Thursday, 29 June 2017

A Royal death will certainly affect indyref2.

Its not for me to say whether Nicola Sturgeon should  call  a Second Independence Referendum .

As  Non - Scot unlike the Unionist Media the decision is up to the people if Scotland and their current government,.


I think however I can point out am issue that could affect the outcome if it is called and that is the danger that in the lead up to the vote , we could see the unfortunate death of the Duke of Edinburgh.

He is 96 and is clearly not in good health and the Queen is five years under and it is likely that one or both will pass away in the next five years.

Even if it was only her spouse , I suspect the Queen may decide to abdicate mad we will see a Cora nation.

This will of course (rather morbidly) be a gift to the Unionist Media and what will be a sad time for a family , will be turned into Unionist-Monarchist Jamboree ,

To fight an  year long Independence Referendum under such circumstances  even for those who like me are republicans will be difficult.

We are after all in a minority, although much larger than we are led to believe. in the UK including Scotland .

Indeed just before the First Referendun tAlex Salmond, the then Scottish First Minister, has risked controversy by suggesting that the Queen would be proud to reign over an independent Scotland.

Mr Salmond said he wanted the Queen to remain head of state in a separate Scotland “as her ancestors were”, 
How many Nationalists are republicans who want to get rid of the monarchy is an interesting question , but it is one we could adk of Labour and Liberal Democtats.
However fighting a referendum under the sycophantic Unionist coverage of a coronation is  going to be difficult .
So it could be the case of a Referendum Now  or some years later as we clear up what after all is the inevitable demise of members of the House of Windsor.




Wednesday, 28 June 2017

Circuit Break.



I must admit that I have had my doubts about the financial viability for the proposed Circuit of Wales but does this mean that I am applauding the Labour Welsh Government basically cancelling the project.

The plea by developers of the Circuit of Wales in Ebbw Vale for £210m in taxpayer-funded guarantees has been rejected by the Welsh Government.

The £433m motor racing track and leisure project aimed to create up to 6,000 jobs in a deprived area.

But Economy Secretary Ken Skates said job claims were "overstated" and there was too much financial risk.

The developers "strongly disagreed" with the decision and the rationale behind it.

Ministers said a £100m automotive business park would be built instead.

First Minister Carwyn Jones said backing the scheme would mean schools and homes would not be built.

After the meeting, economy minister Ken Skates issued a statement detailing why the Welsh Government had refused the £210m guarantee.


"The due diligence interrogated the company’s estimate of 6,000 potential jobs to be created across all elements of the project and found it to be significantly overstated." "Cabinet therefore today decided that the potential impact on the public finances of the current proposal before them was too great



The key points of his statement are:

  • The entire £373m debt of the Circuit of Wales would have gone on the Welsh Government's books,
  • It would have hindered the Welsh Government's ability to deliver new hospitals, schools or housing
  • The developer's estimate of creating 6,000 jobs was significantly overstated,
  • As few as around 100 operational jobs would be created in the operation of the racetrack,
  • Instead, the Welsh Government will provide £100m for a new "automotive technology business park in Ebbw Vale",
  • It will also explore the the potential of locating a South Wales Metro depot in the Ebbw Vale Enterprise Zone.
Plaid Cymru finance spokesman Adam Price said it

It is a shocking indictment of this government that it has taken seven years and over £9 million of public money to arrive at the decision to reject the Circuit of Wales. If there was an issue with the apportionment of risk, then why was that not communicated to the company, other than through the written statement issued by the government this morning?
"The Welsh Government has today turned down the single biggest private investment proposal in the history of Wales. Investors like Aviva will think twice before ever investing in the south Wales valleys again. Other partners may have recourse to legal action whose costs could run in to tens of millions of pounds. Is Wales open for business or open to ridicule?
“When Plaid Cymru accused the Welsh Government of delaying its decision on the Circuit of Wales until after the election in order to defer an unpopular announcement, the government denied it. Clearly, the Welsh Government misled us, but more importantly it misled the people of Blaenau Gwent.”
Plaid may have more reason to question the delaying od the decision.

A year ago the Blaneau Gwent seat the Assembly seat almost fell to Plaid.

