, competing for influence in Latin America and Asia with no time for old Europe ?

Maybe even the US has signalled this. Some in the US have studied the decline of the British Empire and have been impressed by the strategic decisions the UK took to reduce its sphere of influence to hold onto the rest ( specifically getting out of South America ). Maybe this is the future for a over stretched US.

Either way its a potent of things to come.

Suez II is now ready for production, only this time the US may be leaving us to our own devices.

Update: See this on US decline and how the UK may already be reacting to it.