EU Referendum

A defence against referendums

2012-03-06T17:37:00.007Z

It is inevitable, I suppose, that when the Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism wanted someone to give the Reuters Institute/BBC David Butler lecture, focusing on the decay of democracy, they would go to someone in the political bubble.

That person was Peter Kellner, husband of EU "foreign minister" Baroness Catherine Ashton - and this is their choice of speaker to tell us about democracy? But then, the Reuters Institute boasts for its advisory board Lord Patten, former EU commissioner, as its chair, and such notables as Alan Rusbridger, Editor in Chief of The Guardian and Mark Thompson, Director-General, BBC. Its director is David Levy, the controller of public policy at the BBC until 2007.

Howsoever, it came to pass that yesterday, the egregious Mr Kellner delivered his lecture, the full text of which is on the Reuters Institute site, entitled "The Second Superpower".

The title came from New York Times writer, Patrick Tyler who in February 2003, one month before the Iraq war, wrote that the huge anti-war demonstrations around the world this weekend were reminders that there may still be two superpowers on the planet: "the United States and world public opinion".

To an extent, the title is a red-herring, because Kellner goes on to say that world public opinion failed to stop the Iraqi war and that, while the eventual impact of people power will be immense, "right now it is still groping for institutional forms that can give it teeth".

Bizarrely though, Kellner did not seek to empower the people – the objective of a functioning democracy. Instead, he came to warn that representative democracy was in trouble, not just in Greece and Italy, or Russia and the United States, but "here in the United Kingdom". He argues that "our very system of democracy is more fragile than we like to think".

In fact, we do not have democracy, as such, but a system which now relies only partially on "representative democracy". But representative democracy isn't democracy at all, but the next best thing, devised for the times when it took days for a stagecoach to get to Edinburgh, there was no telephone and the internet had yet to be invented by Al Gore.

Then, says Kellner, representative democracy enjoyed a technical monopoly but now, under the assault of modern technology, mendacious journalism and angry voters, we are "drifting towards a political system" which "will undermine representative democracy". And this is, horror of horrors, direct democracy - with decisions made by the people using referendums.

Thus, very early in his lecture Kellner nails his flag to the mast. He is not there to defend democracy at all, but to protect the status quo - representative democracy, the thing that isn't democracy at all - mounting a defence against that peril of all perils, the referendum .

To perform his task, he decides to frame the "core issue" in terms of legitimacy – whether people accept the principles of representative democracy. He then calls in aid his own polling organisation to inform us that nearly two-thirds of voters (62 percent) believe politicians lie "all the time" and less than a quarter (24 percent) think parliament does a good job debating issues of concern to them.

The biggest handicap though is that voters see MPs as servants of the party leadership, backed by a poll which also showed what people thought MPs should be giving most weight to their views.

It is because of this, Kellner argues, we see a growing clamour for direct democracy and the use of referendums. And, if a variety of issues were put to the vote, "Referendum Britain" would be a country outside the European Union, with no net immigration, a £1 million maximum pay limit and parents armed with the names and addresses of local paedophiles.

This, clearly, is not acceptable to Mr Kellner – or his backers (and, doubtless, abhorrent to his wife), so the man launches into an attack on the very idea of referendums. And, shorn of its rhetoric, this is what Kellner's lecture is really all about.

To be fair to the man, in identifying the problems with referendums, he makes some good points - not least that politicians, in deciding when, where and on what terms referendums are held, can use them as a tactical device to achieve their own ends. And with such arguments, he argues against direct democracy in general and their concomitant referendums as the basis for improving democracy.

Instead, Kellner, the pollster, wants better ways of measuring public opinion, and then urges MPs to engage more fully with it. Interestingly, though, he is very far from being the first to make such points. More than seventy years ago, in the pages of Reynolds News, Prof A Berriedale Keith was writing in very much the same terms. Then as now, though, the problem is not so much the measurement of public opinion as getting MPs to take notice of it, and "not humbly to obey the bidding of the whips".

To that problem, Mr Kellner has no answers. Even though he does come up with ideas for improving the measurement of public opinion, he no more than Berriedale Keith, have any ideas as to how MPs can be forced to take note of public opinion. He ends up, therefore, with the incredibly lame suggestion that the public should have confidence in the process by which governments and parliament reach their decisions.

The goal, he suggests, should be neither to surrender to the "second superpower" nor to ignore it, but to show that it is being listened to, seriously and with at least a semi-open mind, so that when MPs vote differently from the way their constituents want, they deserve respect for the way they make up their minds. Referendums, he says, can then be kept for those, hopefully rare, occasions when Parliament gets it totally wrong.

Such is a partial summary, which barely does justice to as lecture that runs to thirteen pages. But what is especially interesting is that Kellner says that, because they misuse them, politicians should be banned from calling referendums. Instead, the public should be given the power to wield a "people's veto" on any Act of Parliament or local council decision by gathering the signatures of ten percent of the electorate on a petition.

But, in coming out with ideas that were, in fact, being rehearsed more than seventy years ago, he does not acknowledge current ideas, particularly the discussions on the blogosphere where there is a healthy debate going on.

And, of course, he does not in any way acknowledge the concept of referism, which offers the ultimate "people's veto" in allowing the people to block the budget. The likes of Kellner are far to grand to sully their precious minds with other people's ideas. Thus, whatever else we have here, this is not a democrat speaking. This is a man who wants to keep people away from power, and to reinforce the status quo.

COMMENT THREAD

Dutch eurodoom

2012-03-06T09:38:00.002Z

Taking a break from his prolonged break (in blogging), Klein Verzet brings us a "bit of news" – a report, he says, that "will blow up the eurozone".

This shows that the Netherlands would benefit financially from leaving the euro and returning to the guilder (75-pages available here). It was commissioned by Geert Wilders and produced by Lombard Street Research.

The bottom line is that the euro has damaged the Netherlands' prosperity. For example, the Dutch economy has grown an average 1.25 percent per annum since the euro was introduced, compared with three percent each year in the twenty preceding years.

Yet over the past ten years, the economies of Sweden and Switzerland, which are not members of the eurozone, have grown 2.25 and 1.75 percent respectively, the report states.

Leaving the euro now will cost up to €51 billion, but that would be more than offset by the €75 billion saved by not propping up the single currency, Wilders says. Predictably, he wants a referendum on the issue – which, of course, will not happen in the foreseeable future, as it might give the "wrong" result.

COMMENT THREAD

The cliff-edge recedes?

2012-03-05T22:08:00.002Z

Despite the no-expense-spared run of clichés, it looks as if the "colleagues" aren't even going to give us a decent crisis for our money. At least, that would be the conclusion if we take at face value the New York Times, along with the Financial Times and several others.

In the words of the NYT, Greece moved a step closer to avoiding default when the Institute of International Finance, the global banking group that represents major private-sector holders of Greek debt, said that twelve members of its steering committee would take the haircut.

However, ZeroHedge immediately put a damper on that, telling us that the steering committee only holds about 20 percent of the private sector bonds that are involved in the debt swap. That means, says ZH that a whopping 80 percent of the bonds are unaccounted for, and more importantly, "it means that the likelihood of a major blocking stake having organised is far greater than even we expected".

Nevertheless, with even the Wall Street Journal sounding bullish, we might only have to let a few more clichés run to the wire, before the game is over and the man in the white hat rides off into the sunset.

COMMENT THREAD

The end of Merkel's Europe?

2012-03-05T17:49:00.001Z

One is just a tad surprised by the surprise expressed over Mariano Rajoy's surprise announcement about the Spanish deficit last week. That is because, if one recalls what the prime minister was saying at the end of February, it should not have come as a surprise.

Anyhow, even if the Financial Times was surprised when Rajoy said that Spain was going to breach its budget target for the year, that is nothing to what Ambrose is calling it - no less than a "thunderclap".

But, it seems, it is not only what Rajoy has done, but the way he has done it – or, to be more precise – what he has been saying. Bearing in mind that the "colleagues" had just signed their fabulous new treaty, taking the eurzone closer to fiscal union, up pops Rajoy and says: "Democracy, national sovereignty and dignity of the states and their citizens in a democratic Europe that is said is much more important than the supposed 'fiscal union' of the EU".

This is as close to farting in church as it gets, and what Ambrose finds striking is the wave of support for Mr Rajoy from the Spanish commentariat. One from Pablo Sebastián, he says, left me speechless.

"Spain isn’t any old country that will allow itself to be humiliated by the German Chancellor," he writes – as loosely translated by Ambrose. "The behaviour of the European Commission towards Spain over recent days has been infamous and exceeds their treaty powers … these Eurocrats think they are the owners and masters of Spain".

"Spain", he continues, "and other nations in the EU are sick and tired of Chancellor Merkel's meddling and Germany's usurpation – with the help of Sarkozy's France and their pretended 'executive presidency' that does not in fact exist in EU treaties".

There is then reference to the behaviour of the EU commission to Spain in recent days being "infamous" and "exceeded the powers granted to this institution to the Treaties", and a complaint that the Eurocrats are acting "as if they were owners and lords of the Government of Spain".
Thus does Sebastián say: "Rajoy must not retreat one inch. The stakes are high and the country is in no mood to suffer humiliations from a Chancellor who is amassing all the savings of Europe and won't listen to anybody, as if she were the absolute ruler of the Union".

"Merkel and the Commission should think hard before putting their hand into the sovereignty of this country – or any other – because it will be burned and the citizens are not going to consent".

This then is the fermenting mood in the fiercely proud and ancient nation of Spain in Year III of depression, probably the worst depression the country has seen since the 1640s, says Ambrose. And he sees in this trenchant comment the awakening of the Latin Bloc – and the end of Merkel's Europe.

If that is the case, it really would be something.

COMMENT THREAD

What is the purpose?

2012-03-05T12:15:00.002Z

The Independent, to its credit, conveys the condemnation by Nassir Abdulaziz Al-Nasser, the 66th elected president of the UN General Assembly, of his own organisation.

The United Nations, he says, "must urgently reform to stay relevant in a world facing unprecedented conflicts and is not fit for purpose", and that "the ability of five countries to veto Security Council decisions was no longer credible and the outdated system was endangering international peace and security".

Al-Nasser is treading on dangerous ground here, as it is the veto which makes the difference between an intergovernmental organisation and a supranational government. It was the lack of veto in the League of Nations which led Jean Monnet to look for an alternative structure, and the emergence of qualified majority voting, on which the EU largely depends.

Whatever the current limitations, the prospect of a UN constructed on the same basis as the EU is not a road down which we want to go. Therein lies another major step towards the establishment of a world government.

Such considerations actually beg the question as to what the UN is for. Al-Nassar is looking at the organisation in the context of its traditional peace-keeping role, but as Dellers points out in his book Watermellons, there is far more to the UN than this.

In fact, it is through subsidiary bodies like the UNEP, the UNFCCC and the IPCC, that the real power of the UN is exercised, making the traditional peacekeeping operations a minor part of the total operation.

Via Watermellons we actually get a very much clearer idea of where the UN is headed, with its grandiose and sinister ambitions for world governance. Whether, with his call for the abolition of the veto, that casts Al-Nassar as a useful fool, or a Machiavellian plotter, is moot, but the one thing we really cannot afford is a UN without that veto.

However, we can agree with Al-Nassar that the UN is not "fit for purpose". Perhaps, then, the more important question is whether we can (or should) afford a UN at all, or whether we should abolish it entirely.

COMMENT THREAD

A cliché-rich environment

2012-03-05T00:02:00.008Z

Well, the "colleagues" are not to be denied their crises, with another one set up for this week. This is, according to The Financial Times and other media sources, Greece on another cliff edge – if a country can be said to be thus poised.

With weary constancy, we are told it faces yet another "decisive week" in its struggle to avert a sovereign default – this time the "planned debt swap". The FT has it poised not on a cliff edge but a knife-edge – which, in terms of helpful clichés, means much the same thing. I suppose it is even possible that one could be poised on a knife edge as one falls over the edge of a cliff.

The proximate cause of this current crisis is "doubts" over the level of participation by private bondholders. At least 75 percent must "volunteer" to partake in a form of ritual slaughter known as the "Collective Action Clauses" (CACs), where private holders of €206 billion in Greek bonds have until Thursday evening to decide whether to take part in a swap.

The word "swap", of course, is another of those clichés – and may also be a euphemism. It requires the bonds to be traded for a package of bonds and cash that will knock about €100 billion off Athens' debts. This is known as a "haircut", even though the scissors are applied somewhat below the neckline - more like Shylock territory really, only think kilogrammes (plural).

The 75 percent figure was one which was inserted retrospectively into the bond conditions, but the "drop dead" figure is 66 percent. If less than that number participates, the CACs become invalid … end of deal and civilisation as we know it, not with a whimper but a CAC (failed).

However, in an "cliché-rich environment", we have been marched to the top of the hill and down again so many times that one just knows that we are going for yet another long march. The investors will run it to the edge and then cave in. After all, what is €100 billion between friends, when the end of the world is at stake?

The last word, though, must go to an "insider" who says, "we are going to be flying blind for a few days". A piece of cake, as they say, to use up another from our inexhaustible stock of clichés.

No cliché has been harmed in the writing of this post.

COMMENT THREAD

All hail Helmer the heretic!

2012-03-04T19:36:00.002Z

It would seem that I have under-rated the earth-shaking importance of Roger Helmer jumping ship to join UKIP, giving it only the briefest mention in an earlier piece. However, Autonomous Mind makes some of the necessary observations – having outed the man in the first place - while Roger himself gets the chance to explain on the Tory Boy Blog.

The event of Helmer's defection is celebrated by a photograph of an apparently smiling Farage, locked in a Masonic handshake with the Helmer (click also the photo above). But look closely and you can see the dead eyes, and gritted teeth.

This possibly because the very thought that has occurred to Your Freedom and Ours has most certainly crossed Farage's mind. Given the size of the two egos, it is unlikely that both could survive in the one party.

With the help of a little bit of photoshop, therefore – amateur but good enough for the purpose – I have reproduced the happy group photograph (above right), modified to represent how Helmer most probably sees his role in UKIP. Two go in, but only one is going to come out.

COMMENT THREAD

Ignorance or deception?

2012-03-04T14:34:00.004Z

Following up on my earlier piece on circuses, Booker today notes that there have been few longer-running threads in his column than that famously invisible "EU elephant in the room".

This is the way that ministers, MPs (and even, alas, too many journalists – says Booker) fail to admit or explain that some controversial policy or law stems not from our own government but from "Europe" and we are therefore powerless to change it. There have been countless examples over the years, from the destruction of our postal system to those fraudulent but EU-approved breast implants.

This, in my view, is an extremely important phenomenon: people are being deliberately shielded from the impacts of our supreme government in Brussels, to which our provincial government is increasingly subordinated.

Interestingly, though, the circus example, although one of the more egregious examples, evoked absolutely no comment on our forum, and very little in the comments to Booker's own comments, which long seem to have been hijacked by a bunch of obsessive climateers – with only a couple of comments on the circus piece.

Despite that, the circus issue is special, not least because the indications are that the government set out deliberately to deceive. And newspapers such as the Daily Wail seem to have bought the spin, announcing that the government was intending to ban circus animals.

On in later versions of the story in The Independent did it emerge that the government had made no commitment to a ban, simply leaving it as a vague aspiration, with no firm date offered for when a ban would be implemented.

Cameron was thus accused of deploying "smoke and mirrors" to avoid imposing an immediate ban on wild animals in travelling circuses (above), while Tory MP Mark Pritchard, who had been leading the campaign for a ban dismissed the announcement as "disingenuous".

"Without a proper commitment to legislation in this Parliament", he said, "any claim to be listening to the will of Parliament is meaningless. This is a classic smoke-and-mirrors tactic by Number 10. Meantime animals continue to suffer".

Not once did any of the reporters, the government, nor in any of the published comments, was the EU dimension mentioned, although – as Witterings from Witney observes – EU activity continues apace.

In this affair, a possible explanation is that animal welfare is a highly emotive subject, and the fact that the UK is being prevented from adopting a ban is potentially very damaging to the EU, hence the reluctance to publicise the EU role. Even the Commission seems wary of admitting its role, forcing the EU Ombudsman to take a hand.

All the same, one really does wonder whether ministers are fully informed. In this case, we are dealing with Defra minister Jim Paice. He is not exactly famed for his intellectual accomplishment, to the extent that some have thought to applaud him when he successfully strings together three words to make a sentence without civil service help.

Certainly, there is the most profound ignorance within the Tory ranks on the role of the EU, evidenced by the recent comment on the fate of Cameron's top aide Steve Hilton. He is regarded as "one of the most imaginative brains in the Conservatives' high command", whose ideas have included scrapping maternity leave, suspending consumer rights legislation

But we are now told that Hilton has been driven out by Europe, after becoming "increasingly frustrated" by the slow progress of the battle against red tape and the endless meddling of Europe in British politics.

As an aside, it is very easy to be "imaginative" in terms of policy ideas, if one has little or no idea of how government works, or the constraints upon it, but if Cameron's top aide is seemingly unaware of them, then the idea of government ministers being equally unaware is not that untoward.

Thus, even now the question of whether ministers are deliberately setting out to deceive, or are just pig-ignorant, remains an open question. I tend towards favouring the latter, but you can never be sure.

COMMENT: "POTENTIAL LEGAL OBSTACLES" THREAD

The wages of wind

2012-03-04T00:02:00.001Z

Evidence that we are winning the "climate wars" is not hard to find, in the sense that the balance of the argument is tilting in favour of the sceptics. But, as I have pointed out on numerous occasions, were are dealing with the regulatory aftermath, which is the longest and most damaging phase of a scare.

The effects are not always visible but, sadly, that is not the case with one particular consequence of the global warming scare – the rush to build wind factories. And so it is that Booker this week has chosen to feature the subsidy bonanza that the wind developers are seeking to exploit, often against the wishes of local communities.

But Booker also informs us of a particularly insidious ploy used by developers to buy off opposition to their proposals, offering cash to fund local community projects, as a form of bribe. At first sight, there sometimes look quite generous but few campaign groups are aware just how derisory the sums often are, compared with the gains the developers stand to make.

This is the case with the proposed construction of two 3.4 MW turbines near the Suffolk town of Eye, for which local residents are being offered a bribe of £7,000 a year, yet the income from the Eye turbines might be around £1.6 million a year.

Other so-called "sweeteners" are just as derisory. For instance, the German-owned energy giant RWE is offering to villagers in Powys a staggering £18.8 million over 20 years to win their support for a plan to build 65 3MW turbines. But that wind farm's possible income of £50 million a year will amount to £1 billion (£500 million of it subsidy) over the same 20-year period.

As a rule of thumb, the annual income per MW fed to the Grid from wind energy is around £800,000, half from the sale of the electricity, the other half from the subsidy we all pay through our electricity bills under the Government’s Renewables Obligation. Thus, villagers are being bribed with their own money.

While the absurdity using wind as a means of generating electricity is gradually percolating into the public consciousness, with even some MPs expressing carefully tailored reservations, thanks to the unrealisable commitment agreed with the EU to reduce CO2 emission, now embodied in UK legislation, the government will do nothing meaningful to remedy this grotesque waste of public money.

That is the classic effect of the regulatory aftermath, and a graphic example of how we are winning the battles and losing the war.

COMMENT THREAD

Lest we forget

2012-03-03T15:05:00.001Z

The Daily Wail is back on the case today, telling us that the EU is "an unaccountable, undemocratic institution" (above).

But if that is the case, why is it the paper's editorial position is for the UK to remain in the EU (above)? Are we missing something?

COMMENT THREAD

For what it's worth

2012-03-03T08:55:00.007Z

The book is finally on sale. You can buy it here for £12.99 or, grab a used copy for £1,179.86 – I kid you not. I would be hard put to deny that the latter price reflects its true worth, but I suspect that UKPaperbackshop is not going to sell many books (and they charge postage and packing).

UPDATE

Having decided the book was for sale (and having delivered most-pre-orders today, Saturday), Amazon has now decided that the book has not yet been released has thus reverted to "pre-orders". What has probably happened is that Amazon has run out of stock and, since the book is not officially launched until 8 March, the computer has reverted to "not yet released". In the meantime, the overall ranking went briefly to 854, and the book holds its No. 1 ranking in Battle of Britain books.

COMMENT THREAD

The slow road to madness

2012-03-03T08:20:00.002Z

First you have this (above), reported on 14 September 2009 - " … effectively a new interpretation of the European Working Time Directive".

Then we have the usual ritual (above) of a man pretending to be a British prime minister, calling for a cut in "Europe red tape" – this one on 26 January of this year … but it could have been yesterday … as indeed it was.

Then, for the final act in the play, we have this (above): implementation of the original ECJ judgement, bringing with it more red-tape and costs to business and the hard-pressed taxpayer – making The Boy to be the powerless fool that he is.

New regulations will be introduced in October and the government estimates that they will cost employers more than £100 million annually.

Strangely, the Failygraph reports that: "Ministers claim that the new regime must be introduced following several European legal judgements". "Ministers claim"? That is odd phrasing, for something that could be checked - but at least there is a mention of "Europe".

And so the charade goes on, year after year after year, while little Timmy on the Tory Boy Blog prattles that: "The Conservative Party remains the best hope for Eurosceptics". At least Helmer has had enough - he's resigned from the Tory Party.

COMMENT THREAD

Has the greenie spell broken?

2012-03-03T00:02:00.001Z

It was already obvious that, two years ago, the German policy on feed-in tariffs for electricity generated from photovoltaics was in trouble. With a tariff eight times higher than the wholesale electricity price at the power exchange and more than four times the feed-in tariff paid for electricity produced by on-shore wind turbines, it clearly could not last.

Cuts were already in the works and, over the last three years, subsidies have been slashed by up to 50 percent. But, says environment minister, Norbert Röttgen, the incentives are still too high.

So it is that the Germans are again cutting subsidies, this time by a further 30 percent, in a plan which, according to David Wedepohl, spokesman for the German Solar Industry Association, " amounts to nothing less than a solar phase-out law".

With the feed-in tariffs established in 1991 by the Electricity Feed-in Law, that makes it just over twenty years for the madness to work its way through the system, and now that the generators are embracing coal in a big way, it looks as if the greenie spell is being broken.

This is coming not a moment too soon for, even last week, Speigel was complaining that rising energy prices were endangering German industry. It had Hans Heinrich Driftmann, president of the Association of German Chambers of Industry and Commerce, saying that energy supply was now "the top risk for Germany as a location for business".

Bernd Kalwa, a member of the general works council at ThyssenKrupp, was also cited, warning that: "Some 5,000 jobs are in jeopardy within our company alone, because an irresponsible energy policy is being pursued in Düsseldorf and Berlin".

In the run-up to German general elections in 2013 and prior to state elections, Kalwa and his colleagues plan to march into party meetings and ask how the candidates intend to regulate the energy supply in Germany in a cost-effective and reliable manner.

