How encouraging is this MORI poll for David Davis?
June 17th, 2008
Nearly three electors in five say they would vote for him
A new Ipsos-MORI telephone poll for the Independent this morning has what seem to be contradictory conclusions over David Davis’s move last week.
On the one hand the national survey found that respondents would give him strong support if they were able to vote in the forthcoming by-election. But on the issue of whether he was right or not there’s a different conclusion.
In the poll carried out from Friday to Sunday respondents were asked how they would vote if there if they lived in Davis’s Haltemprice and Howden constituency. A total of 35% said they would support Davis against 23% who said they would not. The balance was made of “wouldn’t votes” or “don’t knows”.
So of those expressing an opinion on voting Davis was ahead by 57% to 33%.
On a second question of whether he was right to resign his seat the split was 39% in favour to 48% against - but this includes the views of those who say they wouldn’t vote.
This is a strange poll in that the main question, what would you do if you could vote in Davis’s seat, is completely hypothetical. It is also, I think, the first political poll to be published by Ipsos-MORI since their methodology review was initiated after the London Mayoral election. I am looking forward to seeing the detailed data.
Mike Smithson
MessageSpace Advertising
People have mixed feelings. They don’t want the Party political system to unravel with individual MPs rushing off and resigning in droves. But they like an occasional one coming out and attacking the system now and again, to keep the insiders on their toes.
People are telling Davis that he’ll get away with his ‘effrontery’ on this occasion, but they’re flagging other potential imitators to be careful. Voters could tire of such antics very quickly if they became a habit. But right now Davis has done something interesting and useful. Democracy is in need of a boost, with Brown bottling all elections and referendums, and he’s giving it one.
Brown has created a unique situation. He doesn’t trust the British people. And they in turn don’t trust him. The situation is ripe for attack.
I was going to make a long post and then I realised that Tapestry had said what I thought.
Nobody is sure of whether Davis should have done this, but now its done, they are backing him.
What I find most significant is the very large percentage who say that they would not vote at all. They are not against him - they don’t feel that strongly, probably recognising the importance of the issue.
I suspect the continuing contamination of the Conservative brand has something to do with it.
David will need to play his campaign very carefully.
3 - “I suspect the continuing contamination of the Conservative brand has something to do with it.”
In your dreams, sunshine!
3 - If the Conservative brand was still contaminated then the general opinion polls would not show the Conservatives up to 20 points ahead. I suspect that the reason there are large don’t knows/won’t votes is that it is a complex area. Both arguments have emotional pull and to be honest the genuine case for either hasn’t really been put.
O/T - the economy. Is the independence of the Bank of England effectively resulting in the Govt following the failed monetarist policies of the early eighties.
Prior to independence the Govt effectively had the choice of two unpopular means to cope with inflation - tax and interest rates. They couldn’t duck the decision and (except when dogma said otherwise - as with early eighties Thatcherism) were able to raise the one most appropriate to the situation.
We now have a situation that Independence has creates a political imbalance between the two measures. Taxes have effectively been removed from the equation and the Bank in charge of inflation. With only one tool at their equation they have real problems.
And David Davis website is live!
http://www.daviddavisforfreedom.com/
3 - How do you know how many have said that they won’t vote? It probably isn’t any different to anything Mori have found in the past (subject to changes in their methodology).
6. Tax has been ‘removed from the equation’ because of Government shortcomings (”failing to fix the roof when the sun was shining”), not because of Bank independence.
re 3. The 33% non-voting is typical of the figures coming from pollsters doing national voting intention surveys. Remember that at the last general election the proportion of non-voters was nearly 40%.
33% not voting isn’t particularly high matched against the 30% or so who didn’t in last two general elections but previously Mori had a 1 to 10 likelihood to vote rating - what are they using here to rate “will vote”/”wont vote”? Are the 67% who say they will vote the equivalent of the certain to vote category used previously or is there a more sophisticated filter?
11 meant to say against the 40% or so who didn’t vote in last two elections.
3/10. If David Davis gets a 67% turnout, I’m sure he’d be absolutely delighted. I would think the actual figure will be a little over half that.
There is probably an element of the ‘public vote distortion’ in these figures - people want to be seen to be saying the right thing. That may or may not affect the headline split - there is a genuine case to be made on both sides, although only one side is being made - but respondents are likely to feel a pressure to say that they would actually vote.
