Is it just me...

This story in today's Guardian (no, I don't normally read it: the Devil linked to a different story and I saw the headline) has opened my eyes to a bizarre 'pastime', called 'Upskirting'. This apparently involves the illicit taking of photographs up the skirts of oblivious females...

What the fuck?!

Just how low can people sink? I thought we'd reached a nadir with Big Brother and Benicio del Toro's 'Che', but...

One view might be that the legalisation of prostitution can't come soon enough. Another - that these men are too cowardly (or too small down there) to ever try to have sex with a woman, even if they were paying for it...

However, it does have the upside of getting Guardian readers all in a tizz - the comments are well worth reading, if only to see the stupidity of that particular group... And the Islamist tossers who suggest that 'women should dress appropriately'. Which takes me back to the Devil's post about how 30% of the population still, apparently, plan to vote Labour.

Lord help us.

Nutter on the bus...

'Fuckin kids, nah fuckin respect these days. Me, I got a dodgy knee, and that scum we've brought into the world won't give me a seat. Kids these days - they're just scum. Just stabbing kids, no good for anyfink. Going into hospital tomorruh, only waiting til tomorruh so I can get my pension. And they won't give me a seat'

Says the nutter to his reflection in the window, as he climbs up onto the top deck of the thing they call a bus here in Chav-ville.

So far, not a lot to disagree with.

'Can't believe the mess this country's in. We're going to the bloody dogs.'

How true.

'It's all the fault of that one-eyed Scotch cunt. He should go back to fuckin' Scotland. He's finished, finished.'

If only. If only.

'Let the banks fail. Why the fuck should bloody taxpayers bail out the fucking banks? Somefink else would've evolved to take their place.'

True, how true.

'This place is full of bloody Europeans, half of 'em don't even speak fuckin' English.'

Mmmmm. Well, I don't hold it against you.

'All that cunt Gordon Brown's fault. He's let 'em in.'

Fair point. But they (and the, ahem, people of colour you don't appear to like very much) are, for the most part, a damn sight more useful than the native inhabitants of Chav-ville. Perhaps we could send the chavs to their countries?

'But I won't vote for the bleedin' Tories, me. No way.'

Well, it's true that they won't be much better (not that they could be any worse, of course).

'Nah, the answer's National Socialism', he emphasises, 'National Socialism'.

Oh dear.... and I thought we might be friends. Well, alright, maybe not... but I did at least feel sorry for you.

'Yer, vote BNP. Vote BNP, that's what I'm gonna do. This country's goin' to the dogs.'

How instructive for the twats at Liberal Conspiracy, who keep trying to claim that National Socialism had nothing to do with socialism. Clearly, not something that all of their fellow 'liberals' share... Something for them to ponder - if only they dared read anything outside their own comfort zone...

Wanker of the Week

Back by popular demand...

And today's wanker is... Derek Draper.

Primarily for this post. Presumably, 'revenge' for Guido pointing out that he didn't go to Berkeley (even though it would have been an appropriate place for him...).

Derek - fuck off you tedious, totalitarian cunt. None of the comments you cite are racist - they simply reflect reality in Brown's Britain. But, of course, socialists have always shouted, 'Racist!' at anyone with whom they disagree.

But racist comments like 'British jobs for British workers' are, of course, OK if they are uttered by socialist cunts like Gordon the Moron.

Anyway, given that Guido has apparently deleted the non-racist comments, I'm more than happy for any reader to leave similar ones on this blog. As a reminder, this is the picture:



And, Derek, keep your totalitarian shit on LabourShite - there's no room for it in the rest of the blogosphere.

Honestly, you'd think he had better things to worry about, like his mental boss, who's taking the country down the toilet - or just shagging his wife (after all, we all know the risks of not keeping your spouse happy in bed...).

Next stop for the UK police?

Apparently, some Nigerians think a thief has shape-shifted into a goat, and their local police force has been forced to take it into custody!

[This might explain a lot... After all, Harriet Harperson can't be human - perhaps she's that famous Sudanese goat that was married off to some peasant after he was caught, ahem, engaging in marital relations with it. Might explain her hatred of men and the idea that they might enjoy having sex...

On the other hand, maybe she's just a man-hating lesbian who has been forced into a sham marriage with a 'man' (using the widest definition of 'man' possible, given that it is Jack Dromey we're talking about here...)...]

Anyhooo... it's just so easy to go off-topic when it comes to the utter cunts that 'Govern' our country...

I think the point of raising this - apart from the fact that it's a tad amusing - was that it could never happen here... could it?