That seems to be making the difference. Unlike the UK, energy is going to be an electoral issue, and one which the politicians cannot afford to ignore. However, according to The Guardian, the greenies are also set to fight back, with thousands of demonstrators planning on Monday to gather at Berlin's Brandenburg Gate to protest under the banner, "Stop the Solar Phase Out".

To whom the federal and state governments listen will be interesting to see.

COMMENT THREAD

WWF in embezzlement scandal

2012-03-02T13:00:00.005Z

Despite its interest in such matters, and its concerns about third-world corruption, strangely absent from the pages of The Guardian is the recent news of what appears to be a major embezzlement scandal involving the WWF in Tanzania (pic - the air conditioned offices in Dar es Salaam).

Approximately $1.3 million in cash seems to have gone missing from a project called "Strengthening Capacity of Environmental Civil Society Organisations". Overall, it was worth about $4.5 million, part-funded by Norway. Further funding has been suspended for this and for the $2.5-million REDD+ readiness project, aimed at "enhancing Tanzania's capacity to deliver data on forest carbon stocks", has also been put on hold.

As the news of the scandal emerged, WWF's Tanzania country director, Stephen Mariki, resigned and, so far, the eight people linked to the fraud have had their employment terminated.

This is not the first time the REDD+ project has attracted unfavourable publicity, with reports last November, with complaints of evictions and that paddy rice farm huts had been torched and coconut trees felled in the Rufiji Delta mangrove forest reserve, where WWF has been operating.

WWF are seeking to reduce dependence on rice farming in the mangrove forest reserve and are encouraging Rufiji Delta communities and earn their living by other means, with the support of REDD payments.

The programme has been criticised by Betsy Beymer-Farris and Thomas Bassett, respectively assistant professor at the Department of Earth and Environmental Science at Furman University in South Carolina and professor, and the Department of Geography at the University of Illinois.

The pair have said that stopping the local tribes from cultivating in the delta is counterproductive, and censures WWF researchers and government authorities for trying to stop them from surviving by using resources in the delta despite their existence for centuries.

In the currently scandal, an external auditing firm, Ernst & Young, has been brought in to carry out a detailed audit and investigation of the projects, and WWF has undertaken to pay back to the government of Norway any funds that have disappeared.

The Ernst & Young report was supposed to have been released by mid-February, but no details have so far been announced even though it is said that Britain's Department for International Development (DFID) is eagerly awaiting the outcome.

Britain, through WWF UK, are the main sponsors of WWF Tanzania whose patron is Prince Charles. DFID works with WWF UK "to provide flexible and strategic funding for development work across the world". It is in close contact with the Royal Norwegian Embassy on the issue.

The total income of WWF UK in 2011 was £55.7m (2009/10: £54.3m) and total expenditure was £56.6m (2009/10: £48.2m), of which membership and donations from individuals amounted to £28.7m (2009/10: £24.9m). The members may have to dig a little deeper this year.

COMMENT THREAD

Springtime in Brussels

2012-03-02T10:32:00.002Z

Well, the treaty that was so skilfully "vetoed" by The Boy in December has now been signed by twenty-five leaders of EU member states in Brussels today.

This is what the "colleagues" are calling the Treaty on Stability, Coordination and Governance. It is aimed at strengthening fiscal discipline and introducing stricter surveillance within the euro area, in particular by establishing a "balanced budget rule". Cameron must be so pleased he was able to stop it in his tracks.

Such an event would not be complete without a little homily from van Rompuy, who told the chaps that the treaty constituted "an important step in re-establishing the confidence in our Economic and Monetary Union".

No doubts are allowed to cross the path of the revered council president, who then gravely informed the world that "the restoration of confidence in the future of the Eurozone will lead to economic growth and jobs". That, he said, was the "ultimate objective".

The signing was on the first day of the spring European Council, which traditionally deals with economic matters, although the massed ranks of the media still insist on calling the meeting a "summit", demonstrating yet again that none of their commentary can be taken seriously.

The meeting also marks the re-appointment of van Rompuy as president of the European Council for a second "mandate" of two and a half years. The "Euro Summit" has also designated him president, for the same period.

Said Rompuy, on accepting the extension of his £249,000 a year post: "... The word 'Europe' has long been a sign of hope, embodying peace and prosperity. In the wake of the crisis this equation has come under stress. It is my, and our, role to make sure that Europe again becomes a symbol of hope. Of a better future for all".

Meanwhile, The Boy seems to be bitching that the "colleagues" are "ignoring his proposals to tackle its debt crisis by cutting red tape to free markets and unleash economic growth". But he should hardly be surprised. Since the acquis communautaire is at the very heart of The Project, proposals to cut it back are about as welcome as plans for building a new Israeli embassy in Mecca.

On the broader front, there are nine days left for the completion of the Greek debt swap, leaving Jeremy Warner struggling to catch up with recent events. But again, we see a reference to a European Marshall Plan, which provides yet another clue to the longer-term intentions of the "colleagues".

Whether Warner likes it or not, the current strategy is to flood the PIIS (PIIGS minus Greece) with money, and to isolate the Greek economy, prior to cutting the country adrift in the autumn, when the spin will be focused on the new rescue plan which will restore Greece to economic prosperity.

Gradually, the pieces are falling into place and, if the euro can survive past the summer, my gut feeling is that they might just get away with it for the time being. And, for the "colleagues", that is all that really matters. Tomorrow is always another day.

COMMENT THREAD

Game changer

2012-03-02T00:02:00.000Z

This is all over the media, with the Financial Times reporting that there is 200 years-worth of shale gas in China.

The announcement really is a game changer. The Agenda 21 pushers are now going to find it increasingly hard to run with "sustainability" and, with climate change running out of steam, we can see them struggling to create another scare which will have anything like the impact.

This also has important knock-on effects for Europe, as it will in due course relieve competitive pressure for supplies from Russia and its partners. Prices are undoubtedly going to ease, and it is going to be harder still to argue that renewables are ever going to be cost-effective.

And although it is early days yet, as the gas supplies become more plentiful, we will see wind become less and less attractive. Politically, it is no longer sustainable. The reality has to catch up soon, although one can see the vested interests attempting a rearguard action.

Within the decade though, my guess is that we will be looking back to this time as the point when the current suite of scares started to fall apart. I suppose we could say they are dead scares walking.

COMMENT THREAD

The perception of great events

2012-03-01T13:36:00.009Z

Autonomous Mind directs me to a superb ad hominem attack in response to his recent post, allowing me, just for once, to cap him by referring to a lengthy forum thread, largely devoted to personal attacks, directed at me as author of The Many Not The Few.

Some of the most vitriolic condemnation comes from another author, Andy Saunders, a man to whom I bear no malice and who has written some tolerably good books in his time, not least Convoy Peewit 1940: The First Day of the Battle of Britain , which I have referenced in my own work.

Yet it is Saunders, without having read The Many (and nor could he as it does not become available until next week), condemns it as "utter tosh", describing me as "the chief bunkum-monger", at the same time imperiously declaring that he has, "no interest or intention of entering into e-mail communication with North". (Not Dr North … but "North").

With others declaring that the book "sounds like complete attention seeking rubbish", not for the first time does it strike me that there is a parallel between the Battle of Britain and the obsession with climate change.

In particular, in Saunders's extreme and personalised response is so similar in demeanour to AM's critic that one immediately looks for commonalities, and indeed there is one of considerable relevance: they are both defending their respective orthodoxies.

In Saunders's case, this is evidenced by his long post, defending the central tenet of the Battle of Britain mythology – that Fighter Command won the battle - which rests on three points: one, Hitler intended to invade Britain; that, successfully to invade the island, air superiority was required; and that Fighter Command deprived the Germans of that air superiority, thereby preventing the invasion.

He and others take particular offence to my suggestion that Hitler had no great desire to invade and thus conquer Britain (but merely wanted to secure his western flank, paving the way for his invasion of Russia), and that the invasion threat was, by and large, a huge bluff.

In support of his argument that the invasion was intended, Saunders calls in aid Führer Directive No. 17, issued on 1 August 1940: "In order to establish the necessary conditions for the final conquest of England". This is seen as proof positive that Hitler intended to invade, that that necessarily, but for the intervention of Fighter Command, the invasion would have taken palace, with the subsequent defeat of Britain.

Without dwelling too long on issues dealt with at length in my book, one can take note of another book, which I am currently reading: The Politics of Nonviolent Action by Gene Sharp, a useful addition to the library of any would-be revolutionary.

Sharp tells us that, "An error frequently made by students of politics is to view political decisions, events and problems in isolation from the society in which they exist". And, whether Saunders can cope with it or not, Hitler issuing that directive was a political decision, and one aimed at achieving a political effect. That effect was not the defeat of Britain, per se, but to neutralise, by whatever means, the nation as a combatant.

Herein lies my challenge to the orthodoxy, and at two levels. On the German side, there was neither any real intention to invade Britain, nor, when push came to shove, was there the technical or military capability to do so. On the British side, there was never any real expectation in the higher echelons of government that an invasion could succeed – or that Britain could lose the war.

Interestingly, reading Liddell Hart's The Defence of Britain, first published in July 1939, one finds that he declares that the first responsibility of the Army is to protect of the country – by defending it from attack from without. Yet, he then says, "The risk of sea-borne invasion by a foreign enemy has become so slight under modern conditions as to be almost negligible".

That remained the prevailing view in 1940, and was one that was shared by Churchill, who doubted whether an invasion would be carried out and, if it was, that it could be successful.

On 12 July 1940, however, Churchill was to confide with Generals Paget and Auchinleck that "the great invasion scare" was serving a most useful purpose. It was well on its way "to providing us with the finest offensive army we have ever possessed and it is keeping every man and woman tuned to a high pitch of readiness".

Despite having doubts as to whether it was a "serious menace", he intended to give precisely the opposite impression in a forthcoming broadcast, talking about "long and dangerous vigils, etc.". The threat was to be exploited as a unifying and motivational force, the classic scare technique that we see used today on climate change issues.

But what is often forgotten by war historians – and almost always left out of Battle of Britain narratives – is that Churchill spoke not only as a war leader, but also as a Conservative prime minister, and one who had ambitions of leading the country after the war, which was then generally expected to come to an end around 1942.

No better can this be seen than in his famous "The Few" speech on 20 August when, as I note on the Days of Glory blog (and in the book), Churchill rejects out of hand the calls for a declaration of war aims, not least by as demanded by J B Priestley.

We see then the Daily Mirror question this rejection, but my recent review of Reynolds News brings this even further into focus. In the first edition after the speech, on 25 August, H N Brailsford, in his weekly column, observed that there were "two passages in this fine speech that call for some discussion".

These were the passages where Churchill rejected the idea of declaring war aims as "premature", with Brailsford observing that, while our hope of victory depended in part "… on our ability to win superiority in the air, and to create a powerful mechanised army", in order to convince the Europeans to lay down their rifles: "We must convince them that our victory will mean a better life for them, at once and in the future". Brailsford went on:

Victory is as much a political as a military problem. The forging of an appeal requires as much preparation as the manufacture of our airplanes, and the time to begin this is today. But it cannot be done until our peace aims are precisely announced.

Mr Churchill, he wrote, "has the temperament to lead in such a war, but has he yet begun to think out its strategy?".

This piece was matched by another alongside it, written by the anonymous Cameronian, who asked: "But why does Winston, master of our loyalty as well as our Mr Attleee, refuse to state our war aims? In his magnificent speech, he held out deliberately to the German and Austrian people the hope of 'food, freedom and peace'. Why then deny them the answers to the question: What kind of peace, what quality of freedom?"

In a rhetorical flourish, answering his own question with, "I can only guess", Cameronian went on to declare, "The sooner we tell the world precisely where we stand, the sooner we shall rally our friends everywhere under the flag of liberation".

Strengthening thus was a division which was to dominate domestic politics, characterised on the one side by demands for war aims and, from Churchill, a stubborn refusal even to consider them.

The reason for Churchill's obduracy is not hard to find. The sub-text of the "war aims" demand was for the creation of a socialist Britain, and all that went with it, including nationalisation of the means of production. That was what Churchill was also fighting against – the enemy within, the socialists who sought to label the conflict the "People's War".

His was an elitist vision of Britain, based on three pillars: Empire, King and Country, and it was interesting to see in the same edition of Reynolds News in which Brailsford held forth, a large government advertisement, urging people to buy War Bonds to support "our airmen", the advert itself displaying in bold type the now famous quote from Churchill's speech: "Never in the field of human conflict …".

"The Few", therefore – even then – were part of the domestic political battle. The reference was as much an attempt to shape the political perception of the battle, which as Clausewitz tells us was "a continuation of political intercourse, with the addition of other means". The élite "few" coming to the rescue of an embattled population was much more in tune with Churchill's idea of how the war should be seen. The people could not be allowed to be authors of their own salvation. That way lay the curse of socialism.

And this is what the guardians of the Battle of Britain orthodoxy cannot deal with – that the battle was as much (if not more) a political event (at many levels) as it was a physical battle between young men in their flying machines.

For them, the "intrusion" of politics is felt in some way to sully the purity of this battle. For me, though, it makes it that much more interesting, and more relevant to today, illustrating as it does, how the public perception of great events can be shaped.

COMMENT THREAD

Potential legal obstacles

2012-03-01T09:18:00.004Z

It seems that The Independent has invented a new type of headline - one that completely contradicts its own story.

Thus, while being told in the headline today (above) that wild animals are to be banned from circuses, the story goes on to say that: "Ministers will today dash hopes of an immediate ban on the use of wild animals in circuses". DEFRA has said it cannot outlaw the use of animals because of "potential legal obstacles".

Still, you can see why the paper is reluctant to declare the truth, given last year's headline (below) which paraded a famous victory.

The real confusion, however, arises from what is self-evidently government spin, with the Press Association stating:

Ministers are to unveil plans in the Commons that will outlaw the practice at the earliest opportunity. But a tough new licensing regime will be brought in to improve conditions for performing animals while changes in the law are developed.

Bizarrely, we then have a DEFRA spokeswoman saying:

We always said we were minded to ban wild animals performing in travelling circuses, the only issue being that we have to be sure that a ban cannot be overturned legally. Therefore in the meantime we are proposing a tough new licensing regime which can be introduced quickly, to ensure high welfare standards.

So, despite last year's unanimous vote by MPs for the practice of using wild animals in circuses to be outlawed, and 30,000 people signing a petition, the government is only prepared to "set out plans to create a licensing regime to ensure animals are well treated", against the vague promise that it is "minded" to ban wild animals performing in travelling circuses.

Jan Creamer, chief executive of Animal Defenders International, says: "It is appalling that public and parliamentary wishes are cast aside in such a cavalier manner."

And indeed it is "appalling", but that is the sort of thing that happens when you outsource your legislative powers to Brussels. As we have pointed out, on one or two occasions, animal welfare in circuses is covered by Commission Regulation (EC) No 1739/2005 of 21 October 2005, laying down animal health requirements for the movement of circus animals between Member States.

Thus, the British government is not permitted to legislate in what is an "occupied field", and can only lamely cite "potential legal obstacles" as an excuse for not acting, somehow omitting that these are EU obstacles.

Ironically, the EU law is part of the Single Market acquis, of which Mr Cameron is so proud – although not proud enough to direct his officials to claim credit for it when the shoe pinches. But then, he can always rely on confusion and obfuscation from the media to keep it from the voters.

COMMENT THREAD

Mediocracy

2012-03-01T00:15:00.001Z

John Toland's "Hitler" has the Führer describing democracy as "an anthill with everyone scurrying in different directions". How ridiculous it would be, he said, to concern the average man with problems that give headaches to better heads.

Imagine, he said, burdening "such a little human worm" with the final decision, for example, of the Rhineland crisis. "What if the Four Year Plan had to be first presented to a democratic parliament?", he asked.

Now, prof David Dunning, reported in The Mail, would seem to agree about the inadequacies of the "little human worm", only he positions the problem as lying with us and the electoral system. The majority of us lack the mental tools needed to make meaningful judgements about the quality of candidates.

Dr Mato Nagel, a sociologist in Germany, recently used this as the basis for simulating a democratic election. In his experiments, candidates whose leadership skills were only slightly better than average always won, leading Nagel to conclude that democracies rarely or never elect the best leaders.

Their advantage over dictatorships or other forms of government is merely that they "effectively prevent lower-than-average candidates from becoming leaders".

Assessing the politicians currently leading the western democracies, and especially our own Boy, it is hard to disagree with this thesis. We enjoy not democracy but a mediocracy.

COMMENT THREAD

Tax collection

2012-02-29T21:40:00.006Z

More than 160 German tax collectors have volunteered for possible assignments in Greece to help the struggling Mediterranean country gather tax more efficiently, says Reuters.

Meanwhile, English tax collectors have already mounted an expedition to Sunderland … with predictable results.

We bring you the first pictures.

COMMENT THREAD

Twisting and turning

2012-02-29T15:58:00.004Z

Banks today grabbed €530 billion at the ECB's second offering of cheap three-year funds, fuelling expectations that credit will flow to businesses and borrowing costs will ease for governments hit by the euro zone crisis. This is what Reuters tells us, adding that, in the space of two months, the ECB has now injected more than a trillion euros into the financial system, banishing the threat of a credit crunch.

Ambrose has a different take. He thinks the ECB is "twisting itself in knots" by bailing out Club Med sovereigns very inefficiently through the back-door via the banks.

He offers the alternative of "engaging in transparent, plain-vanilla open-market … that is to say by purchasing bonds directly from the non-banks and injecting a blast of stimulus into the real economy", but he does acknowledge that it is a "game changer for the South", heading off the near-certain disaster that was unfolding before Mario Draghi took over the European Central Bank.

Nevertheless, Ambrose complains of "utter confusion, massive distortions of the European credit market, and a naked breach of the no-bailout clause of the Lisbon Treaty". What they [the ECB] are doing is basically illegal as well as clumsy. And all this to pretend to the Germans – and to themselves – that they are not doing QE.

It is better than doing nothing, though, Ambrose concedes, which perhaps illustrates the depth of the crisis engulfing us. ZeroHedge and spells it out, and it isn't pretty.

Crucially, though, the exercise is buying time. This is admitted by Michael Kemmer, managing director of Germany's BdB banking association. "With the ECB's supporting measures time is being won" he says. "But", he adds, "these measures can neither replace a functioning interbanking market nor solve the debt crisis".

Reuters more or less agrees, stating: "The strategy has sucked much of the heat out of the eurozone crisis and given governments time to work out sustainable budget and growth policies for affected countries on the periphery of the bloc". That latter sentiment is BS, but it may just see the "colleagues" through the summer.

So far, so good …

COMMENT THREAD

Green jobs

2012-02-29T12:30:00.004Z

… but mostly for foreigners, as The Guardian notes. However, it would not be much different if we were building conventional power sources. Nuclear and gas plants both are largely built by foreign companies, and often using immigrant labour. Whether our energy is green or not, we seem to have abandoned this vital strategic interest to foreign firms - while our people fill supermarket shelves and don't even get paid.

COMMENT THREAD

Dialogue of the deaf

2012-02-29T12:05:00.003Z

It doesn't matter how many times the error is pointed out - Mail journalists, it seems, are determined to parade their ignorance, confusing the Council of Europe with the EU.

Not only is the confusion sown in the headline, but we also see the caption to the picture of the ECHR in Strasbourg stating: "A leaked document says Britain should be given enhanced 'margin of appreciation' in interpreting EU rulings".

It might not be so bad if the paper could actually copy out stories properly, as this one is filched from The Guardian, which perfectly correctly refers to the Council of Europe, even in its headline. There is no mention of the EU anywhere in the report.

Apart from illustrating its unreliability though, the Mail is demonstrating that it simply doesn't listen to anything but itself. This is the archetypal top-down MSM, engaging in a one-way "conversation" with its readers. No wonder people turn to social media, which – despite the obvious deficiencies – is a two-way process.

COMMENT THREAD

You can't fool all of the people

2012-02-29T10:27:00.001Z

In retrospect, we can now say it was never going to last, and indeed it has not. While initially The Boy was riding high on the back of his pretend veto, Reuters is telling us that the halo has slipped.

From a heady peak of a forty percent lead in December (against 34 percent for Labour), the Tories have slipped back to 35 percent, with Labour in the lead at 41 percent, with the Lib-Dims on 12 percent. Effectively, the positions have been reversed.

Compared with January, there is a three point drop, and only forty percent are now satisfied with Cameron's performance. This puts his "net satisfaction rating" at minus 11, down ten points from January, and contrasting with his 48 percent in December, then giving him a net score of plus five.

Unsurprisingly though, give the calibre of the opposition, The Boy remains the most popular of the main three party leaders.

However, what emerges clearly from the result is confirmation of the old saw: you can't fool all of the people all of the time. Capturing briefly the anti-EU sentiment of the country, very much under false pretences, Cameron and his party gained hugely in approval ratings with his pretend veto.

Now that the gilt has worn off, and The Boy has been revealed for what he really is – just another sad little europhile - both he and his party have lost ground. Nevertheless, we are still on the two-party see-saw, which means that some people still see merit in an alternative.

That would seem to confirm the other part of the saying, that you can fool some of the people all of the time.

COMMENT THREAD

The End-a Kenny?

2012-02-29T00:02:00.001Z

Whether it is good news or bad remains to be seen, but it certainly is interesting to see Taoiseach Enda Kenny (pictured above, left, with Mario Monti in Rome last week) telling the Dáil that his government intends to put the "fiscal compact" treaty to a referendum.

From the Irish Times, we learn that Kenny told the House that the Attorney General's advice was that "on balance", a referendum was required to ratify the treaty.

Kenny says he intends to sign the treaty at the end of the week in Brussels and then, in the coming weeks, his government will finalise the arrangements and the process leading to the referendum. No date has been was given for the poll.

Inevitably, the occasion of the announcement was used to make a propaganda pitch, with Kenny saying to his MP colleagues: "I am very confident that when the importance and merit are communicated to the Irish people that they will endorse it emphatically by voting yes to continuing economic stability and recovery". Unsurprisingly, he also says that he believes "… it is in Ireland's national interest that this treaty be approved".

Even then, a "no" vote won't actually scupper the treaty. The very nature of an intergovernmental treaty is that it does not require unanimity. In this case, it can go into force after it has been ratified by twelve states.

However, the Failygraph offers the headline: "Irish EU treaty vote threatens chaos". In the circumstances, that is probably an exaggeration – even assuming a negative vote – although the effects on the Irish economy could be severe.

Last December, finance minister Michael Noonan said a vote on the treaty would effectively be a vote on Ireland's membership of the euro. If that is how it is framed, then the "no" lobby could be under considerable pressure to perform.

On the other hand, Reuters says a "no" vote would prevent Dublin from using the European Stability Mechanism and, with about €20 billion borrowing costs to cover in 2014, "most analysts believe it will need more official funding to meet some of its commitments".

