Author Archives: johnengland55

Don’t Meddle

Posted on by

During his recent visit to London, President Obama announced that the United Kingdom would be better off staying in the European Union and that if we left we would be “at the back of the queue” as far as trading with the USA is concerned.

This obviously delighted our pro-EU Prime Minister but certainly did the opposite as far as opponents of the EU are concerned, several of whom directed some pretty sharp comments at the President by way of a response.

It’s not really a good idea for a foreign statesman to meddle in the affairs of another country, no matter how well-intentioned his motives may be. I wonder what the response would be if a foreign leader stood before the cameras in Washington DC and, however politely, suggested to the Americans how they should run their country?

Actually, I don’t wonder at all, I know what the response would be; the speaker would be greeted with a not-so-polite suggestion as to where he could stick his microphone, and quite right too!

Happy Saint George’s Day!

Posted on by

 

 

This royal throne of kings, this scepter’d isle,
This earth of majesty, this seat of Mars,
This other Eden, demi-paradise,
This fortress built by Nature for herself
Against infection and the hand of war,
This happy breed of men, this little world,
This precious stone set in the silver sea,
Which serves it in the office of a wall,
Or as a moat defensive to a house,
Against the envy of less happier lands,
This blessed plot, this earth, this realm, this England.

(Taken from the speech by John of Gaunt, King Richard The Second, Act 2 Scene 1 by William Shakespeare who was born on this day 1564 and died 52 years later on the same day, 1616).

 

Message to the Undecided

Posted on by

According to the media many people have yet to decide which way they are going to vote in the European Union referendum on June 23rd.

To listen to politicians both for and against the EU is to be bombarded by facts and figures based on speculation, surmise and, predominantly in the case of the pro-EU politicians, scaremongering. Nobody knows for sure what the financial cost will be one way or the other and frankly, the cost is irrelevant, as are the arguments on safety and security

The only relevant issue in this debate, and one that few have highlighted, is the issue of freedom. We, the electorate have to decide whether we want our country to determine its own future or have decisions made for us by a federation of European states.

As an independent United Kingdom we are governed by the political parties we vote into power and who we can vote out again after 5 years should we be unhappy with them. It is called democracy and accountable government. No such democracy or accountability exists in the EU where we are governed by unelected members of the European Commission accountable to nobody.

It may well be that we will be financially better off by staying in the EU (a moot point) but so what? You cannot put a price on freedom and, throughout history, peoples and countries (including our own) have fought to gain or protect their independence and freedom. We must not allow ourselves to be bought and sold on the whim of political idealists or fat-cat businessmen getting rich from trading in the EU. Freedom is price-less.

Here is a useful analogy for those yet to decide. If you were an animal would you prefer to be one which is fed, watered and cared for in captivity with a third party responsible for your welfare? Or would you rather be outside of the secure fence, free to come and go as you please, making your decisions freely and with sole responsibility for your own destiny? I know which one I would rather be.

Drones

Posted on by

Yesterday a British Airways passenger plane was struck by a drone as it approached London’s Heathrow airport. Fortunately nobody was hurt, but the incident brings home the real danger of something feared by the aviation industry for some time.

This was said to be the first such incident in the UK and it is unlikely to be the last. There is always the possibility of a carelessly-operated drone accidentally colliding with a plane and usually there is unlikely to be any life-threatening damage, but what if terrorists decided to use an explosives-filled drone to target aircraft? What can be done to keep aircraft safe?

Firstly, the aviation authorities and forces of law and order have to maintain and probably increase vigilance. Secondly, we have to copy the US and make it illegal to own a drone unless it is registered with the police and marked with an official number making it traceable. Thirdly, whilst the use of a drone near airports is already punishable by imprisonment we have to look at further ways to extend criminal aspects of drone use.

None of the above will stop a determined terrorist however and all we can do is hope that our military and police intelligence services are good enough to prevent disaster. That and prayer.

Dead Right

Posted on by

It was reported this week that Thailand,  facing one of the world’s worst records of drink-driving,  has passed new legislation compelling convicted drivers to work in mortuaries and to physically handle dead bodies to try and drive home (no pun intended) the seriousness of the offence.

Talk about the punishment fitting the crime!  Perhaps the Thai government will now compel car thieves to clean and valet cars unpaid for months at a time or require those convicted of assault to go ten rounds with a professional boxer.

Maybe persons convicted of indecent exposure will be forced to expose themselves, fully naked, in a commercial fridge-freezer until they turn blue or something drops off! The list is almost endless.

Spellin an Grammer

Posted on by

I wer talkin to a mate a mine the other day wile we was in pub an I sed wot a sham it wer that alot of peepel thees days ave got no ideer abowt spellin punchyuasian or grammer an that he agrede an sed your ded rite john so tru an I sed I fine it reelly frusst…furst….frut…… o bolloks  anoyin  lol an it gets on me nervs ave they got no cloo abowt that stuf didunt they doo anythin at skool other than fool abowt at the bak of the klass not payin attenshun an gettin in trubbel with the teecher an get no educashun I reelly do dispair an am sory for avin a rant an I cud of sed mor but it gets me goin big tyme aneeway not to wurree ave a gud day wont yer

Tax Avoidance – Again

Posted on by

Every few months a new episode of the same story appears in the media. This week we’re back to the hoary old chestnut of tax avoidance and the “scandal” of wealthy men and women arranging their affairs to save on personal income or corporation tax.