On a slightly different note, I have to take slight issue with Mike’s headline. Three voters in five haven’t said they’d vote for him: a touch over one in three have. It’s true that the poll says that three in five of those expressing an opinion agree with Davis (though even there, Mike’s figures are out - they should be 59/41), but the don’t knows may also vote, so even if ‘voters’ are defined as those who do vote, rather than those who can, that would reduce his support among voters to 48%, with 33% against and 19% don’t knows.
I suspect the figures suggest that the block supporting 42 days is broad but shallow. Those against hold theirs views much more strongly.
The Tory brand is still contaminated; but for far fewer people. 47% in the opinion polls suggests that the vast majority of people can now vote for them (this figure is no glass ceiling and we can expect Cameron to go higher).
DD’s website is rubbish; I know they’ve only had a few days, but honestly!!! Still, I have sent my cheque to support the campaign but did almost object to writing it out to a Con Assoc Fighting Fund. They ought to change that ASAP.
Naturally all political ‘brands’ carry a degree of contamination with a portion of the population but can we seriously say that the Tory brand is more contaminated than Labour? I doubt it.
15 agree with you on the website - they should get the backBoris team on the case!
Can’t see much wrong with the poll’s findings. What it appears to say is that a majority agree with DD about the ‘liberty’ question but a majority also feel it was the wrong way to go about it.
A harmless poll with common sense findings.
It was 33% “won’t vote or don’t know” not 33% “won’t vote”
A source in the Obama campaign tells me that they’re making a real stab for Georgia, with plans to invest a lot of money and talent there for a state that doesn’t look too competitive. This suggests to me (although the source didn’t say this) that Nunn could be a serious frontrunner in the VP picks.
I have a feeling that, perforce, David Davis’s campaign is gonna turn into a referendum on Europe. Partly coz it is gonna dominate the news up to his by-election, whatever; but also because it fits, all too neatly, with the Davis the Folk Hero theme: of authoritarian elites versus the little guy.
Things are now so bad, Europewise, even the previously sensible europhiles, such as they are, seem to be losing it.
Here is the normally bearable Steve Richards in today’s Indy:
“It is now the view of pragmatically pro-European cabinet ministers in Britain, and senior Liberal Democrats, that a referendum on Europe can never be won in any country at any point in the future. I agree with them. If Ireland turns away in spite of all the obvious benefits it has enjoyed from membership of Europe, no other country will vote “yes” on any Europe-related issue…
Ireland should be removed from the EU if it continues to insist on subjecting each treaty to a referendum campaign. It makes democratic politics unworkable in Europe.”
So there you have it. Again. There will be no more referendums because they are unwinnable; but that doesn’t mean European integration will stop - just that we, the people, won’t ever be consulted on it. Ever again.
And any country that dares to get in the way will be kicked out.
I love Steve’s comment, that the pure expression of democracy in referendums makes “democratic politics unworkable”.
I think he sees the definition of democratic in the same sense as “The German Democratic Republic”.
Here’s a link for the Steve Richards piece, just to prove he really did say that shameful, unbelievable crap.
http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion/commentators/steve-richards/steve-richards-dont-be-fooled-ndash-these-heroic-campaigns-only-make-our-democracy-even-more-fragile-848514.html
21 - I am beginning to wonder if certain Europhile cheerleaders have been forcibly lobotomized, or do they seriously believe the crap they peddle.
21. Great quote. Referendums make ‘democracy’ unworkable. Again, a pure expression of the true beliefs of the euro elite and their various hangers-on.
The purpose of the EU is to emasculate national electorates and replace democratic self-government with a bureaucratic despotism. And now EU lickspittles are openly admitting this.
SeanT Steve Richards piece is one of the most anti-democratic articles I have ever read.
Shame on him.
See that Jack straw decided on an anti-Tory thrust in his proposals on campaign funding. Key is limit of £12,000 from October through to GE per candidate with fig leaf of “limiting” unions donations to individual MPs or candidates - at £12,000 (could be missing something but if there’s a limit of £12,000 isn’t that a result anyway?).
http://www.guardian.co.uk/politics/2008/jun/17/partyfunding
Its got no relation at all to Hayden proposals purely an attempt to stop the Conservatives marginal seats campaign. Expect the new Conservative Government in 2010 will almost certainly change rules on union donations now.