Personally, I'm not so sure... with the Government's anti-Darwinian scheme to reduce average intelligence, otherwise known as the 'Welfare State', funded by piling ever more taxes on hard-working individuals (whether they have families or not), whilst the likes of Paul Myners get rich courtesy of the taxpayer (via shorting banks, something which he is now slagging off, the hypocritical cunt) and pay very little tax...

And the outcome? How about this, for starters...

Fake charities

An eagle-eyed reader may have noticed that Devil's Kitchen has launched the fakecharities.org website, after yet another 'charity' was revealed to be nothing of the sort, but rather a front for the Government to claim popular support for imposing yet more illiberal legislation on us.

Like the Devil, I am thoroughly pissed-off with this state of affairs - it's bad enough that businesses do this (see, e.g. The Truth About Drug Companies for examples of how Big Pharma uses charities to persuade the sheeple to lobby for ineffective drugs, like Herceptin for early stage breast cancer). But now the illiberal cunts in Government are using the same dirty tricks, cunts that they are.

So I have volunteered to help this noble cause. And I urge you to do the same.

My first contribution: some FoI requests:

To: info@dcsf.gsi.gov.uk

Dear Sir / Madam,

I am writing to make a request under the Freedom of Information Act.

I would be grateful if you could let me know which charities received funding from the DCSF and its agencies:

- In 2008; and
- In 2007.

Yours sincerely,


Paul Brennan

To: dhmail@dh.gsi.gov.uk

Dear Sir / Madam,

I am writing to make a request under the Freedom of Information Act.

I would be grateful if you could let me know which charities received funding from the Department of Health and its agencies:

- In 2008; and
- In 2007.

Yours sincerely,


Paul Brennan

And:

To: public.enquiries@homeoffice.gsi.gov.uk

Dear Sir / Madam,

I am writing to make a request under the Freedom of Information Act.

I would be grateful if you could let me know which charities received funding from the Home Office and its agencies:

- In 2008; and
- In 2007.

Yours sincerely,


Paul Brennan

Etc........

Let's see if the cunts respond with some answers, or dodgy excuses... Not holding my breath...


PS I see the Devil is talking about the alcohol 'limits' which some 'scientists' invented in the 1980s, and which Government uses 'charities' - and dumbass 'liberal' democrat MPs - to promote. Did you know that they also made up '5 a day' - apparently, it's actually 3 a day.

Update: All Depts have promised to respond within 20 days, other than HM Treasury...

Oh. My. God.

As you probably know, the Devil already has a blog. But, in that case, it's clearly not the Devil in the evil - Satanic, Beelzebub - sense

Now, however - via one of DK's Anonymous disciples - it seems that Satan - the real one - has learned the art of seeking to spread his poison online.

Some of you may remember Rory Bremner's avatar of Peter Mandelson on his C4 show (well, C4 has to be useful for something...). I thought it was funny.

Now I'm not so sure...

Is nowhere safe from these bastards?

Citizens of Second Life - prepare yourselves for:

• Eye-watering levels of virtual taxation and government debt
• Monitoring of all your online activities.
• Harriet Harman stopping any sexual fantasies (unless they involve ugly women only)
• Virtual imprisonment / hanging for smoking or speeding offences; rewards for committing anything previously regarded as criminal
  
• 'Losing' your data so that it can be used by criminals
• A financial crisis that 'began in America' but hits the UK worse than anywhere else, for reasons that can't be explained, other than by some vague reference to potential other governments being 'do-nothing' organisations
  
• Gulags for anyone that doesn't repeat, parrot-style, everything that the Mandelson avatar says
• A Second Life Broadcasting Corporation - funded by compulsory taxation - which features such 'balanced' reporters as 'Toilets' Macguire and 'Toenails' Robinson
• Free inside information for a Robert Peston avatar
  
• All-in-all, a virtual USSR - a model for the UK if Labour win the next election.
  

Is it possible to have a virtual revolution? Are there any Second-Lifers who would volunteer to lead it - and treat the Mandelson avatar to Bolshevik-style retribution?

Please, God - what did we do? :-(

The bishop is back... and angry as ever!

Dear Reader

Apologies for the absence of posts recently - I've been enjoying a (well-earned?) holiday.

I gather that I'm not the only one... Mandy Pandy has apparently been spotted in Marrakech (incidentally, not his first time there...). Some of Guido's co-conspirators have even suggested that he might have been enjoying some of the, ahem, adult entertainment that Marrakech offers.