It happens throughout the world and offshore tax avoidance schemes seem to be as popular and thriving as they ever were. In many cases, no laws are being broken and the smart folk are simply utilising smart accountants and the infrastructure available to them.

It may be immoral for the chief executive officer of a large company to pay less tax than the woman who cleans his office or the bloke on the factory floor who assembles the parts for the machinery that has made the CEO’s fortune, but it is not illegal.

It should be illegal of course but to make it so would require a change of law so that tax avoidance, which is legal, is instead proscribed as tax evasion, which is not. That would require a huge change in political will however and, no matter how much we all rant about the unfairness of it all, it is unlikely to change.

Many of the targets of any proposed change in legislation are the paymasters of our leading political parties and politicians are as likely to bite the hand that feeds as a turkey is likely to vote for Christmas.

British Steel

Posted on by

The staggering collapse of the British steel industry, like coal, formerly one of the pillars of all that made this country wealthy and prosperous, has been painful to behold. Like anybody else, I feel desperately sorry for those people who have lost their jobs through no fault of their own.

The fact that for the last few years our steel industry has been run by a foreign company, Tata of India, was initially hard to digest but welcome nonetheless if it kept the industry active and people in work. Sadly, it hasn’t worked out and, following the loss of thousands of jobs at the turn of the year, it was announced last week that thousands more will follow on the back of losses of £1 million per day.

The main reason is said to be the flooding of the market by cheap Chinese steel with which the West cannot possibly compete. There are those who say that our Government must intervene and save the jobs, a familiar refrain but one that has to stack up economically. In spite of the wishes of the Far Left it cannot just be left to the government to keep its citizens in full time employment. The lessons of the former Soviet Union clearly demonstrate that.

However, there is something that any government can do and that is to tax foreign imports so harshly that the home market can flourish once more, even if it means a more expensive product for the consumer. In the USA the steel industry faces a similar problem and the government there has responded with taxes in excess of 250% on foreign steel to try to protect the American industry and its workers.

Our government should do the same thing although the problem we have is that we are bound by the rules of the European Union. It is up to them to deal with the problem, meaning that British jobs are at the mercy of the unelected mandarins of Brussels. Another factor to be considered when voting in the June referendum.

Mere Semantics

Posted on by

There’s evidently been a bit of a to do Down Under following the decision by lecturers at the University of New South Wales in Sydney to no longer refer to Captain Cook’s voyage of exploration and its aftermath as a “discovery” but as an “invasion”. Some have accused the University of  political correctness but I’m not so sure.

I think we in the West can occasionally be guilty of viewing our past through rose-tinted spectacles although it is a natural human trait to try and paint ourselves in the best possible light. Using the British as an example (though it applies equally to France, Holland, Germany, the USA or any other imperialist power) we were taught that when things happened to us it was bad and when we did it to others it was good.

Thus, the Romans did not “discover” Britain, they “invaded” it. The Vikings did not “discover” the British Isles, they “conquered” large parts of the land following their sea-borne raids. However when the British sailed across the world to Australia or parts of Africa and then settled the land following their military defeat of indigenous peoples it was referred to as “discovery”.

It is no more than mere semantics with different words used to describe the same action and effect. It is also rank hypocrisy and political correctness has got nothing to do with it.

American Service

Posted on by

As most travellers to the USA will tell you, service in restaurants, cafes and bars tends to be of a pretty high standard and perhaps too much so for British sensibilities. Tourists from the old country can be a little overwhelmed, as the following encounter in an American diner nicely illustrates –

Waitress (enthusiastically) – “Hi there! My name is Britney and I’m pleased to be your server today. What can I get you?”

British Tourist (somewhat less excitedly) – “I’d like a hamburger please”

W. “Certainly and how would you like it cooked?”

BT.“Eh?”

W. “Would you like it well-done, medium or rare?”

BT. (thinks – I ordered a burger, not a steak) “Er, medium, I suppose”

W. “Sure and would you like cheese with that?”

BT. (If I wanted cheese I would have ordered a bl***y cheeseburger!) “Yeah, ok.”

W. “What kind of cheese would you like?”

BT. “What?”

W. “We’ve got Swiss, American or Provolone”

BT. (What the h*** is Provolone?) “Well, since I’m in America I’ll have American, please.”

W. “Great choice! What kind of bread would you like?”

BT. (What the …?) “Oh, I’ll have it on a roll please.”

W. “We’ve got white, brown, wheat, kaiser or reuben.”

BT. (Give me strength!) “Er, wheat please.”

W. “That would be my choice! Oh, and it comes with lettuce, tomato and onion.”

BT. “Lovely, thanks.”

W. “Would you like fries or, for an extra dollar, sweet potato fries?”

BT. (For F**k’s sake, just bring me the bl***y burger.) “Oh, yes, I’ll have the sweet potato fries please.”

W. “Awesome. Coming right up! What would you like to drink?  We’ve got coffee, sweet tea, unsweetened tea and….”

BT. (You’re taking the p***!) “No, no thanks. That’ll be all thank you very much.”