As it stands, a recent poll had 40 percent supporting the treaty, 36 percent against and 24 percent undecided. With the last referendum on the Lisbon treaty delivering 67 to 33 percent for "Europe", expectations of a "no" vote cannot be high – especially as the Irish government is very adept at invoking the "fear factor".

If voters believe a "no" vote might make credit harder to get, then there will be even less incentive to rock the boat, and with Ireland's main opposition party Fianna Fail saying it will join the governing Fine Gael and Labour parties in campaigning for a "yes", the vote almost looks a done deal.

Still, it us unwise to underestimate the Irish. Unlikely though it might be, we could still see some shocks, and this time the government says it will not be looking for a second ballot if the vote goes the "wrong" way. But if that happened, it would almost certainly be the End-a Kenny.

COMMENT THREAD

Watermelons

2012-02-28T18:55:00.004Z

Chapter Six has the intrepid Dellers at the Heartland Institute's Fourth Annual Conference on Climate Change in Chicago - enjoying the lavish hospitality from Big Oil, or so we are led to believe.

He is amongst principled people, he says, several of whom have become his personal heroes. And the last thing he wants to do is make them feel unwanted. Nevertheless, he goes on to attempt just that. It really doesn't matter how many brilliant papers Roy Spencer produces on cloud cover feedback, he writes:

… or how many times that Nils-Axel Mörner proves that sea levels show absolutely no sign of dangerous increase. This is a debate that no sceptic scientist can possibly win, no matter how much apparently overwhelmingly persuasive evidence they produce. That's because the debate was never about "the science" in the first place. It was, is and always will be about politics.

Latterly, this is the theme that I have been pursuing, alongside Autonomous Mind, and one to which Dellers returns in his current blog. But the text comes from his superb book, Watermelons, which needs to find a space on the bookshelf of everybody who wants to understand how the world works.

The reason it should have such wide appeal is that, while it comes into the category of "global warming", it is in fact an intensely political book. The sub-title tells all, identifying the subject of the book, the threat that is "killing the planet, destroying the economy and stealing your children's future" – the watermellons, a "handful of political activists, green campaigners and voodoo scientists.

As you might imagine, though, Dellers does not pull punches. In his own forthright style, he writes of a green religion, where the core beliefs are "dressed up as a concern for nature and the future of mankind" and rooted in the most bitter misanthropy and direst pessimism. The advocates:

… care little for the human species' myriad achievements, preferring to see our race as a blot on the landscape, a parasite, a disease which threatens the eco-system's otherwise perfect balance and which should at best be reduced by natural means – at worst ruthlessly culled.

In scrutinising the political agenda behind greenery, this is a book that needed to be written, but it is a book that had me cursing the man for writing it so well. As one who reserves such books for bedtime reading, consuming a few pages at a time before drifting off to sleep, he kept me awake for many hours as his riveting narrative made Morpheus an unwelcome guest.

Dellers's deft touch, exhibited throughout the book, takes us through a range of topics, from the nature of scares, a remarkable analysis of the first Climategate scandal, a potted history of the climate change agenda, and the costs of the obsession, to an excellent review of how "the bastards" are getting away with "the biggest and most expensive scientific scandal in history".

If I have a favourite section, though, it is in Chapter Eight, in which Dellers welcomes us to "the New World Order". It takes someone with his writing skills to give the subject just enough gravitas to make his arguments credible, yet confer sufficient lightness to avoid bogging us down in the swamp of conspiracy theory.

He thus romps us through many serious matters, such as the Club of Rome, and its sister organisations, the Club of Budapest and the Club of Madrid, ably writing of "master plans" and the like, without invoking the knee-jerk that has other books flying into the bin.

Keeping it light and humorous is one of Dellers's great skills – and only he could have us contemplating Charlie peeing on the compost heap as an introduction to "sustainable development". Despite this, one is left in no doubt that there are important issues at stake, with the sinister-sounding "Agenda 21" and many other warmist constructs, dragged out, eviscerated and sun dried.

Predictably, after its exposure in The Daily Mail, the book soared to number one in the global warming listings on Amazon, and has remained there ever since, briefly touching double figures in the overall best-seller rankings. As a book suitable for a wide and non-specialist audience, it deserves that ranking, and should become a standard primer on the politics of climate change.

COMMENT THREAD

Crisis fatigue

2012-02-28T14:22:00.001Z

Constitutional issues relating to the eurozone bailout have again been raised by the German constitutional court in Karlsruhe.

Reuters is reporting that the court has ruled that a nine-member parliamentary panel set up to approve urgent action on the European Financial Stability Facility was "in large part" unconstitutional, demanding that decisions of the type made by the panel should be referred to the 620-strong Bundestag or the 41-member budget committee.

Similar issues were raised in November last year, and while these rulings are going to hamper Merkel's ability to railroad changes through the system, and one can only speculate as to whether this will strengthen the administration's determination to curtail the powers of the constitutional court.

However, this particular event many only be of short-term relevance, as the EFSF is to be replaced by the European Stability Mechanism in July, and the game may then have to start all over again.

No sooner does one gets to grips with one issue, though, another and then yet another crops up, in a never-ending kaleidoscope of activity which defied understanding. Here, the crise du jour seemed earlier to be the downgrading of Greece's credit rating to "selective default", but even that has had less impact than might at first have been expected.

Averting catastrophe is the ECB, which is leaning on the national central banks to provide "emergency liquidity assistance" (ELA), until the €35 billion-worth of support from the EFSF can be mobilised.

Meanwhile, a eurogroup summit scheduled for Friday has been cancelled, apparently at the behest of Germany, which is unwilling to discuss the single agenda item – increasing the funding for the so-called "firewall" of the ESM.

The European Council, set for Thursday and Friday, is nevertheless going to go ahead, and there will doubtless be discussions in les couloirs, triggering much media speculation.

However, it seems to me, with even ZeroHedge somewhat at sea, we are back in a trench warfare situation, where nothing much is expected to happen in the foreseeable future. The time is not yet right for another major crisis – we are suffering from crisis fatigue and need a break.

COMMENT THREAD

Unsustainable combustion

2012-02-28T00:02:00.000Z

Although the Daily Mail does the Tibury power plant fire big, the one thing it does not mention is spontaneous combustion.

Opened in 1969, Tilbury previously operated as a coal-fired power station but has been converted to generate power from 100 percent sustainable biomass until its scheduled closure at the end of 2015. Now on fire, the seat was reported to be 4-6,000 tons of biomass in a wood pellet hopper high up in the power station building.

It is left to Bloomberg to raise the prospect of spontaneous combustion, as this is the most likely cause of the fire. The agency cites Claire Curry, a bioenergy analyst at Bloomberg New Energy Finance. She says: "If biomass is stored in large volumes, with little aeration, it is very likely to catch fire as it can get very hot. Normally biomass plants will pass streams of cool air through the biomass to avoid fires happening".

So hazardous are large quantities of stored biomass that it is a reasonable proposition to argue that no large plant is likely to run through to its end of expected life without a serious fire.

Yet the UK is seeking to get 15 percent of its energy from renewable sources by 2020, of which DECC estimates as much as half of that may be generated from biomass. And so popular is the option that burning of wood and wood waste for energy in the UK rose eight percent to 648,000 tons of oil equivalent in 2010 from 598,000 tons in 2009.

The trouble is though that, as the Tilbury fire has demonstrated, the process is anything but sustainable. It seems we have a case here of unsustainable combustion, and yet another black mark for the greenies.

COMMENT THREAD

No surprise then

2012-02-27T19:01:00.002Z

The Bundestag has overwhelmingly endorsed the second Greek bailout, 496 to 90, despite growing pressure from voters and the media, while Merkel admits there is no guarantee that it will work. "Europe will fail if the euro fails. Europe wins if it wins the euro", she warns.

This comes as absolutely no surprise. Despite some predictions to the contrary, it is too early yet to cut Greece adrift. Wait for the fall.

COMMENT THREAD

Reynolds News

2012-02-27T17:37:00.003Z

I spent some time at Bradford University this afternoon, reading copies of Reynolds News from 1940. This important newspaper was, at the time, owned by the Co-operative Society, and reflected a strand of left-wing thought which is rarely given much of an airing today.

One of the reasons it has been airbrushed out of history is that there are only two complete collections in the country (and, therefore, the world). One is in Hendon, and the other in Bradford, on my doorstep. Neither collection has been indexed or microfilmed, and the papers can only be viewed by appointment, under supervision.

Typically, historians rely on the newspaper of record, The Times, and then tend only to look at the headlines on the main news page. Although that newspaper didn't then have a front page as such (it was used for adverts), I call this "front-page-itis", a disease that gives a very limited, establishment view of the world. Those who then also rely on official records thus tend to write establishment histories, which present an extremely distorted account of the battle.

By contrast, Reynolds News, with the slogan, "Government of the People, by the People, for the People" is a treasure house, a superb representation of left-wing views. As such, it conveys its own distortions but is probably more representative of what the bulk of people were thinking - and hugely influential as well. Time and time again, the paper has set the agenda, invoking responses in the War Cabinet and other newspapers.

Especially for Witterings from Witney, we have an extract from a delightful opinion piece by professor A Berriedale Keith (a well-known constitutional lawyer of his time), written on 21 July 1940. This column was on the theme, "Battle for Ideas", headlined, "Let Public Opinion Have its Say".

The Prof was writing about the utility of opinion polls (then very novel), telling us that, of MPs: "... we have long outlived the idea that at an electoral contest we confer unlimited authority on the member we elect", then going on to say that: "It is the business of an MP to keep in touch with public opinion, and not humbly to obey the bidding of the whips".

This, and other such delights, I shall feed into an updated version of this blog, the detail standing to confirm and strengthen the thesis offered in the book, that the Battle of Britain was part of the People's War, and won by the fortitude of the people as a whole.

The paper defined the battle on 15 September 1940, seven days into the Blitz of London - on which anniversary we now celebrate Battle of Britain Day: "Göring's 'blitzkrieg' on London", it said, "has a dual object: first to smash communications and disorganise public services in the Capital, and second to confront the Government with the problem of a demoralised and panic-stricken population".

In this, the paper wrote, Göring failed, then declaring: "The story of the bombardment of London is the story of the people's success", adding: "What stands out is the heroism and quickness and common humanity of the ordinary people ...".

This takes nothing from the bravery of the RAF pilots, and changes nothing in history - only our perception of it. The establishment has claimed the victory for its favoured elite, but it was the people's victory as well, in a continuous battle that ended not in October 1940 but went on until the following May 1941.

COMMENT THREAD

Winning the battles – losing the war

2012-02-27T12:29:00.004Z

The Weekly Standard - much cited elsewhere, is running a piece telling us why the climate sceptics (or "deniers") are winning. And indeed, they probably are – they have never really recovered from Climategate 1, and all the other "gates" that piled in on top of it.

It is said of the British, however, that we tend to lose all our battles except that last, thus winning the war. Climate sceptics, on the other hand, now seem to be in danger of reversing this process – winning the battles but losing the war.

This thesis is tried out in an important piece by Autonomous Mind who notes that the battle over climate science is by-and-large meaningless. The climate agenda, he says, is but one front in a much broader campaign involving the centralisation of power, the erosion of democracy and liberty and the transfer of wealth.

Thus says AM, no matter what the "science" reveals and how much it is debunked, there will always be another line of attack from the sustainability playbook to further the political – and economic corporatist – agenda. On that front is where the battle needs to be fought, not in the theatre of carbon dioxide emissions, raw and adjusted data or fractions of a degree of temperature change.

Exactly the same sentiment is reflected in a report by Dennis Ambler.

Whilst the continual scientific rebuttals of the climate reports produced by the IPCC may make many people think that this charade cannot continue much longer, behind the scenes it is quite irrelevant, he writes. The long-term process marches relentlessly on as if there had never been any challenges at all.

As the advocates throw in yet more spurious claims of the "hottest year on record", or record cold caused by CO2 emissions, they occupy the debate, and determine the daily agenda in the media, whilst those who know that the claims are spurious, are driven to waste time, effort and resources on refuting them.

Further evidence supporting this thesis comes from our continued trawl of the Hewlett Foundation grant database (above). This throws us some interesting data about the Bipartisan Policy Center, which started in 2002 under the aegis of Senators Tom Daschle, Bob Dole, George Mitchell and Howard Baker.

Having evolved from the National Commission on Energy Policy, it claims to be a bipartisan group of twenty of the nation's leading energy experts representing the highest ranks of industry, government, academia, labour, consumer and environmental protection.

But what makes it so interesting is that it ranks amongst the beneficiaries of the Hewlett Foundation, as seeking to promote climate change policy - advising Congress, the Executive Branch, States and other policymakers regarding long-term US policy. For that, it has received $42.85 million, having in 2009 pushed strongly for climate change legislation, delivering a major report on the issue.
.
But now, against the same agenda, the main pitch is not "climate" but "energy security". Like any good strategists, this power grouping is capable of shifting the schwerpunkt when it encounters resistance in any one sector. And by such means, the climate sceptics end up winning the argument, only to find that the opposition has moved on and is fighting (and winning) a different battle.

COMMENT THREAD

Bad news

2012-02-27T11:34:00.003Z

Mary Ellen Synon is giving up blogging, closing her blog with this piece. She has a message for the Scots, who need to learn from Ireland's experience how little influence a small member state has in the EU.

The good news is that ME is going to be doing more journalism – so we can still keep an eye on her sometimes penetrating and always entertaining work.

COMMENT THREAD

Poor little Spain

2012-02-27T08:58:00.009Z

Ambrose tells us that the Spanish are revolting (as well as the Greeks), with their new prime minister, Mariano Rajoy, refusing to go down the path of austerity and halve the eight percent budget deficit this year. We are also told that there is near unanimity across the political spectrum that drastic pro-cyclical tightening at this stage is unwarranted and dangerous.

An example is quoted of Josep Borrell, ex-president of the EU parliament. He is said to be the voice of Spain's pro-European establishment, and says such debt-deflation risks pushing the banking system over the edge. "To cut the deficit almost four points in one year would be a true depressionary shock for an anaemic economy, made worse by the requirement for banks to mark their real estate losses to market prices", he avers.

As we wipe away the tears, though, one also wonders whether this is the Spain with its rapacious commercial fishing fleet, equipped with generous EU grants, known for its plundering of British and African waters?

Is this also the Spain that is so poor that it has been one of the net beneficiaries of the EU budget, hoovering up around €60 billion in EU net payments in the eleven years from 2000-2010, yet which has had enough spare cash to buy up our banks and Heathrow airport?

And now that poor little Spain is feeling badly treated, it seems we are supposed to buy into the narrative that Germany is again "the overbearing enemy". Thus does apologist Borell "warn" that "an atmosphere of hostility is building up in a Continent divided between a rich and flourishing North and a South in danger of being reduced to a protectorate". Says the man, "If we carry on like this we are going to destroy the European project".

No doubt the "iron inflexibility" – attributed to Germany and which Ambrose so deplores - is having a malign effect. But one cannot avoid pondering about the total lack of complaint from the Spanish when the good times rolled.

Germany, however, in its new-found role as the scapegoat of Europe, is putting the bailout deal to the Bunderstag today, with interior minister Hans-Peter Friedrich suggesting that Greece should be "made an offer it can’t refuse" to leave the eurozone.

This coincides with almost two-thirds of Germans opposed to further assistance to Athens, according to a new poll by Emnid, a German polling firm, released on Sunday. This leads Friedrich to assert that the EU should "create incentives for an exit" by Greece.

Yet, even though an early exit is the best possible outcome for Greece, there are those who still insist on painting German as the bad man, even though – as ZeroHedge points out, the problem is the weight of sovereign debt. The cold hard fact Greece is facing is that it's now at the point where extraordinary losses need to be taken – and no one wants to take them.

Given current conditions, though, German finance minister Wolfgang Schäuble has written to MPs warning that "this may not be the last time" they would be asked to extend Athens a financial lifeline. A third bailout may be needed to shore up the second.

Against this background, Mark Grant, managing director at Southwest Securities, comes late to the party, wondering if Europe really wants to bail Greece out or if Germany is not forcing so many conditions that they are trying to have them exit the euro on their own so the Germans are not seen as the Lord High Executioner.

By the same token, one wonders whether Schäuble is not trying to have his MPs vote down the second bailout, without being seen as responsible for the outcome of the second vote. And if that is the case, he is pushing at an open door. "At some point, you reach the end of the line because further liquidity isn't solving the problems," Rainer Brüderle, parliamentary chief for the government's junior coalition partner, the Free Democrats, says.

And with everyone conscious that, once (or if) the Greek issue is settled, waiting in the wings is poor little Spain, and the Germans are going to have to go through this all over again, you can see why they will want to cut their losses.

If the Germans are to be cast in the role of donning their jackboots and goose-stepping over the oppressed peoples of Europe, it might as well get its money's worth. Others, though, might be less than convinced by the "poor little Spain" meme, recalling that Franco was perhaps the only European leader to best Hitler in diplomatic negotiations.

After failing in late October 1940 to convince the Spanish dictator that he should join the war, the Führer famously confided with Mussolini that he would "rather have three or four teeth pulled" than go through another meeting with Franco. In dealing with the Spanish, nothing much may have changed. They are tough nuts.

However, nothing is going to change the fundamentals. At its root, Ambrose reminds me, the EMU crisis is a trade crisis - something Mervyn King is keen to tell us. The North has a chronic surplus and the South has a chronic deficit. You cannot close this gap simply by forcing the South to retrench.

Ambrose consistently argues that you will end up with a protracted depression, and that is exactly what they are getting. The problem is the euro itself. Germany is trying to deflect the blame onto the PIIGS rather than admit the Project is deformed. And that is why he is critical of Germany right now.

Those who defend the German narrative of this crisis, he says, are inadvertently defending the Project. I am not so sure. I remain of the view that, in the end, it will be Germany cutting loose that will bring it down.

COMMENT THREAD

Thrown to the wolves

2012-02-26T23:21:00.004Z

Peter Hitchens has a go at our extradition agreement with the USA, which I thought left the issue rather unbalanced. It is all very well talking about Christopher Tappin, and how badly he is being treated - and I would not disagree with the points made. But what about the European Arrest Warrant?

Then, just for once, the Mail does the right thing, picking up on the case of Michael Turner and Jason McGoldrick who will be flown to Budapest today. There, they will be handed over to the Hungarian authorities on charges relating to a business venture that failed seven years ago.

Turner and McGoldrick have already spent four months held without charge in a notorious prison in Hungary after being handed over by the UK government in 2009. The pair were later released and allowed to return to Britain but now have to go back to face a fraud trial, over an issue which, in the UK, would usually be dealt with as a civil case.

Nevertheless, the issue, as always, is that British judges should have first bite of the cherry. There must, of course, be provision for extradition, but only after a British judge has decided there is a case to answer, and that a foreign trial is both necessary and without a reasonable alternative.

As Turner now observes though, "We feel let down by the British government for allowing us to be extradited on such flimsy evidence … When our extradition hearing was heard at the High Court a few years ago, the judge said he was being led by Brussels".

God help them though – and us – when they are represented by Tory MP Richard Drax, who is calling on the government urgently to "reform" the "European Extradition Treaty".

Drax, rightly says that Turner has been the victim of an outrageous injustice and that the system "is a judicial mess of scandalous proportions". We can even agree with him when he says, "It is quite understandable Michael's loss of faith in this country's ability to look after her own".

But then the fool wants to reform an unreformable system. That is the ultimate betrayal.

COMMENT THREAD

Wither transparency?

2012-02-26T13:43:00.008Z

While the warmists are successfully focusing attention on the minor-league operations of the Heartland Institute, with a total budget for all its issues, which include health care, education, and technology policy, of around $4.4 million, their own funding arrangements, amounting to hundreds of millions of dollars, are largely evading scrutiny.

In 2009, picking up on the trail of global warming advocacy and its funding networks, I published this piece, followed by this, where I started looking at what I termed a "vast nexus of influence" - (with Shub Niggurath then writing a piece). Amongst others in the warmist policy camp, I identified the European Climate Foundation (ECF), set up in 2008 as an organisation to transmit funding from a group of funding organisations to a huge range of climate activists.

With offices based in three European countries, there are no unified (or any) accounts and the organisation issues no annual report on its website – and nor does it give any information on how much cash it hands out. Thus, while we have Moonbat bleating about "transparency", hundreds of millions of dollars are pouring into promoting warmist policy, with absolutely no transparency or accountability.

Yet, says Moonbat, "Anyone with democratic instincts should support the demand that the major funders of groups engaged in public advocacy should be made known to the public, whether those groups are leftwing NGOs, rightwing 'thinktanks' or self-declared lobbying companies".

That the ECF needs looking at is evident just from looking at its list of "funding partners", some of which we explored in the earlier pieces. Just one indication of the scale of its funding comes from the Climate Works Foundation.

This organisation had portfolio of grants amounting to $120 million in 2009 – the latest figures available (below), yet this is only one of eight hugely wealthy funds supporting the ECF, including the €3 billion Dutch National Postcode Lottery.

The Climate Works Foundation, though, is of special interest as it was in 2008, awarded $460,800,000 from the William and Flora Hewlett Foundation, a grant-making organisation with assets of $7.2 billion, which disbursed $353,400,000 in grants in 2011. It has made another grant to Climate Works only last week of $100 million – bringing the total grants to this organisation to just short of $600 million.

Where such huge funding is devoted to global warming advocacy, and policy development, there must indeed be a distortion of the democratic process, especially where politicians are also being paid. These organisations must come clean about the sources of their money, and provide exact details of how much is paid to which organisations, for what purposes.

COMMENT THREAD

Gleick House

2012-02-26T00:02:00.000Z

Booker today offers what amounts to a tour de table on the state of play on "the so-called debate over global warming" (above – click to enlarge).

The point, of course, is that the warmists had their debate and lost it. Now they want a replay. But what perhaps is being underplayed is that, while this little spat is over millions of dollars, the amounts spent (and earmarked for spending) on global warming by governments and advocacy groups is in the hundreds of billions.

Not least of the sums is the $28.222 billion for so-called fast-start finance, but, says Booker, we cannot recall often enough that our Climate Change Act commits us to spending more than £700 billion between now and 2050 – far more than any other country in the world.

Thus, when the history of the decline and fall of the world's most damaging scare comes to be written, l'affaire Gleick will only be a brief footnote. But it does suggest how desperate those who wish to keep the scare alive have become.

More importantly, Booker concludes, it should focus our attention once again on the fact that we are still being presented with by far the biggest bill in history, to counter a threat that never actually existed.

COMMENT THREAD

Touchy

2012-02-25T20:01:00.000Z

A reader attempted to place a comment on Moonbat's blog, asking if anyone knew the type of aircraft in which David Milliband flew to his job with VantagePoint CleanTech in California. The above was the result.