Well, clearly the Bishop isn't in a position to judge the truth of the matter - nor, as a libertarian, does he care if Mandy or anyone else indulges in such activities, provided they involve consenting adults. But, if this was what Mandy was doing, and given Harriet Harperson's Jacqui Smith's new law which will insist that clients check prostitutes' ages and that they aren't trafficked, perhaps Mandy could let us know whether he took similar precautions in North Africa, and how he ensured that he was told the truth?

Or, as anyone outside the Labour Party knows, will the legislation not work? There was an excellent article by Hannah Fletcher and Claudia Fromme in the Times on this, back in November. In particular, it points to experience in Finland, where, 'Since [similar] legislation came into effect, there has not been one single prosecution', because it is impossible to prove 'beyond reasonable doubt' that a client knew that a prostitute was trafficked.

Perhaps this is all part of Labour's ongoing attempts to turn England into a police state? The failure of the legislation will mean that 'beyond reasonable doubt', the backbone of a fair and just legal system for centuries, will be changed - no doubt, to 'if you support Labour, you're a victim and we'll pay you vast amounts of taxpayers' money, and, if not, you're an evil criminal who doesn't understand social justice, and we'll send you to the gulag'.

Perhaps the Prime Mentalist is more like Stalin than Mr Bean, after all?

Getting back to the subject in hand, I think it is worth reflecting on some of what the article says in detail...

When Richard Gere picked up Julia Roberts in his Lotus Esprit in Pretty Woman, it was the start of a great Hollywood romance. The classic prostitute with a heart of gold, she was transformed almost instantly into a glamous sex kitten, equally at home shopping on Rodeo Drive, decorating his arm at the opera in San Francisco or stamping the divots at a polo match. And, of course, there was a fairytale ending in which the corporate prince rescued the fair maiden as she promised to “rescue him right back”.

But if an English Gere — perhaps a hedge-fund manager trying to find Notting Hill in the dark — attempted a similar stunt in the brave new world of Jacqui Smith, the Home Secretary, he wouldn't be handing out strawberries in the hotel penthouse but having his mugshot taken at the nearest police station.

Well, yeah. I mean, does anyone seriously think that prostitution is glamorous? Pretty Woman is a shit film, and hardly compares to reality (for a start, Richard Gere [edited for legal purposes! ;-)]). Seriously... (I guess they had to do this, as such sensationalisation seems to be a requirment even for broadsheet journalists these days... But forgive them - the rest of the article is unusually balanced and fair).

Andy Hayman, former assistant commissioner of the Metropolitan Police, thinks that the new proposals are ludicrous. “The police have so many other priorities, such as knife crime,” he says. “They don't want to hound prostitutes who obviously need the money, or their clients, unless they are causing serious problems.

“What these women need is help. Many of them are drug addicts or behind with their rent; they already have criminal convictions so they can't find another job. They don't need to be forced farther underground. Most are already very co-operative, and they are great informers. Coppers will ignore this one.”

Wow! The police being sensible? Perhaps Inspector Gadget despairs too much? Although it is an ex-copper talking... And they probably should go after the people traffickers....

"This is an disaster for many working women,” says Virginia (not her real name), who works in a sex parlour in southeast England that is run by a middle-aged couple. “These measures will make our jobs far more dangerous. The couple I work for are not pimps, they check my clients and make sure I'm safe. The sex between my client and myself is a consensual act.”

Nicky Adams, a spokeswoman (NB not 'spokesperson' - naughty, naughty!) for the English Collective of Prostitutes (NB note that 'union' seems to be a dirty word here - perhaps this explains Labour's hatred for them?), adds:

...prostitutes are now terrified of ending up with the most unscrupulous pimps. “All this will do is hound the decent parlour owners. The Government is trying to take the moral high ground but it's a low blow for women who are struggling to make ends meet, whether they are from Croydon or Croatia.”

But, as Harperson argues, isn't prostitution just, well, wrong? If women demean themselves by being prostitutes, why should we want them to be protected? After all, if we can get murder and rape figures up, then we can put all men (the raping bastards!) in prison and have a much better world! And we don't want any pretty Eastern European women here, showing how ugly many British women are! After all, how's a girl to get a girlfriend against that sort of competition?

If only women would simply look and dress like Harriet or our dear Jacqui (especially in her knife-proof vest, and with her protection squad, vital for any Labour Minister given what they've done to this country), then no man would want to fuck them! And then there would be no prostitution.

Except for rent boys in Marrakech, accessible only to senior Labour Ministers. Nothing wrong with that - after all, gay and Labour, now that's a minority group that deserves the full protection of the law...