23. You’ve been able to hear opinions like this - and worse - for a long time, in private. They are genuinely held, repellent as they are. The amazing thing is that they are now being openly touted.
Truly jaw-dropping stuff from Steve Richards. To think it is one thing, but to put it on the page…
The Eurocrats must really be hurting.
Heh!
23. Thing is, we eurosceptics have been saying this for years - that the EU is basically and essentially undemocratic, that it is a conspiracy against the popular will, however benign it seems, and that its cheerleaders are fanatical Federalists - who only act nice when they get their way.
For years we sceptics have been dismissed as hysterical, as obsessives, as paranoid. Sometimes I even wondered myself if I was imagining it all - that the EU wasn’t that bad.
Now we eurosceptics have been proved totally right. If anything the situation is worse than we imagined. The europhiles are more ruthless and arrogant than anyone suspected. Their naked desire to crush dissent is extraordinary.
This vindication doesn’t give me any pleasure. Because these horrible people are still trying to destroy national democracy - and they might still win.
Well done Ted - good call on the semantics. I see from DD’s site that he’s using ‘British liberty’ and, though I’ve not searched it thoroughly, it looks like he’s avoiding the term, ‘civil liberties’.
“On 12 June, I resigned from Parliament to take a stand against the sustained assault on British liberty.”
28 - What puzzles me is what the hell they hope to acheive? Admitting that they are a bunch of undemocratic scoundrels is hardly going to make those of a sceptic hue jump ship and go ‘jolly good thing this Europe lark’. I am seething at this arrogance but I suppose the silver lining is at least some of them are beginning to be somewhat honest about the travesty that is the EU.
Conservative peers try to stall Lisbon treaty Bill as Ireland seeks more time
“A last-ditch attempt to stop British ratification of the Lisbon treaty was being planned in the Lords last night as EU foreign ministers vowed not to let Ireland’s “no” referendum kill it.
The Conservatives will table an unusual motion today urging that the third reading of the European Reform Treaty Bill, due tomorrow afternoon, be delayed, probably until the autumn.
They are seeking the support of Liberal Democrat, crossbench and even rebel Labour peers to back the measure, arguing that they would not be stopping ratification altogether but delaying it while Ireland and Europe decide what to do next.
David Miliband, the Foreign Secretary, flew back from the foreign ministers’ meeting yesterday to tell the Commons that the Government believed ratification should continue as planned.
The Lords motion is likely to be tabled today by Lord Howell of Guildford, the former Cabinet minister and chief foreign affairs spokesman. It is being put forward as a way of peers stopping short of killing the Bill by voting against the third reading, but responding to the Irish decision.
Ireland pleaded for time yesterday to work out if it could save the treaty. Ministers from the eight member nations yet to pass the treaty were urged by their colleagues to continue their ratification processes, which will pile pressure on Dublin to try a second referendum next year”
Richards’ Brechtian view appears to be devoid of irony, “Ireland should be removed from the EU if it continues to insist on subjecting each treaty to a referendum campaign. It makes democratic politics unworkable in Europe.”
Where are the checks and balances on the EU’s directives? Where is the scrutiny?
Where is the democracy in the way the EU formulate laws, and policy? There is something ironic, if not chilling about the way that an ‘unelected’ British Prime Minister appears to want to transfer more powers and responsibilities to a body which appears to have a rather weak commitment to democratic scrutiny or oversight. The response of EU leaders so far does little to suggest that they are serious about winning over sceptics, if anything their stance is unsettling, contemptuous and a receipe for profound damage for the whole EU project. One can only wonder if the likes of Richards, Mardell, Brown and Milliband have actually read or understood the Treaty of Lisbon.
28. This horrible euro-arrogance also weaves in, quite noticeably, with some of the anti-democratic bile poured out by the left following BoJo’s victory.
Remember how the Islingtonians reacted to that. The outrage, the affronted hauteur - the sense that the people had “got it wrong”, the quote that “democracy is a sham” - just because Londoners had dared to disobey their liberal-left rulers - and elect a Tory. Horrible horrible stuff.
The mask has slipped from the Left in recent weeks. I wonder if they really believe in democracy at all. They are certainly the nasty party now.