COMMENT: "MOONBAT" THREAD

This is wrong

2012-02-25T14:20:00.003Z

If Moonbat wants to trouble himself about undue influence, why isn't he worried about this? It cannot be right that an elected politicians – with a salary and expenses from the public purse - is so egregiously enriching himself.

But this is not any politician, but a senior Labour man - David Miliband MP. He earned, we are told, earned "a staggering £20,000 a day as an adviser for a company investing in green technology", and was paid £70,000 for just three-and-a-half days spent working for VantagePoint CleanTech in California - part of his £90,000+ annual fee.

The post with the American venture capitalists is the latest in a series of lucrative part-time positions Mr Miliband has taken up since being beaten by his brother in the Labour leadership contest.

And these are the sort of people with whom Miliband is associating – including Alan E. Salzman. That is the man who has served as Finance Chair of the World Business Summit on Climate Change. Miliband is taking his money as a "senior advisor", a smiling addition to the company website.

This is wrong … very, very wrong.

COMMENT THREAD

Another clue

2012-02-25T11:38:00.001Z

Interestingly, despite Moonbat's desperate plea, very few of his readers seem prepared to help him answer our questions, and none have come even close. We, therefore, thought we might help him out with another clue (above).

Even though we enjoyed lavish hospitality - don't you just love the little bit of red carpet – our mission was ultimately unsuccessful. The very great irony, however, is that Moonbat would have completely approved of what we were doing, with us offering arguments very similar to his own.

One must be a little careful here though, as the truth could cause little George's head to explode. And that would be very bad for the environment.

COMMENT: "MOONBAT" THREAD

Political sophistication

2012-02-25T11:11:00.002Z

One has trouble coming to terms with the idea that some people believe that the euro is no longer legal tender in Portugal, Greece or Italy. But then, most of us will have had experience of the jaw-dropping question from people who one would have thought should know better, asking: "do you think we should join the EU?", when they actually meant the single currency.

Sadly, one is thus reminded of this.

COMMENT THREAD

Liberal nationalism

2012-02-25T00:02:00.027Z

Remember this? Now look at this. What is happening to this country of ours? It gets to the stage where the whys and wherefores don't matter any more. This should not be happening in a country which has pretensions of being civilised.

Yet this is neither an isolated nor recent problem. So what purpose is being served by turning our nation into a third-world country, in its people, its urban poverty and its politics, making a mockery of the rule of law?

The point to take on board, though, is that this is not a matter of race, and it is a mistake to treat it as such, although this sort of thing, brought about by this, does not exactly fuel racial harmony. However, wickedness, and police incompetence/indifference, span the racial divide - and the Devil comes in many colours.

Nevertheless, the attack on our wealth, our values (such as they are) and security, in a personal sense, comes from multiple sources - with the Romanians in many cases more trouble than they are worth. We now have train interiors fitted with CCTV, not least to protect sleeping passengers from these marauders.

And I'm still not sure what to make of this either, with 500,000 French citizens living in London alone, while keeping up political representation in their own country. If the French come here to live, should they not "integrate", in the same way that we ask of all immigrants. And if they do integrate, what do they integrate with ... the East Ham Bangladeshi community?

The bigger question, though, is why are we allowing this to happen - this cumulative assault on our national identity. What should we be doing to stop it - and what indeed should be stopped? Such questions are far from rhetorical - they need a response, and we don't seem to have sensible or convincing answers to them. Do we know even how to define the problem, much less try solving it?

Part of the answer, surely, must be to rehabilitate nationalism - rescuing it from the grip of racist thugs, and indeed the taint of racism. That, above all else, gave the multi-cults and the tranzies their rationale grip and their over policy.

Maintaining border integrity is not racist - it is common sense. The two issues must be separated: we need a form of liberal nationalism with which to retake the moral high ground. In terms of helping others, a secure, wealthy state is far better equipped to resolve others' problems than one which is dragged down to the lowest level.

Alongside referism - putting power where it belongs - we need to redefine ourselves as liberal nationalists, fulfilling that most obvious and necessary requirement for a secure base.

COMMENT THREAD

Moonbat strikes back

2012-02-24T20:14:00.003Z

He's there, in all his glory on his blog ... the first time one of my photographs has been swiped by The Guardian. The comments are priceless.

COMMENT THREAD

I spoke too soon

2012-02-24T19:42:00.002Z

Earlier, in customary snarl mode, I reckoned on getting very few reviews for the book, but I hadn't reckoned with the fantastically brilliant James Delingpole doing a wickedly insightful piece in The Spectator.

"What North has achieved here is admirable", he writes, leaving me purring so loudly they are ganging up to evict me from the "quiet coach" where I temporarily reside.

Dellers then continues, saying, "He has set out to reclaim for the people of Britain the credit for a glorious victory which was stolen from them by the political Establishment". He concludes the review with a quote from the end of the book:

To restore that history is to change the way we think about ourselves. We are part of a nation which, in time of peril, rallied and by collective endeavour engineered its own salvation... That makes us a different people from the passive, shadowy inhabitants of a myth — and all the more powerful. What we could do once we can do again.

Needless to say, lesser mortals cannot actually read the thing yet. Despite what the publisher says (who exists only to torture innocent authors), Amazon tells us that deliveries go out on 8 March. Late is better than never, they say.

In the meantime, of course, you could read that other brilliant book, Watermellons by ... er ... Dellers which, by a strange coincidence, is also reviewed in the Speccie. "Do not be deceived by his sometimes flippant and always highly readable prose. This is a serious and significant book", writes Matt Ridley. "He gets me EXACTLY right", says James.

And he does ... I'll post my own review soon.

COMMENT THREAD

The disease of incompetence

2012-02-24T10:16:00.004Z

The resignation of Cynthia Bower, the head of the Care Quality Commission, says the Failygraph, would have been merited even without its exposure of the scandalous failings of the abortion system.

But only up to a point, Lord Copper. This ghastly woman came (once again) to notoriety in June last year, over the Winterbourne View residential hospital scandal. Before that, Bower - on a salary in order of £215,000, more than the prime minister – had been chief executive of Stafford NHS Trust, where she had presided over utter catastrophe.

But despite this appalling performance, in June 2009 she was given the prestige appointment as head if the Quality Care Commission, where she has proved herself to be, yet again, an egregious failure. By any measure, this woman should never have been given the job in the first place.

The worst of this, though, is that this is far from the only case where failure has been so handsomely rewarded. More recently, we see the civil servant who presided over years of chaos at the UK Border Agency promoted – to run the tax office (above).

This is Lin Homer, who was paid almost £1 million in salary and bonuses over four years as the first chief executive of the beleaguered agency, and is now rewarded for her incompetence with another highly-paid, prestige post.

One really does wonder about high public office and why it is that the system unerringly seems to go for the most incompetent people it can find, and then consistently rewards failure. Tragically, though, this disease seems to be spreading throughout the corporate world, which looks to be embarked on its own orgy of incompetence – at our expense.

Is this the disease that is going to bring down civilisation?

COMMENT THREAD

More error than trial

2012-02-24T00:02:00.004Z

The deal eurozone leaders struck with private holders of Greek government bonds to impose deep cuts to the value of their holdings was "as voluntary as a confession to the Spanish Inquisition", the head of one of Germany’s biggest banks has said.

The comments, via the Financial Times, come from Martin Blessing, chief executive of Commerzbank, on a day that exposed the scale of the damage that Europe's sovereign debt crisis has done to banks' balance sheets.

And therein lies the hidden cost, as we learn that the state-owned RBS has made a loss of £2bn for the fourth quarter, of which losses on Greek government bonds accounted for £224m (€265m).

But executives warned that the trouble in Athens was only one part of a malaise that was forcing them to cut back their balance sheets. "We have reduced the balance sheet of RBS by over £700bn of assets", says Stephen Hester, chief executive of RBS. "That is roughly twice the size of the entire national debt of Greece".

I won't begin to pretend that I know what is going on here, so can only express a rank outsider's perspective, hazarding the comment that, if a bank can write down £700 billion – and the world does not stop spinning – what is the big deal about Greece doing the same with a much smaller sum?

There will be an answer of course, but there are a lot of things about this ongoing crisis that simply do not make sense, and never will. The answer in this case is that I have read it wrongly. RBS has reduced its balance sheet by £700 Billion. It has not written down that amount. It has done this by selling off assets and netting out derivatives. The "real" balance sheet reduction was actually "about £250bn".

But when we see RBS "doubling its loss" to £2 billion as a sign of what Stephen Hester admits is "Alice in Wonderland" accounting - yet still giving its staff £785 million in bonuses" for their "success" - one perhaps can be forgiven for making the odd mistake. At least, in this case, the taxpayer doesn't have to pick up the bill.

It is some very small comfort, therefore, that after my comment on the meaning of the word unprecedented, we see via The Guardian at the end of a convoluted chain, that Angela Merkel has acquired a new expression for her uncertainty in the euro crisis.

For a long time she has been saying that, "one drives with line-of-sight only" (auf Sicht fahren). But currently, she mostly talks about "treading on Virgin Territory" (Neuland betreten). I guess that is a more picturesque way of saying the same thing.

Perhaps of more comfort in an odd sort of a way, we learn that Merkel always stresses that one has to proceed by "trial and error" – according to the graffiti (above), she can't yet have taken flying lessons – see Google translate.

The comfort here comes from the confirmation that one's initial impressions, that our rulers don't really know what they are doing. The worrying thing, though – as The Guardian notes - is that they may be proceeding more on the basis of "error" than "trial". On this at least, we're all in the same boat.

COMMENT THREAD

Being kind to Moonbat

2012-02-23T16:45:00.016Z

In this post, originally published in July 2010, after the great propagandist Bob Ward had responded to the guest post by Christopher Booker, we noted that a full-time employee of an institute paid-for by a billionaire financier with interests in global warming, was complaining that Booker was biased because he had received a free flight and had had his hotel bill paid in New York, to attend a Heartlands conference as a speaker.

To add a little spice to the game, I offered a puzzle, the answer to which would give the warmists some more ammunition - since they go in for such things. This comprised a pic of myself and Booker, asking these questions: Where are we? Who owns the executive jet in which we are about to ride? Where are we going? With whom did we have dinner the following night – and who paid the (very substantial) bill?

I then added the above (another little clue).

Now, in the wake of the Gleick affair, it appears that Moonbat (or one of his agents) was sniffing round the blog, looking for information with which to challenge Booker. To make Moonbat's life a little easier (being a kind sort of chap, who doesn't believe one should be cruel to animals), I have republished the post he talked about. There you are George ... happy hunting!

UPDATE: Well … it looks as if he's swallowed the bait. He's certainly out hunting - and you don't have to work very hard to discover which side he is on.

COMMENT THREAD

A wee rammy

2012-02-23T15:18:00.006Z

The sooner the Scots get their "independence" the better. Not only do they not speak the same language (a "rammy" being a fight or a scuffle - often of the drunken variety), the sort of people they elect as MPs leaves a lot to be desired. Late last night, we are told, one of their finest, Eric Joyce, delivered a "Glasgow kiss" – as a head-butt is sometime called – to one Stuart Andrew, another rather unwholesome piece of work.

Eric Joyce himself has always has been a rum cove although, when it suited it, the media was quite prepared to give him house room, even though he was the first MP to have claimed £1 million in expenses (as well as dodging capital gains tax). Thus, as Your Freedom and Ours points out, these people shouldn't be allowed out. But the real problem is that they were voted in.

In September 2009, when he appeared on our radar, we noted that Joyce was reputed to be extremely unpopular in his own constituency, and believed to be at risk of losing his seat at the general election. Here he is though, like the veritable bad penny. Would someone please care to remind me why we have elections? Wasn't one of the reasons that, should an MP misbehave, or displease his electorate, he could be voted out?

COMMENT THREAD

The killer of nations

2012-02-23T12:16:00.003Z

"Greece is like an Arab oil state without oil", writes Patrick Cockburn in The Independent. "It has an overgrown and expensive state machine hard wired with webs of patronage and corruption". This is worth noting as anyone familiar with the writings of Patrick Cockburn, particularly on Iraq, will know that he far from being the worst analyst on the block, and he most definitely has a point here.

The division between Europe and Asia – and the Middle East – is often put in Turkey. Politically and socially though, Greece perhaps has more in common with the Middle East than Europe. In the Middle East, Cockburn says, the state machine is "a crude, unfair but partially effective way of distributing oil wealth and binding recipients to the state through jobs and favours". He continues:

In Greece borrowing took the place of oil. Membership of the eurozone gave the country the same triple AAA credit rating as Germany, enabling it to borrow what it wanted at cheap rates. Euro membership, like oil wealth elsewhere, was a disincentive to political, economic and social change because the money was there to pay off friends and foes … Everybody was happy until the money ran out.

So far, so good. The rest of the piece, as befits the title, "Greece has an overgrown and expensive state machine", deals with the inadequacies of the state, glossing over the patronage and corruption.

But both are a central feature of the state machine and business, to the extent that corruption is most probably one of the main drivers in the economy. And unlike Italy, where the Mafia and other crime syndicates have something of a separate existence, organised crime in Greece is very much part of the state and the major business enterprises.

What is particularly damning about Greece's entry into the EU is that it has opened up the markets and administrative systems of the European nations to a vast nexus of corruption, linking the diverse criminal enterprises, with the tentacles extending into the heart of Brussels.

The tragedy is that, when criminality prevails, the normal rules of economics and governance no longer apply. Competition is distorted, value-for-money becomes a redundant concept and justice takes the back seat to the rule of the mob.

To that extent, corruption particularly is the elephant in the room – another one. No one in polite company wants to say that Greek politicians are a bunch of corrupt thugs – or in the pay of organised crime, itself indivorcible from the business community.

But as long as we continue to pretend that Greece is a normal state obeying the same rules as everybody else, where the rule of law applies, we will continue to be taken to the cleaners. Corruption is the killer of nations. Until or unless it is rooted out of the heart of the Greek establishment, there will be no real progress.

As it stands, money pumped directly into that benighted country simply presents more opportunity for theft on an industrial scale. And, when demonstrators target some of the commercial enterprises (above), they know what they are doing. The real looters (as in Britain) are on the inside.

COMMENT: "LES GRANDES LIGNES" THREAD

After the fall

2012-02-23T10:05:00.003Z

What have we missed? That was the question we were putting yesterday – although it seems long ago in the distant past, so fast are events moving.

The answer now comes, embedded in a leader in Deutsche Welle, which reiterates the obvious – that Greece is bankrupt and that the bailout is going to fail. But, crucially, it then says: "This may happen by the fall, by which time Spain and Italy have hopefully restabilized".

This is a highly credible scenario. While the focus is on Greece, the real action is on the Spanish and Italian fronts (and, presumably, Portugal). The aim is to stabilise their economies and erect the famous "firewalls" to prevent "contagion". Once the protective measures are in place, the Greek economy will be allowed to crash and burn – but only then. At the moment, it is too early.

Up front, the pretence is there – that these measures are being put in place to save the Greeks. But the fact is that the bailout has nothing to do with the Greeks, per se, and everything to do with protecting the eurozone, and the banking system. Put it any way you wish – Greece is the sacrificial lamb. When its time comes, it will be slaughtered.

Significantly, this is being dealt with by DW as an economic issue, and a separate report has Hans-Werner Sinn, head of the Ifo-Institute for Economic Research, telling us that: "The plan to radically revive the Greek economy with the euro is an illusion". By way of balance, we are also told that the "troika" denies that it is buying time.

Therein lies the real illusion – the picture of the gallant "colleagues" battling away to save Greece, their struggles becoming an all-absorbing soap opera. In the real world, Greece is being positioned for a fall. The only thing not decided is the exact timing, although the autumn is pencilled in, when everybody is refreshed after the summer break. Here, the Americans describing autumn as "the fall" is rather appropriate.

Nevertheless, the plans for Greece are not as brutal as they may appear. The general view is that its economy cannot prosper without growth and, to achieve that, it must be restructured. That, it is felt, will not happen until the plug is pulled. Then, with Greece out of the euozone, the talk is of a Marshall Plan type of package that will put the country back on its feet.

So far, so good, but the economic calculus ignores the human side and the prospect of a long hot summer of riots in Athens and elsewhere. And what may be planned as a managed retrenchment by "colleagues" may be seen from the outside as a headlong, disorderly retreat.

In politics, impressions are everything. Politics themselves are an illusion – the art of managing expectations, and it is here that most damage may be done. If the Greek collapse is seen as a disaster, the knock-on effect throughout Europe may be severe, especially in terms of the European Union's credibility.

So far, the commission seems to have played a reasonably successful hand in diverting attention from itself. With Merkel in the frame, we hear little of Olli Rehn, and not a lot about van Rompuy, even though these two are also major players. And the current wave of Germanophobia, as Helen noted, also serves to keep attention off the malign role of the commission.

What we can then expect in the autumn, as Greece is finally allowed to sink under the waves, is the announcement of a grand rescue package – an EU rescue package, demonstrating the solidarity of the "colleagues" and the strength of the project.

In the meantime, the game is to keep us focused on the soap opera, and the endless guessing game. This will allow the arch manipulators to bide their time and spin the publicity to a gullible media and largely indifferent public, bored and baffled in equal measure by the ongoing drama.

After the fall, we will be presented with the images of "Europe" coming to the rescue. And as long as that image sticks, the illusion of power will be maintained. Then – the "colleagues" hope – the revolution will be deferred yet again.

COMMENT: "LES GRANDES LIGNES" THREAD

Les grandes lignes

2012-02-23T00:02:00.006Z

The Financial Times is now reporting on a scrap between the IMF, the US administration and – once again – Germany. There also seems to be a divergence of opinion between Germany and the Netherlands.

The German government, we are told, is set to resist increasing the size of the €500 billion European Stability Mechanism, the so-called "firewall", held as a back-up fund to shore up ailing economies in the case of a crisis, so preventing the dreaded "contagion".

Elsewhere, we see ZeroHedge reporting on "negative salaries" for some Greeks, making them worse off than "the run-of-the-mill slave". This is, we also learn, on top of another phenomenon - "negative gold".

Such detail and much more is complicating the reporting of the current crisis. Relying on market signals, though, will only take us so far. The market has its own agenda and a very narrow perspective. As Kenneth S Rogoff, a professor of economics at Harvard, says: "I am amazed by the short-term psychology in the market".

Getting bogged down in detail, and the baffling torrent of jargon, simply obscures les grandes lignes. It is this bigger picture that we must keep in focus, the one that is telling us, with increasing clarity, that Merkel is protecting her domestic position , fearful of a backlash "within her own centre-right coalition, and from public opinion".

The Guardian is telling us that several MPs from Merkel's conservatives and her junior partner, the Free Democrats (FDP) are planned to oppose the bailout package, when it comes in front of the Bundestag next week. On present calculations, she is unlikely to win a vote on the deal without the humiliation of relying on her socialist and green opponents .

This, of course, is not a sign of strength, but one of weakness, turning the conventional narrative on its head. As we have seen on earlier occasions, Germany is not calling the shots, the leader of a homogenous grouping comprising the so-called "troika" and the member states.

Rather, we are seeing evidence of what could only be inferred – that there are serious stresses within the different groups of players, and between the groups themselves. Merkel is having to respond to differing and conflicting international players, while squaring them with the demands from her own electorate. And, as the circle gets wider, calling in parliamentarians and cabinets from all the eurozone member states, the discord is going to get greater.

One of the most recent of the stresses to break out into the wider public sphere is the tussle with the IMF which, under pressure from Washington – the fund's biggest provider – is trying to reduce its exposure, dumping as much risk as possible in the laps of the Europeans.

Without needing to go into the details, that itself betrays another strand of nervousness, reinforcing the almost universal view that the Greek deal is going to go belly-up – not if, but when.

Yet to get its fair share of publicity is the bond deal with private bondholders taking the so-called "haircut" of 70 percent, reducing the Greek debt by €100 billion. The shenanigans over this deal, we are told, are going to poison the bond market, with untold consequences.

Such detail on economic issues, however, must not obscure the bigger picture – that Greece is going to default. This, incidentally, is now the view of Fitch Ratings, which is saying that it is "highly likely in the near term".

When that happens, it will initially be an economic event, but it will also become a major political event, which will then dominate proceedings (as do they do now, although less obviously), with huge ramifications.

Here, one wishes that our own politicians (and media) were more on the ball. The economic "contagion" is going to be matched by some pretty heavy political fallout – in Greece initially, but then spreading to Germany and rippling out from there.

Economics apart, the resultant fallout is going to redefine European politics, in a way that we can only guess at. At the end of a decade or so, we are going to see a Germany more and more detached from the EU. At the moment, against the combined might of the "colleagues", Merkel drew back from Armageddon, but that is not always going to be the case. German obedience can no longer be taken for granted.

Thus, while the economic events may for the time being dominate, puzzle and frustrate, we must never lose sight of those political grandes lignes. They, not the bean counters, decide the fates of nations.

COMMENT THREAD

Fakegate breaks cover

2012-02-22T20:02:00.000Z

It seems the Gleick story is breaking cover in the British press. However, he is getting rather gentle treatment - more gentle than he deserves.

COMMENT: "VERY SMALL TRAGEDY" THREAD

And for the anally retentive

2012-02-22T16:35:00.004Z

… all those people who got so terrible sniffy about this blog, when we started warning of a revolution. But now the Failygraph is coming to the same conclusion, are we now permitted to discuss such things?

The interesting thing is that we are self-evidently in a pre-revolutionary situation but, despite the long-standing violence, there is no real evidence of an incipient revolution.

As we remarked recently, the equipment and tactics for dealing with street disorder are such that it is difficult for a crowd to prevail. Thus, we concluded, talk of an uprising may be premature, and even without substance. More to the point, possibly, there is no ideology which can motivate and unify the opposition.

However, since the great Failygraph has spoken, I suppose we must defer to their greater wisdom, although one does wonder (above). If this is what the EU is bringing us to, why is it that the paper wants us to stay in? What is this great "compromise" that it has in mind?

COMMENT: "WHAT HAVE WE MISSED" THREAD

Silence is not golden

2012-02-22T12:30:00.002Z

When even the notoriously europhilic Independent newspaper comes up with such headlines, alongside the Guardian, which is similarly pessimistic, one has to conclude that the game has entered a new phase.

It certainly makes a contrast from the widely promulgated remarks of the preposterous Osborne, here in the Metro (below), which can only be for public consumption. Not even that arrogant fool can believe what he is saying, so one assumes that he is going through the motions of supporting the "colleagues".

Elsewhere, we get little relief either, not even from Ambrose. A day late, he has been overtaken by events and is offering very little that hasn't already been said, or could have worked out for ourselves.

But there is no point in pretending that this is capable of rational (i.e., predictive) analysis, or that we can get insight from secret documents or these high-level, magical anonymous "sauces". We are breaking into new territory here – uncharted waters.