First Predictions for 2009

Well, it's that time of year when we make foolish predictions about 2009. And they don't come much more foolish than those made by our friends at the Treasury - return to economic growth by the autumn, public borrowing of 'only' £120bn in fiscal year 2009/10 (excluding Northern Rock, Land Rover, etc., etc.....)...

And what of the likely reality? Well, here's a go...

1. With the UK economy going down the toilet, Brown calls early election on back of his bounce in the polls. Tories fail to provide proper alternative, saying that they won't cut spending to cut taxes and that 'rolling back the state isn't an option'. Muppets vote Brown back in.

2. Run on the Pound (even more than already) - how about £1 = 0.75 Euro?

3. UK can't refinance all of its debts as well as new borrowing. IMF called in.

4. UK economy completely fucked.

I think that about sums it up. Time for everyone who can to leave for the exit...

OR...

1. Cameron comes to his senses and makes the Tories a low tax party; or luck intervenes (seems more likely...) and the IMF are called in before Brown dares hold an election.

2. IMF forces 'savage' (all of 10%) cuts in UK spending in return for structural adjustment lending. Surprise, surprise - the sun doesn't fall out of the sky and the world goes on...


And this is the point. Although a recession will be painful - no foreign holidays for some (oh, the pain, the pain...) and no job for others (but they're in the private sector, so this is good news for our Labour Masters - more welfare clients...) - it may force the changes that the UK needs:

• It will be pretty easy to squeeze health spending by 10% - just cut the national tariff which determines prices. Together with wage freezes for the doctors who have done rather nicely under Labour (43% of additional health spending under Labour has gone on wage increases). Let's end the fiction of an NHS dental service (other countries leave it to the private sector - lightly regulated to prevent abuse of market power). A lot of public health spending can be cut without affecting health - e.g. anti-alcohol and 5-a-day campaigns.
  
• Cut down on wasteful spending. That means abolishing the Dept of Timewasting & Interfering (now called 'BERR' for some pathetic reason). It means no more 'lesbian co-ordinators' and the like, a ban on outside consultants being paid more than their civil service equivalents without specific sign-off by a Secretary of State (making them accountable for showing VfM) fewer special advisors, a hiring freeze across Whitehall and the rest of the public sector (with the exception of those who can show that they will generate cash savings, e.g. people who know how not to get ripped off buying IT services), wage cuts outside London to reflect the true difference in the cost of living rather than one that's made up, no more new furniture and IT kit at the end of the financial year, etc. And the House of Commons can show it's sharing the nation's pain by taking a 10% wage and allowance cut and losing its drinks subsidies. It's symbolic, y'know...
  
• All civil servants to be required to suggest a way of saving money in their area in order to receive a higher box marking, be eligible for future promotion and avoid a pay cut - we need to encourage a culture where efficiency is the norm, not the exception. Suggestions to be published, so that senior civil servants and Ministers can be held to account if they block their implementation.
  
• Abolish tax credits - whether for 'working families' (just cut taxes) or for R&D (ditto). Simplify tax system, introducing flat tax. Measures together will save billions in Revenue & Customs salaries, fraud / overpayment and firms having to spend much less on their tax returns.
  
• Scotland, Wales & Northern Ireland to receive same per capita spend as regions of England with equivalent levels of GDP per head. If they want more, they'll have to pay more tax. We can also save some money by reducing the number of MPs from those areas to reflect their population size and the fact that Gov't is devolved...
  
• Unilateral UK withdrawal from the Common Agricultural Policy, together with the concommitant cut in the UK's EU budget contributions. We gave up our rebate for nothing - now we'll get something. :-)
• Prison spending to be held steady - 2 at least to a cell (Human Rights Act to be disapplied to criminals), no more playstations, day trips for feral youths, etc. will fund new prison places.
  
• All existing Gov't funding for the Turd Sector / Charities to be ended. If they want to campaign against Gov't policies, they'll have to find private individuals to fund them. Those who want to implement (new, tougher) Gov't policy and can produce credible plans for doing so, can bid for funding against cr&p public sector authorities such as Haringey.
• DFID's budget to be cut. It's stupid for the UK to borrow money it can't afford to pay for corruption in the developing world. Spending that remains only to be given to countries that help themselves by adopting sensible policies. But as we're no longer in the CAP, they can export their farm produce to us without restriction (helping them and us - lower food prices for us, more secure markets for them).
• No national ID scheme (a bigger waste of money than David Bentley...). Olympics to be given to Paris.
• Education spending to be slightly cut by abolishing LEAs and ending nonsense like payments to students to do A levels. Vouchers to be introduced across the board to drive competition a la Sweden. I'm sure there's loads more that could be done - quality hasn't gone up with spending over the last decade...
  