Welsh Assembly Election 2016: Blaenau Gwent
PartyCandidateVotes%±
LabourThomas Alun Rhys Davies8,44239.7−24.3
Plaid CymruNigel Copner7,79236.6+31.2
UKIPKevin Boucher3,42316.1+16.1
ConservativeTracey West1,3346.3+1
Liberal DemocratsBrendan D'Cruz3001.4−0.4
Majority6503.1-42.0
Turnout42.1+3.3
Labour holdSwing−28.0

You don't have to be a conspiracy theorist that the Welsh Goverment did not take this into account  and delayed the announcement  until after the recent election  and it looks kike it may have been justified.

General Election 2017: Blaenau Gwent
PartyCandidateVotes%±
LabourNick Smith18,78758.00.0
Plaid CymruNigel Copner6,88021.2+12.2
ConservativeTracey West4,78314.8+4.0
UKIPDennis May9733.0-14.9
IndependentVicki Browning6662.1n/a
Liberal DemocratCameron Sullivan2950.9−1.0
Majority11,90736.8-3.3
Turnout32,41963.28
Labour holdSwing0.0
One wonders what would have been the result it the Welsh  Labour Government had got its Skates on and made the announcement earlier.

As i I believe that the financial viability of the Circuit of Wales  project was  always in doubt and do not in fact criticise the decision.

What I do how ever is beehive Labour have been dangling this in front of the Blaneau Gwent (and the whole of Wales electorate) seemingly for electoral purposes.

We have a Government  in Wales that has no Vision beyond getting reelected .


Tuesday, 27 June 2017

Modern Nursery Rhyme.





I had a Magic Money Tree
But nothing would it bear
No money for the nurses
or the rest to share;

The DUP's leader 
Said she'e vote with me
So I found an extra Billion
On my Magic Money Tree.

Monday, 26 June 2017

Owen Jones , Just another Left-Unionist?

If Owen Jones is any example then those of us who promoted a Progressive Alliance are are in for a appointment.

He has been seem as a fresh and vital alternative , offering a progressive viewpoint , from the usual crap of  Left pr Right  Labour Unionism.

Bur he has raised ire  when he recently tweeted this 




EDINBURGH! Labour can win the next election - but only if we campaign. Join me, this Thursday. Spread the word!: https://www.facebook.com/events/1698648200163215/ 

Mr Jones seems surprised that  a number of Independence supporters  disagreed with him.
What particularly riled my antagonists was Munro’s reference to “SNP and Tory austerity”. This is an argument made repeatedly by Jeremy Corbyn himself. “Scots have a choice in this election,” said Corbyn in May. “A Labour government which will govern for the many not the few, or the continuation of Tory and SNP austerity.”
The reason Corbyn’s Labour make this argument is that the SNP refuse to use their tax-raising powers to reverse Tory cuts: their argument that it would cause the rich to flee is the standard right-wing objection to progressive taxation. Furthermore, they enforced a council tax freeze for many years that caused cuts to services in Scotland.
As  Colin Alexander Storrier points out in an excellent response 

This is not without consequence. Scotland’s budget has been brutally axed since 2010 to the tune of around £3 billion; severely undermining the ability of the Scottish Government to deliver our vital public services. It’s in this context that the SNP should be applauded for its efforts to mitigate the worst of the Conservative government’s heartless agenda. I ask you this, had the SNP not mitigated the Conservative Party’s austerity measures, then would as many people in the South and North East of Scotland voted Tory in June?
 “the SNP should be applaudedfor their efforts to mitigate theworst of the Conservativegovernment’s heartless agenda”
 And Owen Jones' defense  was   completely shot down by Plaid Leader Leanne Wood  


   Jun 20MoreLeanneWood Retweeted Owen Jones
So Owen, how do you fancy joining to campaign against Labour austerity in ?
Jones however seems to be intent on getting those of us who see Progress as bring a bit more than getting Jeremy Corbyn  as Prime Minister.
....The SNP would be more reliable allies of Corbyn, I’m repeatedly told. Odd, again, given Munro — who I was campaigning for — is a Corbyn supporter. Odd, too, given Nicola Sturgeon’s own publicly expressed view is that  Corbyn’s Labour is “pitifully ineffective.” Odd, also, given the SNP wishes Scotland to leave a country potentially led by Corbyn.In the coming months, I’ll be campaigning in Tory-held seats in England: Labour can take constituencies held by the likes of Iain Duncan-Smith and Boris Johnson. But I’m glad to have combined a visit to my parents with a campaign in a nearby marginal. That’s because I want Labour to win with left-wing candidates in Scotland, England and Wales so that we can have a left-wing Labour government — maybe even by the end of the year.