Perhaps one should rehearse what is meant by "unprecedented". It actually means what it says … without precedent. Strange though it might sound, this then means that there is little to be gained from looking to earlier examples for guidance – there aren't any.

Ambrose makes a big deal about the electoral arithmetic of the coming Greek election, when it seems certain that the left wing/Communist alliance will sweep the board – possibly leading to repudiation of the bailout conditions.

That, though, is not until April and, before that, a number of eurozone member states must seek parliamentary ratification of the bailout deal, the biggest of them all being Germany. So far, the Bundestag seems to have been kept out of the loop and, in the ordinary course of events, one might expect it to roll over and do Merkel's bidding.

But these are not ordinary times and, while Merkel is currently riding high in the polls, things could change very quickly. Thus, 27 February, when the issue is pencilled in to go to the German parliament, could be another of those turning points.

As interesting is the role of the French, and in particular Sarkozy, who has been quiet of late. From the time when the "Merkozy" were dominating the news, and the odd couple seemed poised to move in with each other, they have been invisible as a pair over the last instalment of the crisis.

Unseen or not, the two will undoubtedly be talking, and the motor of integration has not yet stalled, and when it drops out of the limelight, then is the time to be alert. This dimension cannot be ignored – silence, in this case, is not golden.

COMMENT: "WHAT HAVE WE MISSED" THREAD

What have we missed?

2012-02-22T00:02:00.007Z

I cannot think of any situation such as the Greek bailout, where the informed condemnation is so clear and unequivocal - and almost unanimous. You will be extremely hard put to find anyone outside the bubble who thinks the deal will work, and most think it will not hold more than a few months.

Perhaps the most entertaining, if not definitive piece comes from The Washington Post which has asked a group of experts and economists to pronounce on it.

We start with Kevin Featherstone, professor of contemporary Greek studies at the London School of Economics. "With this deal", he says, "Greece has only overcome the first of several hurdles". Barry Eichengreen, economist at the University of California Berkeley, says simply: "It won't work".

Henry Farrell, associate professor of political science at George Washington University offers a more subtle put-down: "The bailout will work", he says, "if by 'working' you mean putting off the really hard decisions for another month or two".

Vincent Reinhart, economist at the American Enterprise Institute, and Carmen Reinhart, economist at the Peterson Institute for International Economics, offer something similar, damning the deal with faint praise: "No doubt, the deal enhances the probability that Greece will be able to squeak past its major debt refunding on 20 March … ".

Dmitri Vayanos, professor of finance at the London School of Economics, is kinder, but still not very encouraging: "While the bailout plan takes care of Greece's funding needs in the short run and puts Greek banks on a sounder footing", he says, "it does not offer a full solution to Greece's problems".

Nicolas Veron, senior fellow at Bruegel, a Brussels-based think tank, is not too far away from that: "This agreement does not set Greece on a sustainable track, and more pain is sure to come down the road …". Yet Mohammed el-Erian, co-chief executive of Pimco is more blunt: " … this agreement is likely to follow its predecessors and fall apart in the weeks ahead".

Richard Portes, economist at London Business School says: "The bailout will fail even if debt restructuring attracts sufficient creditor support now and CDS are not triggered (both uncertain). Debt reduction seriously inadequate. Greece will need more official support, sooner rather than later. The politics are poisonous too, in Greece and in eurozone".

And so on, and on and on it goes. Anywhere you look, you will get the same sentiments. Even the great Gavin Hewitt, on the europhile BBC, can only offer the view that the "colleagues" are buying time (above) – a sentiment shared by many others.

Now, if this bailout is so awful that even the BBC can see it, and we know that the "colleagues" include amongst their number some extremely bright cookies, the fatal weaknesses of the deal must be obvious to them as well. So who are they trying to fool?

Therein lies the mystery. One should always beware of the obvious, and with so many commentators patting themselves on the back for their perspicacity – including me – there is the danger that we are missing something.

That "something" is the next step. The "colleagues" really are not that stupid, and if it is so transparent to us all that the deal cannot work, they surely must have something in reserve … a "plan B".

An alternative, of course, is that there really is nothing left in the locker - that this is the last, despairing fling to stave off the inevitable. But, with their Houdini-like skills for escaping from impossible situations, it is hard to believe that. It is all very well, therefore, for these clever people pontificating about how bad the bailout deal is, and how certain it is to fail. Even the dimmest of us knows that by now. Thus, the question stands: what have we missed?

COMMENT THREAD

Not even a rounding error

2012-02-21T18:57:00.001Z

The warmists making such a fuss about the few million dollars funding directed at the Heartland institute might do well to recall the pledge made in Copenhagen in 2009 and the Cancun Agreements of December 2010.

These formally committed developed countries collectively to providing resources "approaching USD 30 billion for the period 2010 - 2012" to support developing countries' climate efforts.

This so-called "fast-start" finance is supposed to help developing countries, particularly the poorest and most vulnerable, mitigate (reduce) their greenhouse gas emissions, and adapt and cope with the effects of climate change.

These pledges also present an opportunity to build trust between developed and developing countries in the international climate arena, in turn fostering progress towards a comprehensive post-2012 international climate agreement.

The money is being monitored by the World Resources Institute, which now lists $28.222 billion in pledges. By far the biggest single country donor is Japan, with $15 billion. The UK comes next with $2.471 billion and third is the United States with $1.704 billion. The EU member states as a whole, with the commission, have pledged $10.283 billion.

Against that sort of funding, the money going to the Heartland Institute is not even a rounding error. What on earth are the warmists worried about?

COMMENT THREAD

If we have to give aid

2012-02-21T17:18:00.005Z

… would it not be better to spend it on issues which could make a real difference? Although not advocating that we should give any money at all to India, the money spent on climate change could perhaps be diverted to rail safety, dealing with a real rather than imagined problem.

Thus, recalling the piece last Sunday, where it was reported that £3.5 billion of public money has been paid out or allocated to projects addressing climate change abroad since 2007-08, we now stumble on the UK's International Climate Fund (ICF).

Worth £2.9 billion, provided via DFID (£1.8bn), DECC (£1bn) and Defra (£100m) (the latter with respect to forestry finance), the High Commission in India proudly boasts that a billion has already been spent (see below).

This would include – or so it appears - the UK's Advocacy Fund, launched on 6 September 2011, incorporating "a £10 million climate window" that will help strengthen the voice of the poorest countries in international climate negotiations.

The interesting thing here is that, had an Anonymous Donor given £10 million to the Heartland Institute for a "climate window", the warmists would be squealing blue murder. But when it is part of a £2.9 billion climate package, expropriated from hard-pressed British taxpayers, they are strangely silent.

Whatever the warmists might think, though, it would very much appear that the UK aid programme does not stand up to any serious scrutiny. There might be less opposition if the money was spent on serious, life-saving issues. But when it is being frittered away on nebulous issues such as climate advocacy, it is difficult to see how any of it can be justified.

COMMENT THREAD

A very small tragedy

2012-02-21T13:09:00.005Z

In the ongoing mini-drama over the acquisition of electronic-format documents by deception from the obscure Heartland Institute think-tank, the fabrication of another and the subsequent publication of the batch on a number of warmist web-sites, we see a further development.

This is the online confession by an even more obscure person by the name of Peter H. Gleik, who purports to be a "water and climate analyst", published in the Huffington Post.

His choice of outlet tells you much of what you need to know about Gleik, and much that you don't. But one's disinterest is somewhat strengthened by one of his allies, Andrew Revkin, who writes of the confession in The New York Times. Such is the self-absorption of this man, and his lack of perspective, that he writes of Gleick's use of deception as "his personal tragedy and shame".

But, Revkin writes, the "broader tragedy" is that his decision to go to such extremes in his fight with Heartland has greatly set back any prospects of the country having the "rational public debate" that he wrote — correctly — is so desperately needed.

These are, it seems, characteristically emotive words, but it is hard to accept the idea of this being a tragedy – much less a "broader tragedy", given all that is happening in the world.

As to the debate, though, there have been millions or articles on the subject of global warming, hundreds of thousands of programmes on the broadcast media and hundreds of books written, with as many websites on the issue. Rarely, it seems, has there been a broader debate on any one subject – and the warmists lost.

Now, the public is largely indifferent to the global warming thesis, treating alarmists claims more often with derision than the concern that their authors would wish. Thus, if Peter Gleick is not getting the continued debate at the level he wanted, it is a rather small tragedy.

Nevertheless, it has given the Heartland Institute a boost, and a much-needed fund-raising opportunity, and has given the increasingly narrowly-focused, self-obsessed "deniers" a new "gate" with which to amuse themselves. And Dellers is having a field day, which is always good fun.

Overall, though, the greatest achievement of the "deniers" has been to turn the subject into the tedious backwater that it has become. Without the prominence and the heat (if one dare say that), the political traction goes and eventually the scare withers on the vine, which it is now doing.

What is of greater concern now is the regulatory aftermath, where the costs and burdens of regulation continue to multiply. And they lie within the greater realms of politics, where too many in the global warning game fear to tread.

As always, it will be politics rather than science which shapes events, with the likes of the euro crisis having a far greater effect on global warming expenditure than a thousand persuasive scientific papers. The reality of the money running out tends to focus the mind. And against such particular events, Gleick and his "fakegate" is a very small tragedy indeed.

COMMENT THREAD

'Twas thus ordained

2012-02-21T06:39:00.007Z

"We have reached a far reaching agreement on Greece's new programme and private sector involvement that would lead to a significant debt reduction for Greece and pave the way towards an unprecedented amount of new official financing ... to secure Greece's future in the euro area", says Luxembourg's Jean-Claude Juncker, at the end-of-charade press conference.

The official Eurogroup statement is here. "We reiterate our commitment to provide adequate support to Greece during the life of the programme and beyond until it has regained market access, provided that Greece fully complies with the requirements and objectives of the adjustment programme", say the "colleagues".

Off-stage could be heard banging, shuffling and muffled screaming from the fat lady, as she was bound and gagged, and bundled out the back door into a waiting van.

Already, Felix Salmon of Reuters calls it "the improbable Greece plan". His view is that the plan assumes that Greece's politicians will stick to what they’ve agreed, and start selling off huge chunks of their country's patrimony while at the same time imposing enormous budget cuts. Needless to say, there is no indication that this will happen, nor that the Greek people will tolerate such a thing.

Here then is a man saying that the deal could easily all fall apart within months; the chances of it gliding to success and a 120 percent debt-to-GDP ratio in 2020 have got to be de minimis.

Earlier, in the forum, we wrote: "there will be the appearance of an agreement ... which will then take a few weeks to unravel ... the game this time is to get themselves past the 20 March crisis. Then there will be another day, another crisis". Merkel's only option, we wrote even earlier, was to buy time.

Now Salmon writes that Europe's politicians know the deal must fail. "But at the very least they're buying time: this deal might well delay catastrophic capital flight from Greece, and give the Europeans more time to work out how to shore up Portugal if and when that happens".

Wishful thinking that is, but for the moment it is the only game in town. "We continue to believe that Greece can be saved. Or at least we continue to say so", says one Eurocrat, according to The Economist.

COMMENT: "DANCE" THREAD

The dance must go on

2012-02-21T00:02:00.004Z

It was all smiles when the happy colleagues met in Brussels, giving no hint of the tensions and acrimony that have marked the last week – and more. At the heart of the crisis though, there has always been that element of theatre, and no more so now, when the talks are running – especially as the outcome has probably already been decided.

One can imagine a scenario where all the "colleagues" are sitting in the lounge, doors closed and locked, the chaps with their ties undone and feet up, with the waiters passing round the booze. They watch television, roaring with laughter as their "spokesmen" feed in the pre-prepared statements, all designed to keep the drama going until the final press conference, when they straighten their ties, look serious again and tell the world what they have "decided".

Meanwhile, out in the cold, real people bleed, real people suffer, real people go hungry, and real people go bankrupt, their lives destroyed by the carelessness and indifference of their masters.

But the theatre is not quite that cynical, although it might just as well be. The outcome is pre-ordained … the "bailout" is going through, because it must. The small print will now emerge over the days and weeks, when we learn that Greece has taken another step towards Armageddon.

In the meantime, the very rich will get even richer, a lot of middle-income people will get poorer, and the very poor will either stay that way or die. The journalists will prattle and preen and some of them – a very few - will work out what is going on. None will say so clearly, because there are too many agendas to support.

Whatever is reported overnight, only some will be the truth. Much of it will be lies, or dissembling. None of it is worth staying up for. It will take weeks to get a feel for what really has happened, so the analysis can wait its time. In the meantime, the dance must go on.

COMMENT THREAD

The books, the books!

2012-02-20T16:58:00.002Z

"I object to publishers. The one service they have done is to teach me to do without them. They combine artistic pettiness with commercial rascality being neither good judges of literature nor good business men".

George Bernard Shaw … as supplied by my publisher.

That said, the books are being released from the warehouse today. The formal publication date is 3 March. My apologies for the delay. When I said the books were "available" on 17 February, I didn't mean you could actually buy them - dear me no. What do you think we are?

COMMENT THREAD

A confused columnist

2012-02-20T16:08:00.001Z

The Great Sage Wolfgang Münchau, doyen of European columnists and Custodian of All Knowledge, finally comes to the conclusion in the Financial Times that we reached over a week ago.

The German strategy, he writes, "seems to be to make life so unbearable that the Greeks themselves will want to leave the eurozone". He then adds: "Ms Merkel certainly does not want to be caught with a smoking gun in her hand".

But, in an article headed, "Greece must default if it wants democracy", he condemns the German strategy as one "of assisted suicide, and one that is extremely dangerous and irresponsible".

If Münchau is really serious about Greece having to default in order to restore democracy, what is the problem? After all, if Germany is trying to force a Greek default, does this not suggest that he and Germany are arguing for the same outcome?

So why is the strategy "extremely dangerous and irresponsible"?

COMMENT: "EAT AND DESTROY" THREAD

I just simply hope

2012-02-20T14:11:00.003Z

The Sun and the Failygraph are covering this story, and even this obscure journal (above) points out that to give priority to a group on the basis of where they come from breaches employment law.

However, The Sun goes further, admitting that "EU laws ban discrimination against foreigners who apply for work here". But the Failygraph, recording the comments of the employment minister on Sky News, told us that when it was put to him that prioritising British candidates could fall foul of those rules, Grayling stood by his remarks.

He said: "I just simply hope that the choices that employers make in this country will be to give young unemployed British people a chance, so it would be bizarre if I didn't say that and we'll do everything we can to encourage them to do so".

So that is what it has come down to … in matters of acute national interest, our minister has nothing to offer, other than to incite employers to break the law and then "just simply hope" that they get away with it.

COMMENT THREAD

The thin green line

2012-02-20T13:06:00.002Z

No one is pretending it [the bailout] will end Greece's problems says Reuters, which then makes it plain that the bulk of the bailout money will not go to Greece.

A debt sustainability report delivered to eurozone finance ministers last week showed that under the main scenario, Greek debt will only fall to 129 percent by 2020. And that, of course, is assuming that the Greek government can deliver the promised cuts, and maintain its tax income – neither of which conditions look capable of being fulfilled.

And just to rub it in, it seems as if the escrow account idea has wings, although it has not been decided who will manage the account. On the face of it though, the effect of this is that Greece takes on the €130 billion loan, but has no power over how the funds are dispersed.

All this comes with Papademos flying to Brussels, doubtless to get his instructions from his masters, with The Sun reporting that another condition of the deal will be a postponement of the general election.

The concern to stop the elections is understandable, with current polls showing support for the two main parties nose diving. From 42.5 percent in October 2010, the socialist PASOK is down to 8.2 percent, according to MRB and published in the newspaper Real News, with the conservative New Democracy party dropping from 28 to 19 percent.

This is being recorded as a "historic low" for the two main parties, matched by a lurch to the left, with a coalition of the Communists, the Radical Left and the Democratic Left taking a combined 43.5 percent of the vote in one poll.

Variously reported, anything up to 59 percent of the population want an immediate election after the bailout has been decided but, whether a rejection of that demand will translate into violence is anyone's guess. The media, talking up the prospects of a violent response, talk of 2,000 demonstrators clashing with police, but these are small numbers compared with the half-million that the unions can put on the streets.

We haven't seen much police hardware in the pictures so far, and the "thin green lines" of police are just that … thin. So far – apart from the rash of burning Sunday week last - the police seem to be keeping control, even without pulling the heavy gear.

Thus, talk of an uprising may be premature, and even without substance. Away from the centre, the situation is reported calm. One wonders whether the more severe reactions will come not from the Greeks, but from the German people, when they realise what their rulers have committed them to.

COMMENT: "EAT AND DESTROY" THREAD

Facebook

2012-02-20T11:06:00.001Z

It is a wonder that the human race actually survives.

COMMENT THREAD

Drawn to the same conclusion

2012-02-20T09:04:00.003Z

Ambrose is in the Failygraph telling us that it's all over … for the moment. Bowing to intense pressure from France, Italy, and the US-led bloc of global leaders, he says, Schäuble has toned down threats to force Greece out of the euro.

The German finance minister has said (through gritted teeth, no doubt) that the country is "on the right path" and signalled that pension cuts agreed by the Greek cabinet over the weekend would be enough to secure the bailout. Nor is Ambrose alone. Others, such as the Irish Times have got there as well, with Reuters coming in behind.

We do not, of course, get from Ambrose any mention of the commission – which will have been orchestrating the pressure. That would spoil the Failygraph's "house narrative" of a German-dominated EU. But he still ends up exactly where we were yesterday.

So, with no moles, no magic sources, no secret documents, mad conspiracies or even smoke and mirrors to rely on, we get there using good, old-fashioned analysis, based on a sound political appreciation of the issues.

There will still be the " … further hurdles which Greece will be required to surmount". They will have to come since the fundamentals haven't changed. The pressure on Greece will continue, externally and internally. The dance goes on.

COMMENT: "EAT AND DESTROY" THREAD

Eat and destroy

2012-02-20T00:02:00.005Z

After weeks of brinkmanship, bad blood and missed deadlines (to say nothing of wacky conspiracy theories with "secret" plans so secret that even their authors are not allowed to see them), a Greek debt deal may finally be within reach.

So says the Wall Street Journal (apart from the bits in the brackets), speculating on the possible outcome of today's Eurogroup meeting. The paper bases its thinking on the decision by the Greek Cabinet yesterday to find all the extra cuts needed to lower spending by €325 million, thus apparently surmounting the final hurdle standing between that benighted country and its bailout.

Maybe the WSJ is right, even if, as Ambrose suggests, it is too late to make any difference. However, what you see in the WSJ is a lingering belief that the Greeks (and the EU member states) are dealing with an economic problem, as the paper goes on to set out the measures which must be taken to resolve the deeper euro crisis.

Having set it all out in detail, the paper then argues that, unless this is what eurozone finance ministers have in mind as they sit down on Monday, they should have no business signing the deal. To go ahead, it says, with a flawed Greek bailout without a plan to accelerate eurozone integration and create a functional monetary union would be an act of calculated cynicism that would simply deepen Greek - and European - agony.

But, of course, what the WSJ demands as a minimum is not within the realms of political possibility, not with the German chancellor riding high on the belief that she is going to oust the spendthrift Greeks, and restore discipline to the euro-rump, once the rest of the PIIGS (less Ireland) have been excommunicated.

Thus, it is not an economic solution which will be bartered today, but a political compromise. It will be one which is set to achieve the impossible – keeping Greece within the euro yet keeping the increasingly fractious Germans on-side.

Thus, whatever comes out of the smoke-free room later today will be a fudge. It will not work, and there will be no real expectation that it will work. The name of the game is to deal with the crise du jour by buying enough time for preparations to be made for the next one.

Inevitably, therefore, embedded in the agreement that comes – to emerge later, after the hullabaloo has abated – may well be the poison pill which brings the whole thing down, or merely triggers the next crisis. Perhaps what will really happen is that we'll get another fabulously secret plan, this time so secret that its authors will be killed before they have even devised it, thus ensuring that nobody at all in the world knows the details.

On the other hand, when whatever happens actually happens, we will be in exactly the same position of wondering what on earth is going on, reflecting exactly the mindset of our rulers who, by all accounts, are making it up as they go along.

But, just to be on the safe side, you are advised to eat your computer after reading this post, and then press your personal self-destruct button. You just can't be too careful these days.

COMMENT THREAD

Tip of an iceberg?

2012-02-19T17:23:00.008Z

A piece in The Sunday Telegraph by Richard Gray, Science Correspondent, purports to give us spending data from the Department for International Development (DFID), "on projects which they say will either reduce carbon emissions abroad or attempt to deal with the effects of predicted changes in the earth's climate".

According to Gray, in the past four years DFID has spent £900 million on climate change projects with nearly two thirds of that being spent in the past financial year. A further £533 million has already been committed up to 2013. The biggest recipients, he says, are India and Indonesia, two countries considered to be rapidly emerging economies.

These figures, apparently, come from a Freedom of Information request, and "reveal" that total spending on tackling climate change overseas has increased from £61 million in 2007-08 to more than £883 million in 2010-11. In total £3.5 billion of public money has been paid out or allocated to projects addressing climate change abroad since 2007-08.

This is all very good stuff and, coming from this source, is eminently quotable – as a number of blogs and other groups are already doing. It provides good propaganda, not least to counter the increasingly bizarre claims coming from the warmists, about expenditure by those whom they insist on calling "deniers".

However, I suspect that not even DFID knows exactly how much money is spent specifically on climate change. Much of the funding is grouped under portmanteau projects, covering a wide range of issues, of which climate change is sometimes only a small part.

Furthermore, there is some reason to suspect the accuracy of what the government has told Gray. For instance, based on his FOI answers, he tells us that amongst the aid provided by DFID was a £4.7 million project in Indonesia aimed at helping the government there provide "more effective leadership and management of climate change programming".

Indeed there is such a project, and details of this and all the others can be found on the DFID website. However, while Gray has been told of a £4.7 million project, the website details give us £6.2 million, in order to ensure that the GoI (Government of Indonesia) "can provide more effective leadership and management of climate change programming to deliver emissions reduction and poverty reduction outcomes".

Interestingly Indonesia is very much in the frame and, if Gray has done nothing else, he has certainly alerted us to that. Looking wider, we thus learn that in December 2009 DFID exchanged letters with the Government of Indonesia agreeing to a five year programme focusing on climate change over 2010-15, with a budget of £50 million.

The intention is that from 2011 onwards DFID focuses exclusively on issues of climate change in Indonesia, and delivers this by forming a joint UK Climate Change Unit with other government departments located in the British Embassy and withdraws from development work in other areas.

That UK Climate Change Unit (UKCCU) was launched on 6 April 2011, with the press release informing us that this cross-government unit would deliver the UK's climate change goals in a vitally important context.