• Defra and MoD to lose all industrial policy responsibilities and spending. No money to be directed towards the countryside over-and-above spending elsewhere - the cost of living is higher in cities, so why should taxpayers there subsidise those who live in the country?!
• Scrap RDAs - another complete waste of money.
• Police targets to be abolished. Local police chiefs elected - if they don't deliver real cuts in crime, they'll get voted out. All the bureaucracy introduced over the last 30 years to be at least halved.
  
• End welfare as a way of life (TM). Anyone that claims benefits fraudulently will lose entitlement to benefits permanently (and fuck anyone that says, 'but what about the chiiiiildreeeeeen?'). Anyone on benefits will not receive extra benefits for having more children. Nor extra housing. No-one under 25 to receive a council flat / house - that might encourage some responsibility... With tax thresholds massively increased, there will be no excuse not to work if you can - I don't care if that means cleaning the streets or public toilets (which are so disgusting that they can only be carrying large numbers of vacancies).
  

That's just a start. I bet everyone who works in the public sector can suggest many more.

But I needed to get it off my chest.

And 2009 may turn out to be not be so bad after all... but the start of something good.

Faith - whilst some have regained theirs, I've lost mine

Oh dear!

The Diocesan Council's investments have run into even more trouble. A shareholding which, we were assured, would yield a profit in fact looks like yielding a rather substantial loss.

The new advisors we took on last year don't seem to be helping much...

Still, no-one predicted what would happen. Not.

Still, it's only money. And not our money at that. The tithe-payers can always be squeezed a little lot more. And you can bet they will be. And then some.

Especially when we have to call in help from Rome. The International Diocesan Fund aren't renowned for pulling their punches.

Still - the Curia will get their bonuses this year. And the Cardinal, his predecessor and his pals have apparently regained their popularity amongst the tithe-payers.

Incompetent fuckwits.

That's why I have finally lost my religion. Friday was my last day at the Council. Whilst I'm sad to leave, and I'll miss my team and my friends, I've lost all faith in the Church.

My new job is... well, let me think about what I can say about it ;-)


BB

Secret camara in Prime Minister's Office

And people think that this man should be PM? Maybe this is normal in Glenrothes?

Recently (very) drunk...

The eagle-eyed will have noticed a new feature here on Craggy Island - the 'Recently Drunk' sidebar...

This is your humble Bishop's effort to stick two fingers (or one, if you're one of our American friends) up at the health fascists who have stuck posters all over the Metrocity metro telling us all that we drink too much.

These fuckers need to understand:

- I do a stressful job, working in the Diocesan Council with people utter cunts like Archbishop D'Inde, who are busy trying to fuck up the Diocese's investments.
- I have to travel on the Metrocity metro.... and the Metrocity above-ground
- Because my salary's shite - or, rather, I have to pay so much of it in tax - I have to live in Chav-ville, alongside the recipients of my generosity
- Who repay me by spending it on cheap cider, being violent, scaring the shit out of Mrs Brennan and anyone with half a brain, and then visiting Chav-ville A&E, where they are singularly unpleasant to the docs and nurses who try to help them.

And you fuckers have the nerve to tell me not to drink...

You should be grateful I don't shoot-up... the chavs' flats (actually, make that my flats, since I pay for them).

Now fuck off back to Guardian La-La Land, where everyone, darhling, has a BMW and a Tuscan Villa and lives in the nicer bits of Metrocity, and therefore can 'afford' to pay more tax...

Cunts.

Just what is the UK's debt burden?

Fraser Nelson - amongst others - has pointed out some of the, ahem, allegedly dodgy accounting tricks employed by Gordon Brown and co to understate the level of UK Government debt relative to GDP.

The new 'series' is called 'National Debt excluding Northern Rock'. Quite what has happened to Bradford & Bingley, and what will happen with the latest acquisitions of shareholdings in the 'commanding heights' of the financial part of the economy, well, we can't be sure - 'Ratio of UK debt to GDP, excluding Government liabilities relating to banks, PFI, public sector pensions, Equitable Life, etc., etc.' perhaps?