So basically  is telling us who favour Progressive  politics to put our faith in  Corbyn and a Labour Government,

But Corbyn and his allies have not so far expressed anything  on really reforming our electoral system or expanding devolution  in the current legislatures and perhaps vitally Englamd.

In the 1980's i like many others  would march with other Non- Labour supporters at CND rallies , where we would be constantly tole by the likes of Neil Bannock that only a Labour Government could  remove Trident and we should rely on him and his party.
OK Corbyn is not Kinnock ; but placing out faith in one man will lead to disaster for the Progressive left.


That worked didn't it.

At the last election Labour Candidates yes Candidates were telling voter Scottish marginals to voters Tory if they wanted to remove the SNP.

Owen Jones would be better off looking into this and arguing for a Tory fre Scotland rather than attacking a party that has done its best to mitigate Tory austerity  unlike the Labour Government here in Wales.




Sunday, 25 June 2017

Every "Patriot" should know the story of the White Rose



Am I a Patriot , I suspect its a bit of a case that if I was to call myself one it would probably;y mean that I was not

Most are aware of Samual Johnsons 

"Patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel".
 And  Andrea Leadsom's call for 'patriotic' Brexit coverage has  prompted anger




Ms Leadsom's, the leader of the House of Commons, has come under fire for calling on broadcasters to be “a bit patriotic” in their Brexit coverage.
The outgoing Liberal Democrat leader, Tim Farron, described Leadsom, who stood for the leadership of the Conservative party last year, as “sinister” for her comments on the BBC’s Newsnight.
Ms Leadsom said:
 “It would be helpful if broadcasters were willing to be a bit patriotic. The country took a decision, this government is determined to deliver on that decision.”
Emily Maitlis, who was presenting the show, asked Leadsom if she was accusing broadcasters of being unpatriotic .
“Are you accusing me of being unpatriotic for questioning how negotiations are going, questioning whether you have the position of strength that she said she wanted?” 
Leadsom replied: 
“I’m not accusing you of anything, Emily. I’m simply saying we all need to pull together as a country. We took a decision a year ago today to leave the European Union, we have a very strong hand and we are very well prepared for the negotiations.”
Farron said: 
“This is a sinister threat to the free media. How dare Andrea Leadsom tell the press what they should think. This isn’t a George Orwell book. She needs to apologise for these comments and realise what she said was frankly stupid.”
The Cambridge Dictionary describes Patrioisn  as the feeling of loving your country more than any others and being proud of it

It is being proud thats the problem you can love your country and being discusted  by its actions.

Every  February 22nd wear a White Rose in memory of the young members of the White Rose movement  who executed buy the Nazi on that day in  1943.

The White Rose (Germandie Weiße Rose) was a non-violentintellectual resistance group in Nazi Germany led by a group of students and a professor at the University of Munich. The group conducted an anonymous leaflet and graffiti campaign which called for active opposition against the Nazi regime. Their activities started in Munich on June 27th, 1942, and ended with the arrest of the core group by the Gestapo on February 18th, 1943.[1] They, as well as other members and supporters of the group who carried on distributing the pamphlets, faced show trials by the Nazi People's Court (Volksgerichtshof), and many were sentenced to death or imprisonment.

Tke most famous members were  Hans and Sophie Scholl, often referred to in German as die Geschwister Scholl (literally: the Scholl siblings), were a brother and sister who were members of the White Rose, a student group in Munich that was active in the non-violentresistance movement in Nazi Germany, especially in distributing flyers against the war and the dictatorship of Adolf Hitler. In post-war Germany, Hans and Sophie Scholl are recognized as symbols of the Christian German resistance movement against the totalitarian Nazi regime.


This is an example of young people who loved tier country so much that they  stood up to  one of the most evil government  in rhe world .

Who were the Patriots in Nazi Germany ?