Thus we see multiple additional projects, such as Promoting Low Carbon Development in Indonesia with a budget of £5,000,000. There is the Indonesia Low Carbon Growth Project for £1,500,000, the Multi-stakeholder Forestry Programme at £2,000,000, Support to Climate Change Programme in Indonesia at £1,199,735, and the Rapid Response Facility on Climate Change at £500,000.

With a few others, that brings the known total to just under £17 million already spent, leaving – presumably – another £33 million in the kitty for the next three years.

But all of this pales into insignificance against the bigger picture. Go to the DFID website, hit the "project search" tab and then key in "climate change". You will get 301 projects, the first being the Environmental Transformation Fund, with a budget of £554 million, of which only £39.6 million has been spent.

That, however, is only the start. We have the Global Environment Facility 4TH Replenishment at £219,646,000, the Global Environment Facility 5TH Replenishment at £210,000,000, and the actual Global Environment Facilt at £203,080,000.

Adding these four, we already have more than £1 billion, but the projects get cheaper as you go down the list. You will love this one though, for a mere £13,999,992, the object being to fund DFID secondments to the EU:

To enhance the capacity of the European Union in policy analysis and programme management in key areas. These include Maternal and Child Health, Climate Change, Wealth Creation, Water and Sanitation, and issues focussing on Fragile States, Conflict Prevention and Resolution. In addition it will provide support for stronger overall Evaluation and Monitoring of EU spend. The Programme will second approximately 25-30 high calibre DFID staff (Seconded National Experts - SNEs) to the European Commission and related organisations in Brussels and Luxembourg, EU delegations in developing countries, EU Presidencies, and to the new European External Action Service (EEAS) of the European Union. The National Experts on Professional Training scheme (NEPT) will also provide short term opportunities in the EU (Brussels) for staff to get experience and knowledge of how the EU manage their development programmes.

So, nearly £14 million of our foreign aid budget goes to sending British bureaucrats to commune with Eurocrats in Brussels and elsewhere. The starving children of Sudan, to name but one location, will be delighted.

Obviously, Gray's work is but the tip of the iceberg, adding to his earlier work in an area already visited by Booker and myself on several occasions. Given a chance (unlikely though that is, with current pressures), we'd like to hack further into this iceberg. Perhaps DFID could give us a grant?

COMMENT THREAD

Chasing the ball

2012-02-19T10:27:00.007Z

The Failygraph is finally getting close to the message, courtesy of Bruno Waterfield - despite the Londonisation and the desperate self-importance of this failing rag, needing to find a "secret" report to justify printing that which has been evident from open source material for days - and even weeks.

Despite that, Bruno has managed to convey some of the essence of the situation – that the Germans want Greece out of the euro. For this Bruno relies on Wolfgang Schäuble, the German finance minister. He, as we all know, simply does not believe that any Greek government is able to implement the reforms necessary to restore the country to financial health.

With no more substantive evidence of a split between Merkel and Schäuble than had The Guardian, the paper feels the need to run this meme, and while it has Austria and Finland supporting the German view, the Netherlands doesn't get a look in.

That leaves us with the unsupported Failygraph narrative, where the European Central Bank and the "Eucopean Commission" (sic) are, for now, lining up with Merkel to push for the rescue attempt to continue, "fearful that the financial tsunami that would be unleashed if it failed would swamp the eurozone".

At least the piece is without the rampant Germanophobia that so obscures proper analysis, and which has brought Your Freedom and Ours into the fray, but there is still a great deal of bolt-on reporting here.

So far, the only evidence of a "split" between Merkel and her finance minister is a hare started by the Financial Times based on comments made by unnamed "officials". Clearly, there is tension in the ranks, which means that different factions are going to be briefing against each other, so we need a whole lot more than unattributed comments from the rival gangs.

Oddly enough, when it comes to fears of "a financial tsunami that would be unleashed if it failed would swamp the eurozone", this seems to be old hat. In the Financial Times "Trader's diary", David Schwartz notes there were no meaningful price drops two weeks ago when negotiations between Greece and its lenders were thought to be going down to the wire.

Uncertainty of this type, Schwartz says, might have triggered three-digit price swings just six months ago. And last Tuesday, when the Eurogroup meeting was suddenly cancelled, the FTSE 100 fell just six points. To him, "it is becoming increasingly clear that investors are no longer panicking about a possible default".

With Europe's leaders now publicly berating Greece and repeatedly signalling that there are finite limits to the amount of financial support they are willing to provide, it also appears that EU leaders and UK investors alike are growing more comfortable with the idea of Greece's default and its possible departure from the euro.

Thus, Schwartz concludes, "many observers now expect the country to go bust. It is a question of when, not if. I also suspect that this perception is now firmly factored into UK share prices".

Timing, now, is everything. Monday's meeting may reveal more clues, and we might even get to see a glimpse of that elusive fat lady, waiting in the wings for her final crescendo.

COMMENT: "DANCE" THREAD

The dance goes on

2012-02-19T00:02:00.005Z

It has been an interesting week, which started with the vote in the Greek parliament in the expectation that the eurozone ministers (the so-called Eurogroup) would meet on the Wednesday to approve the terms of the bailout.

The next day, though, it started to come clear that Merkel was blocking settlement, with the Germans wanting Greece out of the euro. Not least was the relative triviality of the funding gap, which was to become the battlefield. By Tuesday, it was becoming more widely known that there wasn't going to be an immediate decision, and that Greece was being pushed towards the exit.

Wednesday thus saw a conference call instead of the planned meeting, and an appreciation that there were serious tensions building up, with Germany, Finland and Holland pushing for the Greek to withdraw from the euro.

Then, by Thursday, it was out in the open, with Greece's finance minister Evangelos Venizelos making a public complaint that some eurozone countries no longer wanted Greece in the single currency. That, of course, left Merkel in a difficult position, having to deny the very thing that she and her colleagues were trying to achieve. Nevertheless, by the last working day of the week, the situation looks close to final, although there is an extraordinary variance in the tenor of press reports.

By now, there is a fightback going on, with the forces of darkness rallying to keep Greece in the Europe, ending up with the media hopelessly misreading the position, and still indulging in anti-German rhetoric, even though the Germans have made their position clear.

And all of this brings us back to Sunday, with Booker looking back over the week, in his column, to report on how "the European project is splitting apart at the very core".

Behind all the spin, smoke and fury of recent days, we see unfolding the greatest crisis in the history of the "European project", he writes. "What is emerging is a fundamental split which threatens to inflict on it by far the most serious reverse in its 62-year history".

The thesis is nothing new to readers of this blog, but – owing to the inadequacies of the media in general – it will come as news to many of Booker's readers. Thus, a wider audience will get a glimmering of what is really going on, ready for the message to be drowned out in the torrent of ignorance that will assail us in the coming week.

For what it is worth, my guess is that, under enormous pressure and very reluctantly, Germany will approve the bailout at the Eurogroup meeting tomorrow, only then to create further hurdles which Greece will be required to surmount. And thus the dance will go on.

COMMENT THREAD

Is it any wonder people are confused?

2012-02-18T14:31:00.005Z

"What is so shockingly evident as you walk around Athens are the awful parallels between the war-time era and today. The soup kitchens, the beggars, the pensioners picking up discarded vegetables after street markets close, the homeless scavenging for food in bins … "

"There are so many similarities between these periods", says researcher Eleni Nikolaidou. "Of course, it was the Germans then, and once again the Germans are the dominant figures in our crisis now".

Greeks, we are then told by Mail writer Ian Birrell, "seem torn between outrage at their venal politicians, anxiety over the future and the fierce anger they direct at Germany for demanding tough measures as the price of a European Union bailout to allow their country to continue to function".

The imposition of the latest package of conditions by the German-dominated EU and International Monetary Fund, we are informed, provoked riots last weekend, while newspapers made ugly references to the Nazis, and politicians talked of living under a "German jackboot" as Europe's festering wounds burst open.

Shocked you are supposed to be, especially at the litany of hardships which the people of Greece are suffering. But, hang on a minute! Terrible though they might be, isn't this situation exactly what the Mail wanted (see above)?

"We earnestly hope EU leaders will find a solution that saves the euro from disorderly collapse", the paper said at the end of October last year. "Inevitably", it then noted, "we believe, this will mean re-writing the EU constitution yet again, to bring the countries of the Eurozone under a single economic government, with more uniform tax and spending policies — almost certainly to be dictated by Germany".

However, there is an alternative - for Greece to quit the euro. But that is precisely what The Mail doesn't want. It would sooner Greece remained in the euro, as indeed it is keen to see Britain remain in the EU. But then we are invited to decry the effects of the very policies that the paper endorses, while at the same time marking Germany down as the villain – the very country that wants Greece out of the euro.

Is it any wonder that people are confused?

COMMENT: "HAIL THE MSM" THREAD

Playing the German card

2012-02-18T10:06:00.006Z

With Germanophobia never far from the surface in European politics, Greek politicians and their media have been shamelessly playing the "Nazi" card, to the applause of commentators throughout the world. Too many people – many of whom should know better - have been only too happy to believe the narrative of the German "steamroller" pitched against the hapless Greek people.

Bizarrely, even though it has emerged that the German solution to the current crisis is for Greece to leave the euro, and many of those self-same commentators argue for exactly the same outcome, Merkel gets a swastika armband and now finance minister Schäuble is dressed in an SS uniform.

It is, of course, not part of the media narrative to cast events in any other way, the net effect being to play to the propaganda of the EU commission and their Greek puppets, reinforcing the pressure on Germany to finance the bailout, and keep the euro intact.

At last though, it does seem as if the Germans have finally had enough, today's Bild running a story headlined: "Throw the Greeks finally out of the euro", complaining that, "We pay and they insult us" (pictured above).

But, indicating just how far adrift is the Nazi rhetoric – playing into the hands of the EU - the paper goes on to note that all Greek politicians want to stay in the euro, to which effect they are forcing the pace on harsh austerity measures. It is the German politicians who are saying that the "stubborn Greeks" have no future with the euro.

Thus in a cross-party alliance, we see Klaus-Peter Willsch of the CDU saying: "We must stop the tragedy. Greece in the Euro zone is no prospect of economic recovery", with Frank Schaeffler (FDP) warning that the protests might trigger a civil war.

It is then Veronika Bellmann (CDU) who says that everything the critics have predicted has occurred. She adds: "the ailing administration, the corrupt tax system and an unfit and unwilling political class are not a basis for structural reforms". And now, she warns, this is beginning even "to shake the democratic nature of the country".

What thus comes over is the very opposite of the legend we are being offered, with German politicians genuinely concerned at the fate of Greece, saying exactly the same things that British eurosceptics have been urging. Nor is this a question of throwing Greece to the wolves. CSU General Secretary Alexander Dobrindt, warns that: "We must prepare ourselves for the event that Greece does not implement the promised reforms".

But, far from being the heartless "Nazi invader" intent on dominating the country, he says that there must be a "contingency plan" for when Greece "escapes" from the euro, with the preparation of "an EU-Marshall Plan for the redevelopment of Greece".

All of this points to one inescapable conclusion: the Germans are the best friends the Greek people have right now. The people are being sold down the river by their own corrupt politicians, with the support (and instruction) of the EU commission and their "troika", whose only concern is the integrity of the euro, irrespective of the pain it causes.

When we look at the media at large, therefore, we have to say that never in the field of euro-reporting have so many got it so plain wrong. But then we see how useless they have become, and cannot be at all surprised.

COMMENT: "HAIL THE MSM" THREAD

Hail the MSM!

2012-02-18T00:02:00.000Z

All those resources, the gifted staff, the fact-checkers and the budget of millions, and this is the best they can do? I don't know whether to weep or laugh.

Yes dears, you who are so wedded to the soap opera. There is a schism … between Greece, the commission and France on the one side and, on the other, Germany, with Finland and Holland – plus other as yet undisclosed backers.

Angela Merkel, Mario Monti and Lucas Papademos are "confident" of a deal on Monday? Yeah, right! According to Mr Monti's office in Rome, as copied off the press release by the agencies and then rehashed by The Guardian "man-on-the-spot" … in Brussels. This, ladies and gentlemen, is how news is made.

And there are "concerns growing behind the scenes"? You don't say! I'm shocked, shocked, I tell you! What on earth would we do without our wonderful media to keep us informed?

It tells us that, in Berlin officials "rebutted" widespread reports of a growing rift between Merkel, who backs Greece staying a member of the euro, and Schäuble … unsurprising, because the only report of a "rift" is the Financial Times relying an unnamed "Eurozone official".

Then they then go to another part of the opposition, Francois Fillon, French premier. He "effectively confirmed divisions within Berlin". But he urged France's allies "not to play with" a Greek default and strongly backed Athens: "The Greeks have promised very important reforms. The Europeans now have to keep their commitments", he is cited as saying.

Seriously, this is actually how news reports are cobbled together. This is what thousands of people will be reading at their breakfast tables this morning and, worst still, believing it. Perhaps it is just as well we don't have to rely on the media for any serious news.

COMMENT THREAD

The Camekozy is born

2012-02-17T17:20:00.005Z

We saw it coming in November 2010 when Liam Fox announced a new deal with the Kermits in the form of a Combined Joint Expeditionary Force (CJEF) of around 6,500 troops from the France and Britain under a 50-year deal for closer military "co-operation".

More recently, we've seen plans for an integrated carrier fleet (when we have a carrier to integrate) and now, in the next phase of defence integration, we now see Cameron and Sarkozy agreeing to accelerate plans to create a joint control and command centre for future military operations.

In a logical and continuous development of Blair's 1998 St Malo agreement (which was based on initiatives started by John Major), the two leaders also agreed to push ahead with the next phase of plans to build a new generation of UAVs.

This is the EuroMALE project which the French have been pushing since 2006, and represents a move away from US and Israeli technology in a field where neither the French nor the British have covered themselves in glory.

And if this is not bad enough, it gets worse. The "real and substantial" co-operation on defence discussed today will cover not only the new command centre and UAV production, but also nuclear weapons.

Speaking alongside Sarkozy at a press conference in the Élysée Palace, The Boy – without so much as a blush – told us all: "I don't think that there has been closer French-British co-operation at any time since the Second World War, not just in Libya but also on the vital issues of Syria, Iran, Somalia and defence co-operation".

We know The Boy is not very good at history, but this puts him into a different league. "The defence co-operation is real, it is substantial, it is going to make a big difference to the military capabilities of both Britain and France," he says. "We are similar-sized powers, with similar-sized armed forces, with similar ambitions.

"It is partly about new capacity - the investment that we are going to make in a drone programme. It is also about making the most of our existing capacity, as we will be combining and using it together. It is also about operational capacity and ability to take action together".

"If you look at the detail of what Britain and France are doing together on defence co-operation, not just building new drones together but co-operating on the most sensitive dossiers of all, including nuclear, I think that demonstrates an incredibly strong relationship based on our countries' shared interests".

Thus we have the next stage in the play. After running down our own armed forces, to the state that they are barely if at all capable of independent operation, our masters then enter into defence agreements with France, the Trojan Horse of European defence integration.

The Camekozy is born. The betrayal continues.

COMMENT THREAD

The full Monti?

2012-02-17T14:29:00.002Z

Says ZeroHedge, "reactions such as the one yesterday confirm that the market is not only broken but also very stupid. Which is just as those in charge like it". Of course, the media loves quoting market reaction. It gets endless, easy headlines which save the jornos having to think. But more and more, we see day-to-day market movements as being irrelevant. The markets, like the politicians, inhabit their own little bubble.

At the risk of becoming ZeroHedge groupies (which we are not), we also take note of this piece, which observes that Papademos and Samaras are both out their creating dire images of a post apocalyptic Greek state if a default occurs.

Maybe, we are cautioned, it is a good time to remember what Papademos' job is:

He wasn't elected. He doesn't represent the Greek people in a fashion that we are used to – running for election and winning the election. He was foisted on the Greek people by the EU – the very people he is going through the motions of negotiating with. His JOB was to get the Greeks to accept what the EU wants. If he isn't the most conflicted politician of all time, he is right up there.

Samaras may believe it, or may have decided this is his best route to power when the vote is passed and the Greek people decide to kick Papademos out.

These are important truths. We are not dealing with a monolithic bloc, with a single message that TPTB are anxious to get over to us, the plebs. The players in this game are divided and highly factionalised, each trying to sell their own versions of reality, in an attempt to make them come real.

Thus, not only does one have to take care when exploring what is said, equally important is who says it, and when.

It is in this context that we look at the latest Reuters report. This has it that Merkel, the Italian prime minister Mario Monti and Papademos "are optimistic that an agreement can be reached on Greece at Monday's Eurogroup meeting". The source here is Monti's office, in a statement issued after the three leaders held a conference call earlier today.

But, we are told – in an unsourced interjection - negotiations with lenders in the European Union and International Monetary Fund are again going down to the wire, straining ties between Greece and northern members of the currency bloc.

This is then bolstered by citing Der Spiegel magazine, which quotes Austrian finance minister, Maria Fekter. She says: "The skepticism is especially strong among the AAA states over whether Greece will be able to make it". Thus, she says: "The risk of a Greek insolvency is not off the table".

It must be assumed here that Monti is a creature of the EU commission, and can safely be taken as a spokesman for it – the organisation that wants, above all else, to keep Greece in the single currency, and maintain the integrity of the eurozone. He thus will be bound to put a "pro-bailout" spin on the outcome of talks, whereas, one assumes (with no evidence to support it) that Maria Fekter is a Merkel proxy.

Monti – according to Bloomberg - is emerging as a game-changer in Europe's debt crisis, "as German Chancellor Angela Merkel tackles a domestic political crisis and French President Nicolas Sarkozy focuses on his re-election bid".

Monti was scheduled to meet alone in Rome today with Merkel. First set for 20 January, with Sarkozy, it was rescheduled without him and then cancelled today as German President Christian Wulff resigned amid the threat of a legal probe into corruption allegations. "Monti is extremely important because Italy is really the make-or-break country in the euro crisis", says Christian Schulz, an economist at Berenberg Bank in London. He has "re-established Italy as an important force in European politics".

So it has come to pass that we have had the three-way telephone conversation today with Merkel and Papademos. Monti and Merkel will also stay "in close touch" before the Eurozone meeting on Monday. Seasoned watchers may immediately notice something missing … Sarkozy. The Merkozy is no more … is it being replaced with the Merkonti?

Actually, that would be a misinterpretation of the relationship, as the two are ostensibly antagonists, as indeed Merkel and Sarkozy have become. With French exposure to Greek debt much greater than Germany's (see also pic), French banks are expected to take a battering. Germany, on the other hand, will be expected to pick up the bill.

Either way, though, time is running out. The FT blog has documents which "make clear the schedule is slipping dangerously". The Wednesday meeting of eurozone finance ministers, that was cancelled, was supposed to approve the launch of the restructuring so the process can begin today. Instead, we have the three-header with Monti in the chair.

All of this adds complexity upon complexity, unless of course you are the British MSM. Then all you have to do is plant the flag and talk in trite generalities, as does the Daily Mail today.

All its audience needs to know, the paper decides, is that Lord Howell, father-in-law to the Chancellor George Osborne, told peers (yesterday) that Britain was pressing for a "realistic and sustainable" solution to Greece's debt crisis, which he warned was having a "chilling effect" on the British economy.

He said "uncertainty in Greece must be brought to an end ... without utterly destroying that noble country". It seems that "infighting" is the problem, and if only these damn Johnny foreigners would stop it, and jolly well get down to sorting the problems, everything would be tickety boo.

So there you are then. These are your orders – over the top with you …

COMMENT: "FAT LADY" THREAD

A reality check?

2012-02-17T09:56:00.007Z

Pulling together the disparate strains of events, there is appearing – as one of our forum members remarks – an extraordinary divergence in reports on the impending (or not) Greek collapse - some optimistic and some pessimistic.

Leader of this morning's stock of optimists (which include The Guardian and Reuters) is the Wall Street Journal - a paper with a recent history of optimism. It is telling us that a debt restructuring and second bailout for Greece "appeared likely to go ahead according to plan".

German officials, this paper advises, have scrapped an idea to pressure Greece by withholding part of the bailout and the European Central Bank developed a plan to protect its holdings of Greek bonds from the restructuring.

The source for news of this turnaround, it appears, is German deputy finance minister Thomas Steffen, but the intelligence is not direct from the horse's mouth. He is said to have told German "lawmakers" that splitting the bailout is off the table, by "a lawmaker who was present" – upon whom the paper relies.

Thus we learn that he said (Steffen or the "lawmaker"?) he was "cautiously optimistic" that finance ministers at a meeting on Monday would approve the second aid package.

So, all is well in the world, at least until 23 March when the sky is going to fall in, according to lots and lots of unnamed sources. This, presumably, is to coincide with the total eclipse, as German troops march across the Polish border, supported by US Armoured divisions.

We will try to make sense of this and much more, as the day unwinds.

COMMENT: "FAT LADY" THREAD

The fat lady clears her throat

2012-02-17T00:02:00.004Z

The rhetoric has turned poisonous, says Ambrose as he catches up with events. He judges that Berlin, Helsinki and The Hague show every sign that they intend to eject Greece from the euro whatever it now does, calculating that the eurozone is at last strong enough to withstand contagion.

Theoretically, we should be seeing a resolution on Monday, when the Eurogroup finally meets. But Dutch minister of Finance Jan Kees de Jager is indicating that the Netherlands will block the bailout.

From that source, we learn that, even if everything goes well, Monday will only deliver a "preliminary agreement", creating a parliamentary reservation for the Netherlands, Germany and Finland. The German parliament debates the issue on 27 February and then, as we reported earlier, there is the European Council pencilled in for 1 March.

The Financial Times, however, sees in the German position a split, with Schäuble pushing to let Athens default while Merkel is firmly against.

For this, the paper relies on unnamed German and eurozone officials – and I don't buy it. But it does helpfully add that the Monday meeting is going to cover only the restructuring of Greece's sovereign debt - and the provision of a bridging loan until April is also under consideration.

Others, though – in addition to the Economist - are still totally in fairy land. This hilarious account from Reuters has Jim Paulsen, chief investment officer at Wells Capital Management in Minneapolis, preening himself on getting " … this incredible flow of good data".

The eurozone, we are told, is putting the finishing touches to a second bailout deal for Athens that could be approved on Monday, moving closer to averting a disorderly default by Greece. "People are increasingly of the opinion that although Europe will continue to have flare-ups, it's not likely to become a calamity for the world economy", Paulsen says.

On this, then, we have to turn to ZeroHedge. Its view is:

While next to impossible, now may be a good time to ignore the constant barrage of meaningless noise and flashing red headlines, which not only are contradictory but prove that Europe is literally making it all up as it goes along. Today is a great case in point of a tangential detour which does nothing to change the reality that Germany no longer wants Greece in the Eurozone …

Not yet do we hear the dulcet tones of the fabled fat lady, but somewhere in that lot, we can hear her clearing her throat for her warm-up routine. It can't be long now. Despite that, though, we need to be careful what we wish for. It might be worse than we think.