In honour of the obviously honourable purpose of this new statistical 'series' - to show the true level of UK Government debt to GDP - the Bishop has resolved to create a new measure. I proudly present:

'The ratio of UK Government Debt to GDP if the UK had never suffered from Labour fuck-ups'

First, GDP without Labour fuck-ups:

- The UK wouldn't have wasted its Marshall Aid on building an unsustainable welfare state; instead, it would have rebuilt its industries, as the French and Germans did.
- No nationalisations of steel, coal, etc.
- No NHS
- No idiot Tony Benn in the Cabinet - fewer subsidies to BAe, etc.
- No commies in the Wilson government
- The Tories wouldn't have become socialists in the 40s-70s
- The miners' strike in the 70s would have been more like the one in the 80s
- The Trade Unions would have been told to fuck off earlier
- Taxes would have always been significantly lower
- Ken Clarke's spending plans would not have been followed by a splurge of public spending that mortgaged the future
- Etc.

UK GDP per capita, in short, would be closer to that of the top countries in the world.


Next, debt without Labour fuck-ups.

- No 'Chav' class of benefit-claiming, workshy scum: welfare would be confined to the genuinely needy - and would be generous to the disabled, etc.
- No costs of nationalising industries. But equally, no revenues from privatisation. Generously, let's say no cost for the utilities. But huge costs from support for coal, steel, shipyards, Leyland, etc.
- No need to go the IMF in the 1970s
- No need to spend North Sea oil revenues on restructuring the UK economy in the 1980s - so would have had huge surpluses, perhaps put into UK Sovereign Wealth Fund
- The Tories had concluded by 1997 that PFI didn't work - no mortgaging of the future from waste of money PFI schemes that cost, rather than save money
- No tax on pensions in 1997: not so much would rest on public pensions
- Public sector surplus from Ken Clarke policies would have been used to pay off all UK debt, and spending would have been matched to revenues
- No chickening out on the renegotiation of the Civil Service Pension Scheme in the last 10 years, hence public sector pensions would be more sustainable

So UK would have had no net debt going into the current recession. Hence zero debt / GDP. And with our US+ levels of wealth, half of the population would hardly be thinking of emigrating...


Clearly, this is re-writing history, and so is fictional... But hardly any more so than Gordon's latest debt 'series'. But there is a clear lesson:

Everyone who has ever voted Labour should be disqualified from voting, at least until they've paid off their 'fair' share (national debt / labour voters)...

Do you think Polly's villa in Tuscany will cover it?

Government Gets Something Right Shock!

Thought that might get your attention...

Of course, it's not any of the parts of Government that are accountable to the Great Snotgobbler...

No, it's the (indepedent) Competition Commission (CC), which has recommended the break-up of BAA, the (near-)monopoly airport operator which owns Gatwick, Heathrow and Stanstead, and Edinburgh and Glasgow Airports. Because, as anyone unfortunate enough to fly from those airports knows, the service it offers is a pile of shit.

What most passengers probably don't know, because BAA's charges are hidden (along with the Government's ridiculous taxes, in the prices charged by airlines for the crime of wishing to leave this rain-sodden, socialist-wrecked piece of shit of a country we live in), is that they have been earning monopoly rents from the excessive charges they have been demanding from airlines. And the 'regulator', the useless Civil Aviation Authority (CAA) has done fuck-all about it.

So the Competition Commission, in its interim report, has demanded the break-up of the BAA monopoly. See - economists can be useful! ;-)

Now, what is the Government going to do about the CAA? Today's press reported that the Dept. of Transport was 'surprised' by the strength of the CC's report - despite the gist of its findings being reported for some time - yet another triumph for the Labour Government, which of course is totally against overly-close relations with Big Business (Bernie Ecc... cough, cough).

What the DoT meant to say was, 'We are going to do fuck all about the CAA because it is doing a wonderful job'. As ever, the Government - like its Great Leader - is 'listening'....

The problem with the CAA, like the water regulator after Ian Byatt left, is that it is too soft on monopolies who provide shit services. Just look at the level of price increases allowed for BAA - 23.5% real, followed by RPI + 7.5% for 4 years (note, not CPI, the supposed real level of inflation reported by the Snotgobbler), in order to pay for British Airways' new, ahem, 'wonderful' T5! And they say that BA is not supported by the Government, as, say, Air France is...

[Incidentally, having seen the CC's original report, the CAA did it's best to ensure its future survival by jumping on the 'break up BAA' bandwagon... what the fuck was it doing before? 'Dr' Harry Bush, its 'Group Director of Economic Regulation', is a political animal (formerly a senior bod at the Treasury, where the Bishop gathers he was responsible for the joys of public-private 'partnerships'... and no, that has nothing to do with gay sex or Harriet Harperson...), so is clearly simply trying to save his - and, maybe, the CAA's - skin.]