Gordon Brown’s futuristic eco-towns to fine residents for driving out of city limits
“Motorists living in Gordon Brown’s futuristic green communities face fines for driving their cars out of town, under radical proposals being drawn up by ministers, The Times has learnt.
Residents of the largely pedestrianised eco-towns may also be expected to park their cars at the outskirts and walk or cycle to their homes, up to ten minutes away.
These are among possible ways being discussed with ministers to meet a government target to cut car use in eco-towns by half. Detailed planning proposals will be published next month, a senior Whitehall official said.
The proposals could include a fee for a permanent car space at the edge of town, charges for driving out at peak congestion times, or penalties for taking a car out of town above a set number of agreed journeys.”
All I get from clicking on DD’s website is an advert for the server.
Getting ready for the Eurosceptic onrush, I have a lot of sympathy for the Steve Richards position although would agree that he overdoes it a bit in suggesting that the Irish are “removed”!
First, it is not inconsistent to say that referenda make democracy unworkable (or at least very difficult). That is the experience in California and can be seen in opinion polls when people say that they want more money for health, education and other goodies….and tax cuts. Political parties aren’t ideal but it forces people competing for power to put together a comprehensive set of proposals which at least has to be reasonably consistent. Referenda allow (and indeed encourage) people to vote without any careful reflection about the consequences.
Secondly, there is a serious point about Europe that it would be impossible (and probably always would have been) to get a treaty passed in every single country in a referendum. It would be like having to get a law passed in every single county of the UK only worse. Inevitably, any treaty is a compromise which will leave some people unhappy - for example, if it repatriated most powers back to nation states, some other countries would inevitably vote against it. If we are to have referenda on treaties as opposed to questions such as “join the Euro or not”, it really has to be on the basis of “Do you agree with the treaty or do you want to leave the European Union?”.
Finally, I may be alone in thinking that this is more problematic for the Tories than Labour. Unless everyone just gets fed up, in all likelihood, there will be another treaty to again rehash some of the same administration issues. By the time that this is finally negotiated, the Tories may well be in power and will have people jumping up and down demanding a referendum. Of course, they won’t want to give it because once in power, they will know full well that losing it would be a bit of disaster.
34 “some of the anti-democratic bile poured out by the left following BoJo’s victory.”
I wonder how Arabella Weir’s hunger strike is going? Look on the bright side, dear - no more “does my bum look big in this?” jibes.
(Although, come to think of it, I beleive she also threatened to throw herself under a horse at Ascot. Ladies Day would be very apropriate, Arabella….)
35 - Oh dear god, and they are not anti-car? How in the blazes would it work anyway? so you have to walk 45 minutes to your car to drive to the train station to commute to work? What about family life?
38 Apologies for the typos - post in haste, repent at leisure.
A preview facility would be a real advance, guys….
20 re Nunn for VP.
Nunn’s 69 years old. Wouldn’t that slightly take away from the contrast between the old and the new?
It really is incredible. Do these guys live so up their own back sides that they do not realise what thay are writing:
“Ireland should be removed from the EU if it continues to insist on subjecting each treaty to a referendum campaign. It makes democratic politics unworkable in Europe.”
That really has to take the biscuit!
37 - Amendments to the American Constitution have to be passed by every state, a system which has worked for over 200 years and there seems to be no demand to change it. And if laws had to be passed by every county in Britain, wouldn’t that be an incentive to law-makers to ensure what they did had public support?
Obviously, M in Tokyo is one of those people to whom everything (even a 40% poll lead) is a problem to the Tories. Isn’t it more likely that under a future Conservative administration the probable result of a Euro-referendum is more likely to be in tune with the party’s own views?
37. Reads like a spoof, but…
39 Sounds like these eco-towns are going to be for the massive numbers of unemployed they secretly expect - those who only need to travel by bicycle once a month to sign on…
Making laws behind closed doors as practised by autocrats and politiburos….
42 - Ireland’s Constitution demands a referendum on EU treaties. To change the Constitution also requires a referendum… er, I think I see the problem here…
37 - Setting up false dichotomy’s might work for you the EU and a plentitude of other scoundrels on the make. The idea that the choice is Lisbon or out is ridiculous. And frankly we were told before the Constitution was booted out that the EU would fall apart without the changes, if only, but it seems to be working ok. The cogs aren’t zinging all around the place.