Here are some of their leaflets. which led to their arrests and execution

"Isn n't it true that every honest German is ashamed of his government these days? Who among us has any conception of the dimensions of shame that will befall us and our children when one day the veil has fallen from our eyes and the most horrible of crimes– crimes that infinitely outdistance every human measure– reach the light of day? ”
— 1st leaflet of the White Rose
“ Since the conquest of Poland, 300,000 Jews have been murdered in this country in the most bestial way ... The German people slumber on in dull, stupid sleep and encourage the fascist criminals. Each wants to be exonerated of guilt, each one continues on his way with the most placid, calm conscience. But he cannot be exonerated; he is guilty, guilty, guilty! ”
— 2nd leaflet of the White Rose.

“ Why do you allow these men who are in power to rob you step by step, openly and in secret, of one domain of your rights after another, until one day nothing, nothing at all will be left but a mechanised state system presided over by criminals and drunks? Is your spirit already so crushed by abuse that you forget it is your right - or rather, your moral duty - to eliminate this system? ”
— 3rd leaflet of the White Rose
 Those who believe that Patriotism is about your country right or wrong are no such thing.

For me it is loving your country but also admitting its wrongs and indeed being ashamed when its government and yes its people break the law or degenerate  and abuse other Peoples and Nations

Governments  and the Media who accuse those   who criticise   their failings of  "not being Patriotic" are  on dangerous ground .

Saturday, 24 June 2017

The wishes of the Islanders are paramount,

The government spent more than a £1bn and suffered the loss of British and Argentinian lives in the Falklands war, because it said that the wishes of the islanders were paramount, and that they should not be "betrayed". 
For many this was a case of rank  hypocrisy  when it came to the case of the Chagos Islands;  
Now after many years one of  the UK most recent crimes may at last see Justice finally  carried our
The BBC reported that 
 A dispute between the UK and Mauritius over disputed island territory in the Indian Ocean is to be referred to the International Court of Justice (ICJ).

The UN General Assembly voted by 94 countries to 15 that The Hague should examine the legal status of the Chagos Islands.
The former British colony used to be part of Mauritius but was detached in 1965 and is now home to a US airbase.The Foreign Office said it would be an "inappropriate" use of the ICJ."This is a disappointing outcome," a Foreign Office spokesman said: "Sovereignty of the British Indian Ocean Territory is clearly a matter for the UK and Mauritius to resolve ourselves."Taking this dispute to the International Court of Justice is an inappropriate use of the ICJ mechanism."Mauritius, which gained independence from Britain in 1968, argues that the UK broke international law when it separated off the islands before granting Mauritius its independence.

Officially part of the British Indian Ocean Territory, the Chagos were home to the Chagossians, a Bourbonnais Creole speaking people, for more than a century and a half until the United Kingdom evicted them between 1967 and 1973 to allow the United States to build a military base on Diego Garcia, the largest of the Chagos Islands. Since 1971, only the atoll of Diego Garcia is inhabited, and only by military and civilian contracted personnel.
Chagos map.PNG
On November 16, 2016, the UK Foreign Office maintained their ban on resettlement of the islands.] In response to this decision, the Prime Minister of Mauritius expressed his country's plan to advance the sovereignty dispute to the International Court of Justice.] The British Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson has sought Indian assistance for resolving the dispute involving UK, USA and Mauritius. India has maintained considerable influence in Mauritius through deep cultural and economic ties. While India has maintained that the matter of whether or not to proceed with the UN General Assembly move is a decision for the Mauritian government to make.
On 23 June 2017, the United Nations General Assembly (UNGA) voted in favour of referring the territorial dispute between Mauritius and the UK to the International Court of Justice (ICJ) in order to clarify the legal status of the Chagos Islands archipelago in the Indian Ocean. The motion was approved by a majority vote with 94 voting for and 15 against.