I have no problem with good service being rewarded - but the investment must be made first, and the service (whether a more pleasant airport, shorter queues, or less leaks from pipes, etc.) should noticeably improve before price increases are allowed. Not the other way round - otherwise the incentives are all wrong.

And don't get me started on the returns that are allowed on what are, essentially, risk-free investments (because, like the Inland Revenue, 'customers' can't go elsewhere). Why the fuck should we - because it is us, the airlines' customers, who pay for the subsidies to BA increased charges - pay a return that's higher than the risk-free rate on something that we are paying for (as the repayments of loans used to fund investments are factored into the prices allowed, and there is nowhere else for customers to go). Now, when BAA is broken up, we can think again about the appropriate rate of return. But we need to get tough on these cunts.

Rant over :)

Or I thought it was, until I read, in this FT piece, that the unions were opposed to BAA's break-up. Because, of course, some of the biggest beneficiaries of monopolies are unionised workforces (as we saw with the old nationalised industries - and the weeks / months spent waiting to have telephone lines installed, etc.).

If you needed confirmation that the CC are right, this should be it...


BB

Rewards for failure

A little-noticed announcement from our friends at the Treasury....

Two failures successes from the Financial Services Authority have been appointed to its Board as non-executive directors!

Lady Callum McCarthy and Sir Deidre Hutton, Chairman and 'Deputy Chair' (though, judging from her picture, not even a very desperate person - well, unless they like the 'Butch' look - would want to sit on her....) of the FSA during the great success which is Northern Crock, are being rewarded for their failure by being appointed to the Treasury's Board (although I suppose that, given the way the economy is going, it may be more of a punishment than a reward...).

Now, Nick Macpherson - a Gordon Brown appointment - says that he is looking forward to working with them, and that they will bring 'extensive experience' to their roles. Well, he would have to say that, wouldn't he - he can't exactly say 'extensive experience of fucking up', can he? But it is reward for backing the Treasury is seeking to dump the blame for the Crock on the Bank of England, when in fact it was down to

a) The ill-thought through trilateral arrangements for banking regulation brought in by the great Snotgobbler himself [note that another Brown favourite (in the James I sense?), Tom Scholar, worked on the introduction of that regulation and has now been appointed as Managing Director of the Directorate overseeing the Crock (including a Board role on the Government's first nationalisation in God-only knows how many years)].

b) The FSA's inability to regulate its own bowel movements, yet alone the ex-Nat West fuckups who were running the Crock. They actually agreed to reduce its capital requirements a few months before it went bust, for fuck's sake! Not helped by the Treasury's decision to impose public sector pay controls and headcount reductions on an organisation whose best staff are regularly poached by banks at significantly higher salaries than those offered by the FSA.... Another triumph for Big Government! Hurrah!

I'm sure that Lady McCarthy and the 'deputy' chair (stool?) will add a lot of value...

Lord save us from the cretins that run our country...


BB

Update 27/08/08 : I see the good people at Private Eye have finally caught up with half the story. They should spend more time reading blogs...

A sign of things to come

Under 'New' Labour, where Sweden goes, the UK follows...

Gordon is known to be a fan of Sweden's social welfare system. So this story is quite alarming.

A little boy didn't invite two of his classmates to his birthday party - one because they weren't friends, the other because there was no reciprocal invitation.

Sounds fair enough? Bloody Hell, sounds pretty generous to me - can you imagine how expensive that is, particularly now that parties are no longer a piece of cake and a game of 'pass the parcel'.

Anyway, the school doesn't think so. Apparently, children have to invite all of their classmates to such a party, in case one of the little darlings gets so upset that they wreak a horrible revenge on 'society', e.g. getting a job as a civil servant or becoming an MP or Government Minister stabbing people, robbery, etc.

So, how has his been resolved? A quiet word from the class teacher? A short note home to the parents? A phone call from the Head?

Well, no. The school has complained to the Swedish Parliament!

And have they told her to sod off? Apparently not. What the fuck next? What the Hell is wrong with these socialist, nannying societies? And when is this going to be transplanted to the UK, now dominated by socialist, nannying twats like Harriet Harperson?

I can't wait - no doubt, when the Bishop's son doesn't want to invite one of his classmates round for tea, we will be prosecuted under the Human Rights Act, and forced to pay the kid compensation. No matter if the kid comes from a chav family, or is a bully or a thief.