Come on guys! Referendums suck! Representative democracy is our most cherished civic acheivement - let’s not fritter it away by allowing these things to take over, just because our current representatives happen to be a bunch of wimps!
Just a little reminder why people should NOT vote for David Davis on any account on any occasion. he was in it up to his neck along with Blair, Brown and Cameron:
http://www.thefirstpost.co.uk/42443,opinion,iraq-is-the-shameful-secret-in-our-cellar
36
Works fine for me
43-I think it’s 2/3 of states within a certain timeframe.
I agree with the great Keith Waterhouse (yesterday’s Mail) that Parkinson’s law will be operating, and probably already is on the time limit for holding suspects.
You’ll remember that Professor Parkinson decreed that work expands to fit the time available to do it. He was referring to the practises of the Civil Service, but our police are perfect for the role. If they have 28 days, they will shove the files aside for a couple of weeks and maybe galvanise themselves as they approach the deadline.
Six weeks! Time for a holiday and to see to one or two other deadlines.
19 - No, read it again. It is 33% won’t vote and 9% don’t know.
Do you normally get that high a figure for “won’t vote”? Mike correctly points out at 10 that non-voting is around 40% so 33% is not at all surprising. But I thought people were quite dishonest about that question usually (or at least a lot of people who fully intend to vote suddenly find some very important hair to wash on the day)? 33% seems quite a high stated abstention rate.
37. Good post, except for a couple of minor points:
1. The countries of the EU are not like counties of the UK. Yet.
2. You say the only choices when it comes to referendums are: Yes or Quit. That’s your position, yes? Interesting new slogan for the next referendum in Ireland.
3. Indeed Ireland will have to leave anyway, by yours and Steve Richard’s reckoning. Coz their constitution demands referendums, which are now no longer to be allowed. So the Irish must go.
4. The Tories will stick by their promise to offer referendums if there are Treaty changes. Not everyone is as putridly cynical as you or the Labour party.
5. The Tories won’t give away powers so a referendum won’t be required. They will try and take powers back. And if they have a referendum on that they will win.
6. No, this Europe thing is worse for Labour than the Tories, because Labour are being revealed as hateful and arrogant liars and the Tories are coming across as decent democratic patriots.
As I say, apart from that, good post.
49. In 1830 certain people were saying the same thing about the ‘perfect’ constitution that existed then, complete as it was with rotten boroughs with a handful of voters, a bizarre geographical distribution of seats, and widespread bribery and intimidation at election time.
Over time, elites subvert governmental systems for their own ends, and the same has been happening with so-called ‘representative democracy’ which increasingly means a system that ‘represents’ the interests and values of a narrow self-selecting political class, not those of the wider public.
Referenda are an essential check on this process.
49
Except that representative democracy has been so corrupted by the present incumbents that it is effectively now worthless.
You cannot emasculate our system of government in the way Labour has done over the last 10 years and then start whining when people say it no longer works.
Until such times as we return to the system as it was devised with its proper checks and balances, Labour haas no right to moan if people turn to other methods to achieve their ends.
Darling’s got to get the lavender notepaper out. Inflation has risen to 4.3% (CPI 3.3%)
Davis still not resigned I see. I wonder whether he will have by the time I’m back from Poland. Hope those who are going have a wonderful time at the pb.com barbecue this week.
55 Oops, you used the “patriot” word. You’ll wake Emily Scharnhorst-Tirpitz from her slumbers…
49 - I agree in part and have some sympathy with the Burkean view or representation. However our representatives have a duty to represent our views tempered by their judgement. Increasingly our representatives seem to wilfully vote against the view of those who sent them as a representative, that cannot possibly be right. Sometimes as last week our representatives judgment seems to be for sale.
Reading that Steve Richards article, its beyond parody.
“But what passes for heroic democratic engagement is often the opposite. If they have any choice in the matter, a referendum is a device proposed by leaders only when they are certain they can win. Conversely, it is used by voters to cast their verdict on a variety of subjects often unrelated to the single issue they are supposed to be voting on. Referendum campaigns are fuelled by hysteria whipped up in order to create an atmosphere of fear.”
Straight out of the Gordon Brown school of democracy!
Offer the public a referendum on the Constitution for political expediency, tinker round the edges and call it a Treaty to then renege on that promise. But what ever you do, don’t ask the public their opinion because they might not agree with you and that is bad for democracy, even worse they will vote for reasons completely different from those proposed by the government. I particular like the bit about them fuelling whipped up hysteria and creating fear.