The Foreign Office said it did not recognise Mauritius's claim to sovereignty over the islands - but that it would return the islands when they were no longer needed for defence.
"We have committed to cede them to Mauritius when the territory is no longer required for defence purposes," the spokesman said."At present it plays an important role in regional and global security, helping to keep the UK, US and other allies, including Mauritius, safe."
Safe from whom?
The government said it would "robustly defend" its position ahead of the ICJ's decision, which would not be legally binding.
During the Blair=Brown years there was a small hope that justice for the Islanders would be met , but to no avail.
It would be encouraging if Labour were to back the case of the Islanders now,
Most EU countries abstained from the vote, which BBC diplomatic correspondent James Landale described as an "embarrassing diplomatic defeat" for the UK.
He said it signalled that Britain's diplomatic clout had waned after the vote for Brexit.
In 2015, the UK Supreme Court denied a legal challenge by former islanders to return to Chagos after being removed more than 40 years ago.
The court rejected claims that islanders suffered a "significant injustice" by being forcibly removed from their homeland.which seems to me one of the most ridiculous directions ever made  .
 What other reason can we find in these two treatments  of the Falk;amfs and Chargos other than one group is brown-skinned and the other white settlers?

Friday, 23 June 2017

Tories may have broken electoral expenses law again.



A Channel 4 News investigation has found. The Conservative Party contracted a secretive call centre during the election campaign which may have broken data protection and election laws,

An undercover reporter working for Channel 4 News secured work at Blue Telecoms, a firm in Neath, South Wales.

The report says


In an area plagued by unemployment and low wages, the call centre hired up to a hundred people on zero-hours contracts. For weeks, they contacted thousands of potential voters in marginal seats across the UK.
The investigation has uncovered what appear to be underhand and potentially unlawful practices at the centre, in calls made on behalf of the Conservative Party. These allegations include:● Paid canvassing on behalf of Conservative election candidates – banned under election law.● Political cold calling to prohibited numbers● Misleading calls claiming to be from an ‘independent market research company’ which does not apparently exist

Channel 4 News obtained evidence that at least ten key marginal seats were targeted by the call centre on election day. Calls were placed to voters in Caerphilly, Camarthen East, Ceredigion, Pontypridd, Torfaen, Newport West, Bridgend, Gower, Clywd South and Wrexham.

During election day, on the 8th of June, callers at Blue Telecoms were told that they would spend the day making calls on behalf of named Conservative parliamentary candidates in Wales.

Guidance from the Electoral Commission for candidates and agents says: ‘During the campaign, you must not…pay canvassers. Canvassing means trying to persuade an elector to vote for or against a particular candidate or party’

The candidates were named during the calls and, again, floating voters were subjected to key Conservative messages.


 Interestingly in some of these marginal seats Carmarthen East for example if the "Canvassers" stuck to the Corbyn script and not mentioned Plaid they may encouraged voters to vote Labour

Indeed as the result proved the Labour and Tory vote rose in nearly every constituency as Plaid was squeegeed.

The Tories may have wasted their money but they did manage to push the Two Party sytem, which would please the two Unionist parties.
Will this revelation make a difference ?

Well the Tories failed to win any of thee above seats but even if they did the Electoral Commission and the Crown Prosecution Service (CPS) have proved to be toothless over the Tories in particular when it comes to breaking electoral rules.

One Question remains is the Welsh example , the only one or have call centres in other parts of the UK? and ave other parties also done this?

I suspect that because all parties sail close to the wind when it comes to electoral expenses, they are not going to pour over opponents declarations and highlight irregularities.

But is it not time somebody did and we had a proper audit after the election ,

Canada has the same electoral system as us and Wikipedia supply s similar results page for each constituency .

But with one  stark difference as becomes cleat when we lok at Prime Ministers Trudeau result
PartyCandidateVotes%∆%Expenditures
LiberalJustin Trudeau26,39151.98+14.05$129,821.55
New DemocraticAnne Lagacé Dowson13,13225.87-3.6$111,652.95
Bloc QuébécoisMaxime Claveau6,18212.18-12.71$19,007.27
ConservativeYvon Vadnais2,3904.71-0.33$5,649.91
GreenDanny Polifroni1,4432.84+0.95$82.71
IndependentChris Lloyd5050.99$5,759.41
RhinocerosTommy Gaudet3230.64
IndependentKim Waldron1590.31$2,101.20
Marxist–LeninistPeter Macrisopoulos1420.28-0.25
No affiliationBeverly Bernardo1030.2
Total valid votes/Expense limit50,770100.0$213,091.49
Total rejected ballots698
Turnout51,468
Eligible voters78,64

As you can see the candidates "declared" expenditure is included
how accurate this is may be open to question  but it would be useful to see a similar  practise for UK results.

At least we would have some idea just how much a Parties expenditure affects the result.