What the fuck?


BB

Wanker of the Week

Well, there's a lot to choose from...

Wee Wendy
Tory MEPs
Lady Ian Blair

The obvious candidate is Robert Mugabe. But that would be too easy...

This will be controversial :), but Nelson Mandela is a good candidate - why can't he be straightforward and say that Mugabe is a cunt? Not in those words exactly (surely not from St. Nelson?!), but you know what I mean?

But he did at least say something vaguely critical...

Unlike this week's total and utter wanker, Thabo Mbeki.

How many people have to die in Zimbabwe, you total and utter cunt? Do you share Mugabe's twisted, racist views that 'white people and their "Uncle Tom" friends deserve what they're getting'? Do you want South Africa to go the same way? Why do you think so many Zimbabweans have fled to shit lives in your country, where they are threatened by thuggish South Africans (who don't have jobs because of your stupid labour market laws)?

Lest we forget, one of Mugabe's henchmen rejoices, yes rejoices, in the nickname 'Hitler'! If it wasn't so tragic....

Well, the Bishop, as you know, is not normally a fan of Trade Unions, but has to applaud Cosatu for not toeing the line of their ally Mr Mbeki and speaking the truth about Mugabe, and their members who have blocked Chinese shipments of arms, destined for Zimbabwe, from going through South African ports.

And even the next President, Jacob Zuma, who has been accused of rape and accepting bribes - and so is hardly morally impregnable - and worries some in South Africa (the Bishop does not necessarily accept the worst of these worries, and is reassured by some of Zuma's comments) about his likely approach to the Presidency, has vocally condemned Mugabe.

So, Mr Mbeki, when are you going to take action?

I'm sure that it makes no difference to him, but he is this week's Wanker of the Week by miles and miles. The Bishop feels physically sick that he once clapped Mr Mbeki at a speech :(

Europhiles rumbled!

Dear Reader,

Apologies for the light blogging recently - travel and Mrs B's demands for DIY around the house (despite the Bishop's, ahem, 'differently-abled' DIYing talents... :) have cut into the Bishop's blogging time.

The good news, however, is that the Bishop is able to catch up with things now...

First story: many of you may have noticed this recent gem on the (usually reliably Europhile) BBC website about wonky bananas and overly-bent cucumbers...

Hang on a second! Weren't these things supposed to be myths peddled by evil Eurosceptics?!

Well, no, apparently not. Indeed, it appears that our friends in Brussels have had time to determine the precise required geometry of particular fruits and legumes. For example,

"the difference between the smallest and largest aubergines in the same package must not exceed 20mm for elongated aubergines [and] 25mm for globus aubergines"

What the fuck?! Why do such regulations exist? Are shoppers really so stupid that they would allow themselves to be ripped off by supermarkets on things like this? What happened to caveat emptor?

The reality, as the Bishop has seen at the Diocesan Council, is that the more bureaucrats there are, the more that stupid laws will be created - when people are judged by what they do, and punished for doing nothing (even if it is the most sensible thing to do), who can blame them for doing it?

Nor is the claim in the above link that legislation on bananas was sought by the industry is no excuse. Given that companies are not normally big fans of extra legislation (because it means higher costs), the question that needs to be asked is why would they actually want more legislation. The answer, of course, is to squeeze out potential new entrants or increase costs for smaller competitors.... Again, another cost of too many civil servants is that it increases the number of people in positions of power that can be 'captured' by vested interests.

So, when Europhiles claim that 'there are actually very few civil servants in Brussels', I suggest you send them this post, and ask them to justify the waste of time, food (that gets thrown away) and resources (e.g. the significant pay of the Eurocrats involved, not to mention the costs of enforcing these stupid rules to taxpayers and consumers).

The answer is to follow the usual rule of thumb with regard to the EU, i.e. to tell them to go forth and preferably not multiply :)

What makes this even worse, as the Al-Beeb article makes clear, is that the stupid tossers in Brussels want to respond to the current 'Global Food Crisis' (a result of monstrous stupidities such as the Common Agricultural Policy) by adding even more bureaucracy to the mess:

'The Commission says misshapen fruit should be sold "with some sort of label for use in cooking"'

Well, that sounds like a sound basis for legislating! Perhaps we should ask the people who wrote the Dangerous Dogs Act to help in drafting it?

Suggestions in the comments about the definition of 'label' for the legislation would be most welcome... The Bishop will then forward them to Brussels, in a spirit of 'solidarity' with our 'fellow European serfs citizens'.


BB