Is that how we are describing debate and the airing of opposing views these days?
As Frank Fisher said in that Guardian article yesterday.
“This Westminster media bubble stifles debate, it excludes innovation, it entrenches established power and feeds partisan reporting. It is as guilty as the painfully orthodox and power-hungry politicians of corrupting and devaluing our democratic process. In failing to transmit and understand the concerns of ordinary people, it weakens any claim to sovereignty Westminster might have, and thereby strengthens any claims outside it. Simply put, it’s dull, dumb, and it’s pissing people off.”
30 Perhaps of interest that there’s no use of the term ‘civil liberty’ or ‘civil liberties’ at all on DD’s site. So a bit of ‘civil liberties’ rebranding going on there.
O/T
UK rate of inflation reported to be 3.3%.
If you believe that you’ll believe anything.
NuLabour set for new record opinion poll lows after economic shambles
Good Morning Campers.
……………………….
New Washington Post/ABC News Poll
McCain 45% .. Obama 49%
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2008/06/16/AR2008061602690.html?hpid=topnews&sid=ST2008061700079
43 Amendments to the US constitution are ratified by state legislatures but not by referenda.
56 EWR, great opportunity for debate there, but on one thing I am intransigent: “referendum” is a gerundive, and cannot have “referenda” as a plural. Referendums, please!
archroy@43: “Amendments to the American Constitution have to be passed by every state, a system which has worked for over 200 years and there seems to be no demand to change it.”
That’s not what Wikipedia says. Is it wrong?
“The authors of the Constitution were clearly aware that changes would be necessary from time to time if the Constitution was to endure and cope with the effects of the anticipated growth of the nation. However, they were also conscious that such change should not be easy, lest it permit ill-conceived and hastily passed amendments. Balancing this, they also wanted to ensure that an overly rigid requirement of unanimity would not block action desired by the vast majority of the population. Their solution was to devise a dual process by which the Constitution could be altered.[13]
Amending the Constitution is a two-part process: amendments must be proposed and then they must be ratified. Amendments can be proposed one of two ways. The only way that has been used to date is through a two-thirds majority vote in both houses of Congress. Alternatively, two-thirds of the legislatures of the States can call a Constitutional Convention to consider one or more amendments. This second method has never been used, and it is unclear exactly how, in practice, such a Constitutional Convention would work.
Regardless of how the amendment is proposed, the amendment must be approved by three-fourths of states, a process called ratification. Depending on the amendment, this requires either the state legislatures or special state conventions to approve the amendment by simple majority vote. Amendments generally go to state legislatures to be ratified, only the Twenty-first Amendment called for special state conventions.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_Constitution
(PS. In case anyone gets confused, I should mention that I’m a different person to “M in Tokyo”, although I’m in the same place and had been planning to make the same point s/he just posted. Must be something in the water…)
How can NuLabour carry on with these damning statistics.
“Bottler” Brown’s days are well and truly numbered after theis shocker
National Statistics site has finally been updated:
http://www.statistics.gov.uk/cci/nugget.asp?id=19
May: CPI up to 3.3%, RPI rises to 4.3%
63 “UK rate of inflation reported to be 3.3%.
If you believe that you’ll believe anything.”
The reason that inflation feels so much higher is that housing/food/fuel/travel costs
- the essentials of modern living - are all rising so much faster than the other components of the index that people have no money left to buy. So, yes, maybe clothes and white goods and electicals and bicycle repair kits are coming down in price - so what? Folks have already cut them out of their expenditure. That is why inflation is hurting more than the Government thinks it should. And if 80% of what you have to spend your money on is going up at 10% - 12%, of course people think the inflation number is being fiddled.
Over at CiF
Getting from ‘no’ to ‘yes’
“Europe must now work with Ireland to resolve its objections to the Lisbon Treaty”
“Ireland has said “no”, but there are 26 other EU member states in Europe whose opinion matters too. It is inconceivable that all of the others will simply say “too bad - one country has said ‘No’ to the package as it stands, so let’s forget reform and stick with the current system for ever more”.