COMMENT THREAD

Banned substances

2012-02-16T16:58:00.001Z

This comes from The Economist:

Sentiment about Europe has improved, and that is welcome. So is the greater sense of political direction. But as the immediate danger to the euro recedes, another looms: that the urgency which has driven progress so far dissipates. That must not happen. Europe is on the road to recovery, but the way is long and dark.

Whatever they are smoking, it ain't legal.

COMMENT: "BUYING TIME" THREAD

Buying time

2012-02-16T15:08:00.005Z

As you might expect, German officials are stressing that they want to keep Greece in the eurozone. Merkel's spokesman, Steffen Seibert, has vigorously denied "market rumours" that Germany was happy to let Greece go bankrupt and leave the eurozone. "I can clearly state for the federal government that these rumours are false", he says. "There has not been such a decision from Germany".

Earlier, Martin Kotthaus, spokesman for finance minister Wolfgang Schäuble, had said it was "crystal clear ... that we will do everything, put everything in motion, to get Greece back on its feet". He then added: "It is also crystal clear that the Greeks themselves must do this. We cannot do the reforms for the Greeks. That is in their hands. But as long as the Greeks want to go along this path, we will do everything to support them".

We also have Luc Frieden, Luxembourg's finance minister, who has expressed himself "relatively optimistic" that eurozone finance ministers will take a decision on Monday, but he too is warning that more steps are needed in the coming weeks.

"The Greek authorities must implement these measures, but since taxpayer money from other (eurozone) states is involved, it is in a partnership that we must ensure that they are implemented," Frieden says, at the same time denying that this amounted to placing Athens under "wardenship."

He reiterated that the eurozone cannot kick a member out, but that Greece must reform in order to be in a condition to stay in the eurozone. "We all have an interest in keeping the eurozone intact, but we are not in a dictatorial monetary union" he said, adding ominously: "A state is free to choose to leave … It is therefore the responsibility of the Greek people to choose whether they want to stay in the eurozone".

Thus do white men speak with forked tongues, as even now we are seeing even more logs stacked on the tracks, presumably in the hope of derailing the Greek rescue plan. The latest is the idea that €130bn soft-loan package should be placed in an escrow account, keeping the disbursement of funds out of the hands of Greek politicians.

This ties in with a suggestion from Schäuble that Greece might delay its forthcoming general election and install a technocratic government on similar lines to the model currently in place in Italy. Ambrose reads that differently, as unwarranted German interference in Greek affairs.

That leaves another option being kicked around -that the bailout should be put on hold until after the general election, with the Greek government given a bridging loan to allow it to pay off the €14.5 billion that comes due on 20 March. Then (presumably) the "colleagues" go for the full Monty, negotiating with the newly elected government.

Mary Ellen Synon, however, is having none of it. She tells us: "On some Friday at 5 pm the Athens government will announce that they are pulling their country out of the single currency and re-establishing the drachma". But, if that is also the preferred option of Angela Merkel, it is necessary to remember that her actions are not spurred on by any sense of malice, or desire for world domination.

Even a few days ago, Reuters was telling us that her "dogged insistence" on strict terms for aid is one of the reasons Merkel has kept a lid on growing scepticism in Germany about how deserving Athens is of such largesse. In one recent opinion poll, we are reminded, two thirds of Germans surveyed said they doubted Greece's determination to make savings.

For Erik Nielsen, global chief economist for Unicredit, an Italian bank, the chancellor's unmatched success in preventing the rise of a major eurosceptic backlash is down to her heeding the "German public's sensitivities to lending their tax money to a country that does not implement very many of its promises."

Such points had been made earlier by the Financial Times, at the end of January telling us that the German chancellor was facing growing political pressure at home to demand stricter fiscal discipline from her eurozone partners.

As are Greek politicians playing to their own domestic audiences, with Greek president Karolos Papoulias attacking German "insults", so too must the Germans play to theirs, and no more so Merkel who is facing an uphill battle to re-election.

Perversely, given that so many commentators believe that by far the best option for Greece is default and withdrawal from the euro, the demonisation of Germany, and Merkel in particular, seems misplaced. Right now, as the politicians play games, and the EU commission seeks to block Greece's exit, Merkel is probably the best ally that the Greek people have.

Further, Merkel's tactics seem to be working in her home country. As Reuters tells us, the closely-watched "Politbarometer" poll for public television station ZDF showed last week that 77 percent of Germans believe she is doing a good job.

From her position in late 2011, when she looked terminally damaged, with her coalition partner, the Free Democratic Party (FDP), in meltdown, Merkel is once again the most popular politician in Germany, well ahead of her possible challenger in the next federal vote, Social Democrat (SPD) Peer Steinbrueck.

With these results, one can imagine that the German chancellor will hardly be well disposed to offering Greece any further (or any) concessions. Thus, the Tip O'Neill aphorism seems to be at play. On that basis, if you want to know what is going to happen in Greece, look at the polls – the German polls.

And, for the time being, Merkel's best option looks to be a delaying strategy, buying time for a decision that would be acceptable to her voters – and probably the most favourable for the Greek people, as opposed to their self-serving politicians. This is the one where the Greeks start printing drachmas again.

COMMENT THREAD

"India is as bad as Russia"

2012-02-16T09:26:00.003Z

The Indian aid controversy seems to have disappeared from the British media for the time being, but the US media is taking a look at the country – albeit for different reasons. The Christian Science Monitor claims that India's much-heralded economic boom is faltering, with stock index declining 25 percent. It asks: "Speed bump or meltdown?"

It's not just that India's economic growth has skidded to a halt, says the CSM. A series of key government reforms have stalled while an anticorruption campaign has created uncertainty about what tainted money lies beneath balance sheets. Investors are fleeing.

The journal cites Nick Paulson-Ellis, India head for Espirito Santos Securities. He says: "Foreign investors are as nervous as we have ever seen them about India's global investment environment … Many United States investors have pulled out entirely".

This, though, is very far from sour grapes from an outside source. The Indian press (not famed for its objectivity) is equally voluble, with The Hindu offering an interesting analysis from S. Neelakantan, former director, Madras Institute of Development Studies.

He complains of a top-down approach – where major economic decisions are made and executed by the government. This has led to over-regulation, and fruits of economic development being "pocketed by people who could reach to the corridors of power".

The "visible hand" of the government, he says, failed to provide the necessary growth to alleviate poverty from society. Hence the government ushered in economic reforms where market forces started playing a major role. Thus does Neelakantan continue, observing that the country now finds itself in a piquant situation of inheriting only the vices of socialism and capitalism.

Going back to the CSM, it also calls in aid the chairman of Goldman Sachs Asset Management, Jim O'Neill, who brands India "the most disappointing performer" of the so-called "BRIC" countries (Brazil, Russia, India and China), complaining that it suffers from "a severe lack of leadership". "India is as bad as Russia on governance and corruption and, in terms of technology, Russia is in fact much higher than India", says O'Neill.

The difference, as far as we are concerned, it that we give aid to India and not to Russia (any more – when we did, it too disappeared in a miasma of corruption and theft). And apart from any other issues, the millstones of corruption and poor governance – which often go together – should warn donor countries to stay clear.

But what is even more clear is that India is quite capable of identifying and arguing through the nature of its own problems. The very last thing it needs is the dead hand of British bureaucracy dispensing aid, to add to its woes.

COMMENT THREAD

Upping the ante

2012-02-16T00:02:00.012Z

Long after it had become evident to a number of seasoned observers (although still not to others) that Germany was trying to force Greece out of the euro, the BBC reports on Greece's Finance Minister Evangelos Venizelos complaining that some eurozone countries no longer wanted Greece in the single currency.

The Guardian, is amongst those who have belatedly noticed what is going on. It has Venizelos him noting: "We are constantly being given new terms and conditions" - picking up on more detailed Bloomberg report.

This changes the dynamics of the game, as all the member states are supposed to be keen on Greece staying in the euro. As ZeroHedge observes, the decision to withdraw had to be made by Greek's own politicians, with no detectable fingerprints from the real assassins.

Essentially, in going public, Venizelos has trumped Merkel's hand, and then upped the stakes by declaring that all the demands set by the country's international lenders have now been met. In particular, leaders of both parties in the Papademos coalition, including conservative leader Antonis Samaras, have given written undertakings that the austerity measures will be implemented, election notwithstanding.

As to the eurozone ministers and their "conference call", few details have emerged from what turned out to be a marathon three-hour session. There is talk, though, of "specific mechanisms to strengthen the surveillance of programme implementation", which may have in them the makings of yet another hurdle.

Short of the Greeks buckling, however, it looks as if the Eurogroup will have run out of options and be forced on Monday to approve – in principal – the bailout deal. Merkel and her northern allies have until then to engineer still more excuses for the Greeks to drop out.

Somebody is going to have to play a pretty powerful wildcard, as the tenacity and sheer staying power of the Greek political classes, with the backing of the EU commission, seems to have been seriously underestimated.

That card may be the Greek people, who are already buckling under the strain and have long ago lost faith in their politicians. Whether they can pull the plug, though, remains to be seen in a game that gets more complex by the hour, with many more twists and turns to come.

Adding to that complexity is the expected news that Sarkozy is seeking re-election. Slated as a supporter of Greece's bid to stay in the euro, he will be playing an intensely political game, with an eye on his domestic audience.

There, French sentiment will start to matter. If Sarkozy starts to see electoral advantage in dumping Greece, he could end up back alongside Merkel. Then we will be seeing the "motor of integration" up against the commission – the EU equivalent of a rock meeting a hard place.

Once more, it thus seems, as the very final plays were beginning to emerge, rabbits are being pulled out of hats at breathtaking speed. And most of them may be speaking French.

COMMENT THREAD

A world-wide disease

2012-02-15T17:20:00.001Z

I actually wish it could be said that this sort of problem was unique to Britain. But sadly, the disease is world-wide.

COMMENT THREAD

Level-pegging?

2012-02-15T16:58:00.005Z

The Guardian seems to think (if it can ever be accused of such a process) that the Heartland Institute's $1.25 million fundraising target for climate "denial" is a big deal. It is strangely silent, though, about the $100 billion-plus - five times the cost of the Manhattan Project - expended on the promotion of climate change dogma.

However, we can understand their concern. Given the disparities in scientific credibility between the two sides - for instance, here - and the need for the warmists to propagandise, the extra amount is required to overcome the inherent weaknesses in the warmist case.

But there can be no greater illustration of the weaknesses than that fact that the warmists feel threatened by the tiny (relatively) sums contributed to the "deniers". I suppose they feel that, in equivalent terms, the funds are effectively level-pegging.

UPDATE: Heartland Institute responds.

COMMENT THREAD

An ever decreasing circle of relevance

2012-02-15T14:49:00.015Z

It seems that I am not the only one puzzled by the running order of stories in the MSM today and the prominence given to The Boy's hysterie du jour - the "prime minister's agenda to curb excessive drinking".

Boiling Frog shared our puzzlement, having previously remarked on how the MSM had given so much prominence to Bafta footage and the death of Whitney Houston, even as Athens burned. These comments were based in part on a post by The Talking Clock, leading TBF to conclude that the MSM "is retreating rapidly into an ever decreasing circle of relevance".

One might also ask why it is that Cameron has chosen to make noises about "binge drinking" at this particular juncture. With the European, if not global, economic system about system about to implode, one might think that there were more important things, with which to concern himself.

It is researcher and commentator Dennis Ambler in one of his invaluable e-mail circulars, however, who points out that this is primarily a UN agenda. To that extent, The Boy is simply responding to his tranzie masters – and in so doing keeping the more important issues off the front pages, as an obedient media cravenly follow his lead.

The media itself is much in the news these days and, by coincidence, we saw recently the retirement of Tom Curley, Associated Press chief, who was then invited to reflect on the state of the media by The Guardian.

Curley sees one of the main problems besetting the media as the speed of the news cycle – defined as the "period of time when all the people interested in a story had access to it". When he was a cub reporter in the 1960s, he estimates it was 12 hours. Latterly, "until about 11 September 2001, it was three hours," he says. But, he adds: "Now it's 30 minutes. You might say if you are a certain age – with Twitter and Facebook and all that type of stuff – it's three minutes".

Reflecting on the downturn in newspaper revenues and the enormous contraction in the US newspaper industry, his concerns have turned to seeking how to attract revenue from the web. And, in so doing, the man seems besotted with speed. "The purpose", he says, is to get in step with the social media flow of the news. In the past you would update a story 12 times in a 24-hour cycle. Now it's possible to update it 200 times, and each time you do that on the web it drives traffic".

Before retiring, Curley had considered moving over into academia and, had he done so, one of his research papers would have focused on what he perceives to be the failure of financial journalism in covering the economic downturn.

"I don't think we did a good enough job, and we may not be doing as good a job as we should be on the salaries and people who have been basically taken over by the taxpayers and are still managing to pay themselves large sums of money", he says.

But what he does not concede (although he might have been prevailed upon to do so), is that this failure to do "a good enough job" extends well beyond financial journalism. Rather than speed, he might therefore consider breadth, accuracy and relevance - reporting on stories and issues that really matter.

Almost on cue, we then find, via The Boiling Frog again, the BBC catching up with the story of Greece being forced out of the eurozone - nearly three days after we first broached the idea, and then only because a Greek politician had complained that this was happening.

This should have been lead item on the front pages of every newspaper that has pretensions to that title. Instead, the focus on soft news, trivia and politician-driven agendas, is driving readers away and the likes of us to distraction.

Perhaps not trivia, but we saw a few days ago a complaint by Trevor Kavangh that Sun journalists had been treated like suspected terrorists by the police. He may have been right to do so, but you would have to have a heart of stone not to smile, at least a little bit.

Given the abject failure of the media to do its job properly, it has been taking money under false pretences for years - and for many journalists, locking them up is the least of their desserts. When they start producing relevant reports on real news again (insofar as they ever have), then we might feel some sympathy.

COMMENT THREAD

Not self-promotion

2012-02-15T13:21:00.004Z

I'm in danger of doing a Montford here, but this is just a fun way of saying that the book is finally on sale. It is not self-promotion (honest guv!) – just information. That we have (briefly) made the number-one slot is something mentioned only in passing - entirely routine!

COMMENT THREAD

Tension in the ranks

2012-02-15T10:50:00.002Z

One of the mistakes analysts can make when assessing European politics is to treat the European Union as a monolithic block, or one which is capable of being dominated by any one country – such as Germany. If nothing else, the current crisis clearly demonstrates that neither is the case, with the Financial Times reporting on the tension evident between the commission (as guardian of the treaties) and member states.

Thus we have Olli Rehn, "the Commission's top economics official", warning that there would be "devastating consequences" if Greece defaulted, and pleaded for eurozone governments to approve the bail-out quickly. According to the FT, officials are saying that Rehn has support from the ECB and the French government.

On the other hand, there is a group of eurozone governments, particularly those that retain triple-A credit ratings, that has "lost faith Greece will ever deliver its end of the bargain". Hardline officials in Germany, the Netherlands and Finland, we are told, are increasingly urging a Greek default.

What is interesting here is that, despite the apparent closeness of Merkel and Sarkozy, to the extent that they have been seen as one, under the soubriquet "Merkozy", France and Germany – the motor of integration - seem to be odds over Greek default.

This positions the commission as "piggy in the middle". Its primary objective is to maintain the integrity of the eurozone. More particularly, it is desperate to keep the "bicycle" moving – the oft' used analogy for progress towards full political integration. The moment the bicycle stops, so theory holds, the rider falls off.

For all its powers though, the commission must doff its cap to the two principal players, France and Germany, and when they are at odds, the power of the community as a whole is weakened. And that is happening just at a time when unified, co-ordinated action is needed.

The commission is only too well aware, though, of the psychological significance of a country departing from the eurozone.

The dynamics of European political integration have been sustained more than anything by one word: "inevitability". In Thatcher's time it became "TINA" – there is no alternative – but that amounted to the same thing. Greece falling out of the euro will destroy the myth of inevitability and signal the start of the decline of the EU, towards its eventual collapse.

And that is actually why the impending default of Greece - followed by its departure from the euro – is (or should be) the top news item. Whatever the outcome, we are seeing history made.

COMMENT: "NO TURNING BACK" THREAD

No turning back

2012-02-15T00:02:00.008Z

Reuters is amongst the many to break the news that the fabled Eurogroup meeting – the one that was supposed to agree the Greek bailout – is not going to happen. Instead, president Jean-Claude Juncker has "invited" the eurozone ministers to a conference call, but only to discuss outstanding issues. There is no question of the ministers giving approval to the bailout.

Juncker has "put the boot in", says ZeroHedge because he has not yet receive the required political assurances from the Greek coalition party leaders on the implementation of their austerity programme. Other "technical work" also remains to be done.

Offering the usual dose of brain-rotting corporate-speak, Juncker's formal statement reads: "It has appeared that further technical work between Greece and the troika is needed in a number of areas, including the closure of the fiscal gap of €325 million euros in 2012 and the debt sustainability analysis."

Once again, therefore, the hang-up is this pitiful sum, which says that there is no serious intent to solve Greece's problems. This piece of meat is being hurled off the sledge to the wolves.

Understandably, the Marxism site is declaring that Greece has reached a "pre-revolutionary situation", but the Greeks themselves have no doubts as to the identity of their tormentors – the Germans. The Financial Times thus tells us: "Greeks direct cries of pain at Germany", reporting rioters burning the German flag in street protests and a demonstrator defacing the façade of the Bank of Greece, the central bank, so that it reads "Bank of Berlin" (Raedwald has the images).

Most shockingly, it says, a rightwing Greek newspaper depicts Angela Merkel in a Nazi uniform above the headline "Memorandum macht frei" – "an allusion to the memorandum in which Greece's foreign creditors demand more austerity measures and to the Auschwitz slogan".

Notably though, the Greek "street" is not blaming the EU commission or the "colleagues" in general – the ire is being directed at the Germans, thus building on the thesis that Merkel's intention is to force the Greeks out of the euro. And at this rate, the end cannot be far away. The momentum seems to be such that there can be no turning back. And if there was any doubt at all, Mary Ellen Synon cites Charles Dumas at Lombard Street Research.

"The Greek debt problem is now beyond solution within the euro", he says. "If it does not leave the euro, on the optimistic assumption that the euro does not destroy Greek democracy, its debt write-off will eventually be 100 percent anyhow, with continuing subsidies needed".

Time and time again, it has looked as if the end is nigh but now we really do seem to be getting there. Ambrose seems to have reached the same conclusion, noting that "the tone of recent comments from Germany, Holland and Finland suggest that the creditor powers have already decided to eject Greece, causing great bitterness in Athens".

Meanwhile, Spiegel online reminds us of the human cost. Aid workers and soup kitchens in Athens are struggling to provide for the city's "new poor", it says. Since the economic crisis has taken hold, poverty has taken hold among Greece's middle class. And suicide rates have nearly doubled.

COMMENT THREAD

As for Heffer

2012-02-14T09:44:00.008Z

"For years this paper — a lone voice in the wilderness — has warned that the imposition of a one-size-fits-all currency on Europe’s disparate nations would eventually lead to rioting in the streets. And so, tragically, it has proved", writes Simon Heffer.

A lone voice? Yeah, right! The EU is a profoundly anti-democratic institution, says Heffer. And this is in the paper that supports Britain's continued membership of the EU? This is the paper that also endorses bringing the countries of the Eurozone "under a single economic government, with more uniform tax and spending policies — almost certainly to be dictated by Germany".

This is a newspaper that supports a referendum, but will not support withdrawal. This is a newspaper that will support renegotiation but not withdrawal. It seems it will support anything but withdrawal from this "profoundly anti-democratic institution".

COMMENT THREAD

The euro-slayer

2012-02-14T08:24:00.000Z

It has always been my contention that the EU's days become numbered when Germany accepts its role as a nation state … Angela Merkel … may well be the right person to initiate the process of Germany accepting its nationhood and, consequently, the EU disintegrating.

Your Freedom and Ours

COMMENT: "MERKEL EUROSCEPTIC" THREAD

Prolonging the agony

2012-02-14T00:02:00.003Z

The Guardian seems to be picking up something not immediately evident from Ollie Rehn's statement yesterday. In elliptical fashion, the commissioner for economic and monetary affairs notes only that the vote in the Greek Parliament "is a crucial step forward towards the adoption of the second programme".

He goes on to say that he was confident that "the other conditions including for instance the identification of the concrete measures of €325 million will be completed by the next meeting of the Eurogroup", which would "then decide on the adoption of the programme".

Eurozone finance ministers are expected to meet in Brussels on Wednesday and had been preparing to endorse the rescue programme for Greece, but The Guardian is suggesting that this will not be the final step. The best that Greece can now hope for is an agreement "in principle". A definitive decision would be left to an EU "summit" on 1 March.

On top of that, the German parliament still has to approve the deal, and is not planning to debate it until 27 February.

However, The Guardian is not alone in its analysis. Similar intelligence is coming from the Wall Street Journal, which reported an early surge for the euro on the currency markets, with the single currency then steadily losing steam in New York trading as it became clear that Greece had "more hurdles to jump before receiving its bailout".

All of this points to a continuing reluctance to go through with the second bailout, as discussed here and here in our earlier pieces. The "colleagues" and/or Germany are going through the motions of supporting Greece, but the drive has gone out of the programme.

Not least influencing opinion must be the decision of Greece to hold a general election in April, only shortly after the 20 March deadline when €14.4 billion in bonds come payable. No one can be certain that even if Papademos gives the assurance that the bailout conditions will be met, the incoming government will hold to them.

Thus, more and more, it looks as if Greece is being pushed towards the exit. Some are even suggesting that this has always been the intention, arguing that the bailout was offered as a token gesture in the expectation that the Greek economy would collapse before it was taken up.

Nevertheless, with no one willing to admit responsibility, it is difficult to determine who precisely is wielding the assassin's knife. My guess is that this remains a German initiative, perhaps explaining why Soros has taken against the chancellor, complaining that she is "leading Europe in the wrong direction".

On the other hand, the commission needs to keep the eurozone together, but is also having to nod to the realities, and acknowledge German power. It is not yet appropriate to cast Ollie Rehn in the role of a reluctant Brutus, although stranger things have happened.

Mixing metaphors outrageously, once senses here an element of tightrope walking, but that has more than enough perils without also having too many people trying to balance on the slender thread, each attempting to take different directions and speed. A gust of wind could bring them all down, and there isn't any obvious safety net.

At risk is the entire European "project" and the next part of the script hasn't yet been written.

COMMENT: "MERKEL EUROSCEPTIC" THREAD

Other agendas at work

2012-02-13T17:19:00.000Z

Ambrose makes the point about the brutality of the terms imposed on Greece, as a condition for financial assistance, noting that when Germany needed assistance in 1953, the settlement was altogether much more gentle. Thus does he see the current action, inspired by Germany, as a "blunder" which perhaps former chancellor Konrad Adenauer would not have made.

However, looking it the situation another way, this really does reinforce the argument put up by Mary Ellen Synon, discussed in our previous piece, that Germany is deliberately trying to force Greece out of the euro. But a stronger part of the Synon thesis is the grounds on which the Greek deal was refused, last week, the Greek government being told to go away and find another €325 million in cuts.

You have to ask yourself, says Synon, if €325m is so significant a sum that these euro-bosses would risk Greece going into uncontrolled default next month and crashing out of the euro – Greece has €14.5bn in debt repayments due on 20 March - rather than just wave the latest bailout loan through? No, it's not, she adds rhetorically.

In terms of any Western country’s finances, €325m is petty cash, she says. There are private individuals walking around the streets of most capital cities in the world who could write a personal cheque for €325m. The €325m is not a reason. It's an excuse.

That sum now comes into high profile as a number of commentators recall a piece in the Greek Sunday newspaper To Paron published in June last year. It was headlined "SCANDAL IN THE HOUSE: €500 million not collected from the Germans" (pictured above).

This is our old friend Hochtief. Back in 2005 we were slating the then German-owned company for its dubious dealings over the construction and management of Athens International Airport (pictured right). Not least, there was the question of why there was no record of any VAT payments being made on the construction cost, which should have amounted to €270 million.

In fact, that money, going back to 2001, was unpaid. And in June it publicly emerged – as a result of questions from the 13-strong New Democracy – that the total of unpaid VAT has now grown to €500 million.

The liability for VAT was confirmed in 2009, on the basis of an opinion by the State Legal Council and, on 30 April 2010, the General Directorate of Taxation reiterated that there was " … no reason for issuing a new opinion", reaffirming that there was no exemption from paying VAT.

Having never paid VAT, Hochtief again tried to postpone the payment of VAT but the Administrative Court of Appeal ruled against them. The company finally paid after ten years a quarter of the VAT due for the years 2001, 2002 and 2003.

For that period, the total VAT due was assessed at around €150 million euros, on which basis, the debt is currently estimated at €500 million. This does not seem to include the €270 million for the VAT on construction costs and, on top of that, there will be fines for late payment.

MPs from the New Democracy party were, back in June, demanding that the criminal law be invoked, and measures taken to recover the €500-plus million. But, so far – even to this date – there has been no response from the Greek government.

However, the strong focus in the To Paron article was that the Germans owed this money, with the inference in some blogs that the issue could be thus resolved by Mrs Merkel. And that applies to an even greater extent to this week when, instead of dunning the Greek government for an extra €325 million, she could have gone knocking on the door of Hochtief.

And so we would like to leave the story but, as always, it is a little more complicated. As we now know, the airport was built and is run not by Hochtief but by AIA S.A. (Athens International Airport). Hochtief AG is only a 45 percent shareholder of AIA, in a consortium with ABB Calor Emag Schaltanlagen AG and Flughafen Athen-Spata Projektgesellschaft (FASP). The Greek state owns the other 55 percent.

Thus, it might appear that the Greek state owes itself at least €275 million from VAT collected from Athens airport revenues.

However, the irony does not stop there. Although To Paron made a big deal on 12 June of Hochtief being German-owned, on 18 June, Deutsche Welle reported that the Spanish construction group ACS had secured the majority stake in Hochtief, completing a nine-month-long takeover bid. It then held 50.16 percent of voting rights in the company.

Hochtief, incidentally, had posted losses of €169.5 million in the first quarter of 2011 and later, when it tried to sell of all its airport interests, these were valued at a mere €1.6 billion, only slightly more than three times the debt said to be owed by To Paron.

The point relevant to this post though is that, whatever the amount that is owed by Hochtief, it is a Spanish company now, with Spain itself being one of the PIIGS, alongside Greece. Merkel is not in the frame, not that she ever was.

Nevertheless, the Synon point does stand. To threaten to pull the plug on Greece for a "mere" €325 million – less than a single VAT debt from its international airport – is bizarre. And that says there is a lot more going on than meets the eye. There are other agendas at work.

COMMENT: "MERKEL EUROSCEPTIC" THREAD

Merkel, the great Eurosceptic

2012-02-13T09:48:00.002Z

Mary Ellen Synon thinks that Merkel is deliberately trying to force Greece out of the eurozone – with Portugal and Ireland to follow.

This actually makes sense. Furthermore, it reflects not strength, but the weakness of an electorally-challenged chancellor, desperately trying to cling on to power at home. But it goes far deeper than that. In my mind, she is trying to reconcile the now-traditional Euro-centric stance of her nation with the phenomenal domestic stresses created by Germany's membership of the European Union, and all that goes with it.

These now have her people objecting to their wealth being squandered on basket-case economies yet, within the post-war paradigm, Germany is only allowed to exercise its power within the context of the European communities. Her military and economic might are constrained (mainly) by France and the other member states, within the matrix of the European Union. That is the primary purpose of the EU.

Still burdened by national "war guilt", Merkel cannot break out overtly. She has to be seen as a "good European". She must be seen to be supporting the euro and, more generally, the European Union. But the EU has become a prison. To develop further, Germany must break out its destructive embrace. And this is what we are seeing. It being done by creating the conditions for the destruction the single currency, or a major re-alignment, without Merkel leaving her fingerprints at the scene.

Such a "game plan" presents a contrast with the perceived wisdom. In this scenario, other countries leave of their own volition, or are forced out by the "market" or other extraneous pressures. It eventually leaves an independent Germany (or a Greater Germany grouping) free to follow its preferred domestic policies, without having been seen to be responsible for the break-up of the European construct.

Merkel, therefore, is the great eurosceptic. It will not be Cameron's Britain that will bring down the European Union, but Germany, escaping its shackles and redefining the post-war settlement. That is the game being played. Germany wants "out", and the rest of Europe is trying to keep her in.

COMMENT THREAD

The Greek vote

2012-02-13T00:02:00.004Z

Final tally: Out of 300 MPs, 199 voted in favour and 74 against the second bailout memorandum. Outside looks quiet ... for the moment. We'll pick up the story again, in the morning.

UPDATE 23:19 GMT: Parliament has voted in favor of new austerity bill. All of KKE, Syriza and Democratic Left MPs voted No, as well as 21 New Democracy MPs (one in four- ND has 83 MPs in total) and 13 Pasok MPs. Laos MPs voted No, leader absent, the two former ministers voted Yes. All but one Democratic Alliance MPs voted Yes. Figures to follow.

UPDATE 22:35 GMT: Voting has been going on for about 15 minutes. At a rough guess, the yes have it, but it still goes on. Outside, more than ten buildings reported fired, and many shops looted. The buildings fired included the neo-classical home to the Attikon cinema dating from 1870 and a building housing the Asty, an underground cinema used by the Gestapo during World War Two as a torture chamber.

UPDATE 22:11 GMT: Prime minister Lucas Papademos is speaking. Says that Greece had to continue being a member of the hard core of Europe. It's not the time for detailed analysis, it's the time for decisions. The health ministry says 54 people have been taken to hospital. (Live news blog from Athens News - via ZeroHedge.)

UPDATE 20:13 GMT: Seven buildings are reported to have been fired. A mobile phone dealership and a glassware store a reported amongst them, plus a cinema. Earlier, as many as 100,000 protesters were said to have been demonstrating outside the parliament.

UPDATE: A Starbucks store and a branch of Greek bank Eurobank (above) have been set on fire in Athens. The incident occurred in Korai square, near Syntagma square. Clashes continue between the police and hooded black bloc anarchists who mingled with tens of thousands of peaceful demonstrators outside the Greek Parliament where, at 11pm, MPs are scheduled to vote.

Skai TV reports that police have run out of tear gas and have asked for more supplies to be brought. No doubt, they have a hotline to the nearest rep. Zerohedge is covering the action. The live action seems to confirm this ... not a lot of tear gas visible.

* * * * *

According to Reuters, the 300-seat parliament was due to begin debating the [austerity] bill at 2 pm (1200 GMT) before a vote expected late this evening.

Demonstrators had pledged to turn out in force at 6 p.m. (1600 GMT) on the main square in front of the parliament, although rainy weather may limit the numbers of protesters. Even if numbers are sparse, though, this still seems the most valuable investment opportunity. Booker, in the meantime, has a few observations on the issue.

And despite the unpopularity of the austerity measures, the general view – if The Guardian is any guide – is that Papademos is going to get a majority in parliament. The tribalism of the political classes will win out.

COMMENT THREAD

Respect!

2012-02-12T12:02:00.002Z

A very rude Scottish reaction to the hygiene polis closing down the local chippy. They're losing the battle for hearts and minds, methinks.

COMMENT THREAD

As I recall

2012-02-12T08:57:00.009Z

In times gone past, Tim Montgomerie and his little friends over at Conservative Home were the principal cheer leaders for The Boy.

Anyone with but a hint of a disparaging word was definitely not wanted on passage. Links with EUReferendum disappeared from his site and we were cast into outer darkness. A real strain of nastiness emerged. Criticism was treated with savage disdain.

Never mind that Cameron never looked like a Tory. This was all part of a clever ploy to "detoxify" the party and to bring the Lib-Dim voters on board. As soon as he was elected, we were assured, the "true" David Cameron would emerge, more blue than dolly blue.

And now, as the scales begin to fall from his eyes, little Timmy whinges in The Mail on Sunday that things have not exactly gone to plan. "David Cameron's Government is very different from what so many Conservative activists had worked so hard to achieve", we are told.

Six years ago, during the first few weeks of his leadership of the Conservative Party, Timmy observes, he gave a long speech in which he described himself as a "liberal Conservative". He didn't talk about tax or crime or Europe or immigration. He talked about the environment, female candidates, civil liberties and other issues of importance to the Liberal Democrats. And how they all applauded.

At the time, many (including the gullible little Timmy) really did believe that this was "tactical", that Cameron "was attempting to broaden the party's appeal and that underneath he was still a true-blue Tory". But, as time goes by, the little lad now complains – for a fee - "it is clear that the authentic Cameron is the Cameron that laughs and smiles with Nick Clegg in the Downing Street rose garden".

Well, blow me down with a feather. We would never have guessed … er … except that some of us saw right through him from day one, and then made the "mistake" of saying so.

Despite that, we still get little Timmy telling us that, "it's not too late for Cameron to rebuild confidence in his Government and achieve a majority at the next Election – but he must stop appeasing the Liberal Democrats and embrace real Conservatism". "Cameron", says Timmy, "needs to put away the PR man's handbook and his embarrassment over traditional Tory beliefs".

Well, have we got news for you. He ain't going to change – with The Boy, what you see is what you get. There is no "inner Tory", and you are not going to wake up one day and find that he has embraced your ideals. In short, Timmy, do please grow up. After six years of self-delusion, it is about time you realised you've been conned.

COMMENT THREAD

The sins of Harrabin

2012-02-12T07:30:00.003Z

It looks as if the sins of Harrabin are coming back to bite him, this time via the Mail on Sunday. His partisan approach to climate change has long been suspect, not least because of his financial relationship with the University of East Anglia's Tyndall Centre for Climate Change Research to fund seminars run by an "ad hoc" partnership of himself and a friend.

But now, a study devised by Harrabin to test the accuracy of weather forecasts, called the "BBC Weather Test" - estimated to have cost tens of thousands of pounds of licence fee payers' money – seems to be falling apart.

Seven of the eight forecasters and bodies asked to take part have not agreed, with two blaming Mr Harrabin for undermining the study's credibility, claiming that his reputation is tarnished by his close links to green groups who believe in man-made climate change.

Harrabin, though, also has a reputation as an apologist for the Met Office, so he is the last person one could expect to front an independent evaluation of its performance.

Nevertheless, that is how the warmist claque operates, managing criticism by ensuring that performance reviews and inquiries are conducted by friends and allies. But now he is being so comprehensively outed, the lad is looking more than a little fragile. His friends may not be able to salvage his increasingly tattered reputation.

The only surprise is that it has lasted so long.

UPDATE: See also, further comment from Autonomous Mind.

COMMENT THREAD

The child snatching dilemma

2012-02-11T21:43:00.002Z

This from the Daily Mail, this from Raedwald and then this from Booker. In a much smaller way, I have confronted this dilemma a different breed of officials - meat inspectors.

Given a marginal, difficult to read condition, it is easy for them to take the view "better safe than sorry", and condemn a carcase as unfit. But if they do that, and the meat is not unfit, they are throwing away good food, and depriving someone of the income from the animal. Thus, one expects meat inspectors to apply professional judgement and get it right.

The principle is the same with social workers, only even more so. One expects them to get it right when dealing with children and considering whether to remove them from their parents.

Wrong decisions either way are likely to lead to blighted lives and considerable public expenditure. And with Booker's copious evidence, it is clear that they are not getting it right. It really is about time, therefore, that our children's minister, Tim Loughton, listened to what he and many others are saying.

He might, says Booker, learn how misinformed he is. But then, that is the huge problem we have with so many areas of our governance. Politicians have lost the ability to listen.

COMMENT THREAD

Corporate speak

2012-02-11T20:02:00.004Z

The five members of The Sun staff arrested, and now bailed, are thought to be deputy editor of the paper Geoff Webster, chief reporter John Kay, picture editor John Edwards, deputy news editor John Sturgis and chief foreign correspondent Nick Parker.

A Ministry of Defence employee and a member of the Armed Forces have also been bailed, to a date in May. One other journalist from the newspaper is still in custody over the probe into inappropriate payments to police and public officials.

Payments to police and officials for news "tips", however, go back to the dawn of time, and newspapers have a long tradition of paying their sources. Thus, whether this is any worse than what has always been remains to be established.

But, whatever is wrong with modern journalism, the worst of it is that way the corporates have taken over. Thus, with The Sun staff caught with their hands in the cookie jar, the management come up with this immortal phrasing:

News Corporation remains committed to ensuring that unacceptable news-gathering practices by individuals in the past will not be repeated and last summer authorised the MSC (Management and Standards Committee) to co-operate with the relevant authorities.

These are no words any human being could utter. This is a breed of aliens that has taken over, without us noticing, the only clue to who they are being the way they speak. And as long as they exist, we are in very great peril.

COMMENT THREAD

Referism works

2012-02-11T16:12:00.001Z

Picked up by Witterings from Witney, from the website which calls itself Vox - "Research-based policy analysis and commentary from leading economists" – is a paper entitled: "Direct democracy as a safeguard to limit public spending".

This looks at Swiss public spending over the last century and argues that one reason for its low debt may be its greater use of direct democracy. People vote on individual policies, as opposed to representative democracy, where people elect others to make decisions on their behalf.

The conclusion is that direct democracy indeed causes a decline in public spending. Voters are fiscally more conservative than elected politicians, and the tools of direct democracy help them to get their preferences better represented.

The work is carried out by two academics, Patricia Funk, Assistant Professor in the Department of Economics and Business, Universitat Pompeu Fabra, and Christina Gathmann, Professor of Economics, University of Heidelberg, who thus provide direct evidence that the concept we have come to call Referism actually works.

They themselves call in aid several papers, including one by Feld and Matsusaka (2003), which compare data on post-war spending in states with more or less direct democracy – focusing on the United States and Switzerland, as the two countries which allow for direct democracy.

The empirical evidence, say Funk and Gathmann, points to a strong negative correlation between a region's spending level and the existence of direct democracy in both the United States and Switzerland, and they then are able to quantify the effect, finding a mandatory budget referendum reduces public spending by twelve percent.

Interestingly, they find that voter initiatives that allow citizens to propose new laws also lower public spending. For every one percent reduction in the signature requirement, public spending declines by 0.6 percent.

Furthermore, the constraints imposed by direct democracy at the state level do not result in more local spending. This result, they say, suggests that state politicians cannot avoid the disciplining effect of direct democracy by simply shifting responsibilities to lower levels of government.

If one then takes account of the effect of local referendums, where tax rises have been rejected when put to the people, the case builds for both local and national plebiscites to approve budgets.

Even more, these findings undermine the legitimacy of representative democracy. What might have once been necessary, in the period when it used to take four days by stagecoach to get to Edinburgh, is already rendered obsolete by modern communications and polling technology.

But this work shows that elected politicians are also completely out of step with the people they purport to represent. Their role, it would now seem, is to convey a false sense of legitimacy to the extraction of more money than the people would willingly give.

That says that representative democracy can no longer be considered democratic, without much greater involvement of the people. One can see a case where the executives (local and central) prepare budgets, which are then debated by elected representatives, who then make their recommendations, for the people to then accept or ignore.

We cannot continue, though, with the situation where governments decide how much we shall pay them, with no mechanism for the people to reject their imposts. That is not democracy. It is theft.

COMMENT THREAD

Dynamite on the Danube

2012-02-11T13:30:00.005Z

What might not be immediately obvious to the British, dependent as they are on road haulage as their primary mode for moving goods around the country, is the effect of the great European freeze on continental waterways, and in particular the Danube.

But, as the AP, via the Washington Post and AFP are reporting, European shippers are losing millions because a lengthy stretch of the Danube - one of Europe's key waterways - is stuck in the longest freeze in recent memory. The Danube flows for 1,785 miles through nine countries, starting in Germany's Black Forest, before passing through Austria, Slovakia, Hungary, Croatia, Serbia, Bulgaria, Romania, and Ukraine.

The river began to ice over in early February as temperatures plunged to minus 20°Celsius (-4 Fahrenheit). The freeze followed an autumn drought in which water levels had dropped so low that they were interfering with shipping along the international waterway.

By Friday, though, it was ice that had halted shipping on 440 miles of the Danube in Romania. The river forms the border between Romania and Bulgaria and six river crossings were also closed due to the ice. Upstream, the river was also iced over in parts in the Serbian capital of Belgrade.

Costache Constantin, manager of Europolis Shipping & Trading shipping company, said he'd never seen such a drawn-out freeze on the Danube since he began working in the industry in 1981. "This is costing millions of euros", he added. "The transportation of raw materials, coal, minerals, cereals ... are all affected, construction materials too".

An official from the Serbian economy ministry said the commercial repercussions "could be very bad", while infrastructure ministry official Pavle Galico said shipping would not resume for 10 days. Bulgarian authorities, who have banned all navigation on the river, reported 224 vessels stuck in ports, and Ukrainian rescuers in Croatia reached three crew members on a ship trapped in the ice since Friday.

As a result of the conditions generally, we have already seen a statement by Siim Kallas, EU transport commissioner, but it is too soon for the "colleagues" to take on board the most recent effects of the freeze which, so far, is said to have killed 460 people.

It is instructive though that, in 2003, shortly after the heat wave which caused so much grief in France, the EU parliament was right there, on 2 September, tabling a resolution "on the effects of the summer heat wave".

It interpreted the recent extreme weather conditions "as further evidence of the negative effects of climate change" which underlined "that these extreme weather conditions are another sign of the need for ambitious world action to halt climate change". Thus were the MEPs asked to consider that the EU "should continue to play a leading role in this process and reinforce its efforts in the key fields of environment, energy, transport, etc".

Now, as the cold sweeps Europe, we learn that the self-same Europe "stands ready to respond to severe weather conditions across the continent". But, we wonder, whether the EU parliament will be quite so quick to interpret these extreme weather conditions "as further evidence of the negative effects of climate change".

Now they will have to consider the "evidence" of the "Blue Danube", commemorated by Johann Strauss with a waltz of the same name. Rather than strains of music, what is being heard now is the boom of dynamite, which is being used to blow apart ice floes in a desperate attempt to prevent catastrophic flooding when the expected thaw comes.

Somehow, I think the MEPs might be more circumspect this time – although, as we all know, stupidity knows no frontiers and, like Monbiot, they may still try to argue that warmer means colder.

COMMENT THREAD

Passing the buck

2012-02-11T11:43:00.005Z

The clinics which fitted faulty PIP implants have a "moral and social duty of care" to provide aftercare to their clients. So says professor Bruce Keogh, medical director of the NHS (pictured), giving evidence to the House of Commons Health Select Committee last week.

He then acknowledges that the government has no powers or mechanisms to enforce that "duty" on private sector providers. Chairman Stephen Dorrell asked whether there was any opportunity for legal redress, and got an extremely equivocal response from Keogh.

Compare and contrast this with the stance taken by professor Laurence Kirwan, Harley Street plastic surgeon and Fellow of the Royal College of Surgeons.

Kirwan has taken exception to guidelines Keogh sent to GPs, NHS Medical Directors and plastic surgeons last month. Under the heading "Criteria for replacement of implants at NHS expense" the Department of Health's letter refers to private patients offering to pay for replacements from the NHS because they have been "failed by their providers".

"We have received a number of queries from patients with PIP implants supplied by private providers where the provider has failed in its duty of care", says the letter which was signed by the Chief Medical Officer, professor Sally C Davies.

But, says prof Kirwan, "I will not endorse the statement that the private provider has 'failed in his duty of care' because he has placed a perfectly legal implant approved by MHRA in a completely ethical and legal setting as did the NHS". He adds: "The fault lies with the regulatory agency and they should take full responsibility for removal as well as replacement".

Interestingly, not once throughout the Health Committee proceedings did europhile Stephen Dorrell mention that the CE marking system was part of the fabled Single Market, or in any sense suggest that the regulatory authorities bore any responsibility, even though it was admitted that there had been a "regulatory failure". He steered the committee very firmly to focus on the responsibilities of the clinics which had provided implants.

Back, in Brussels health and consumer policy commissioner John Dalli then had the nerve to call on member states "for immediate action to be taken at national level to ensure full and stringent implementation of the current legislation on medical devices".

However, in a de facto admission that the current system was defective, he said that the priority was "for the Member States and the Commission to act together to tighten controls, provide a better guarantee of the safety of medical devices and to restore patient confidence in the law that protects them".

Dalli has thus outlined his proposals for a joint plan of immediate measures in a letter written to the health ministers of EU member states, asking for their full co-operation in beginning work without delay.

This is on the basis of an earlier report from the commission, asking for "further scientific study" and drawing "first lessons from the recent fraud on breast implants".

Against that background, Keogh on the one hand is determined to contain the impact of this scandal on the resources of the NHS, while Dorrell seems most concerned that the clinics should live up to their "obligations".

Thus do they seek to pass the buck, so who is there to point the finger at the EU and its responsibility for a failed system, and at the French government for its failure earlier to detect the fraud?

And what about these europhiles who are so keen on the Single Market, which includes a single market in medical devices? Where is the "moral and social duty of care" of these people, who so easily seek to dump the responsibility on clincs who relied on the authority of the CE marking?

The attitude of Dorrell seems to me to sum up the europhile tendency – everybody is responsible for their actions, except themselves. They immediately stand aside when there is any chance of blame coming their way. When there is a "regulatory failure", the private providers have a "moral and social duty of care", which requires them to remedy it. If that is not passing the buck, I don't know what is.

COMMENT THREAD