All member states want reform. Even the ‘No’ campaigners in Ireland claimed they want to negotiate a better package. So, what is to be done? First, Ireland must have a profound internal debate to identify precisely what it doesn’t like about the Lisbon Treaty. Presumably it is not the extra powers for parliaments, nor the clearer focus on combating climate change, but some other aspects.”
67. Another person posting from Tokyo? Or is it the same one?
Seriously though these references to the US are very telling. What the europhiles are saying to us is that the EU should be a United States of Europe, not a grouping of nation states.
So once again, they are now admitting what they have previously denied or obfuscated about. At last we are getting an open debate - let’s take it to the people and see who comes out on top, shall we?
63
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/7458209.stm
Can anyone explain how the real inflation rate RPI has only gone up .1%
Does anyone beleve these stats?
72 MM just seen ur post at 69. How right you are!
The gangrenous stench of Steve Richards-style europhilia has even reached the equable climes of Thailand. This piece, by the ex Danish Foreign Minister, appeared in “The Nation” here in Bangkok, this morning.
http://tinyurl.com/6moz42
The sub-headline rather gives the game away. “Ireland should do the rest of Europe a favour and withdraw from the European Union.”
But my favourite passage appears a coupla paragraphs down:
“It is a pity the Irish - and their partners - did not learn the lesson from Ireland’s rejection of the Treaty of Nice seven years ago. Then as now, only a minority of voters bothered to vote, and a mere 54 per cent of those who did participate, then as now, voted no. A year later, a new referendum approved the Treaty, after it became clear that Ireland’s EU membership was at stake…
The unfortunate Irish tradition for referenda should have been addressed after that experience.”
Lovely. Leaving aside the barefaced lie - actually a majority of the Irish electorate turned out to vote last week - you have to admire the boldness of the final sentence.
The “unfortunate Irish tradition for referenda should have been addressed after that experience”.
Naughty, naughty Ireland, for having a constitution that enforces popular democracy! Don’t you know this is no longer allowed?
Bad, bad Ireland. This “unfortunate” tradition of yours must be “addressed”.
The “New York Times” reports from swing state Michigan on Al Gore endoring Obama before a 20,000 rally in Detroit :
http://www.nytimes.com/2008/06/17/us/politics/17campaign.html
66. Now wonder you don’t like referenda if you don’t know it it is the more formal plural of referendum.
definition
referendum (plural referendums or FORMAL referenda) Show phonetics
noun [C] (FORMAL plebiscite)
a vote in which all the people in a country or an area are asked to give their opinion about or decide an important political or social question:
Is it more democratic to hold a referendum, rather than let the government alone decide?
http://dictionary.cambridge.org/define.asp?key=66353&dict=CALD
69.
A good post but the next move in interest rates will be up and then NuLabour will get a deserved pasting at by elections and in the opinion polls.
I dream of the day when NuLabour trail in third in a reputable opinion poll
74. Still thank goodness there is no question of Ireland being ‘bullied’ as our doughty Foreign Secretary and his courageous boss assure us.
72 RPI has rentals and house prices in it I think so the gap between the two will narrow in the current climate.
In fairness, US legislators (in Washington, let alone state legislatures) are pretty responsive to the views of their district without the need for referenda.
Local and direct democracy work very well in the US.
I can’t help but agree with SeanT at 29 - I am naturally a europhile, and wonder if in twenty generations’ time the citizens of the great European Republic will see us as porachial sorts, much as we might see certain Americans from prior to their constitution, or ratification of the XVIIth Amendment. Had there been a sudden referendum a year or so ago, I would probably have voted in favour.
I always thought that the eurosceptic lobby was too shrill, too deranged, too paranoid to be taken seriously. Not content with “not in our best interests” it was a pan-continental conspiracy by Eurocrats and the Communists to destroy Britain. They were cunning and subversive, and would act in a manner that could not be more dastardly or anti-democratic if they tried.
This madness turned out either to be accidentally accurate, or astonishingly prescient of how the Europhile campaign would act. In being duplicitous, arrogant, anti-democratic, elitist (in the bad way), and sly it has done more harm to the project than if it had dared to lose. I can no longer support European integration, and would like to see a stop on all future measures until the character of the EU is changed.
I rejoiced when I heard the Irish had rejected the Lisbon Treaty, and hope that any future attempt to pass major constitutional reform is scotched until the unelected mandarins of Brussels are forced to remember for whom they work.
77 - A general election?
OT
I think this is the sort of thing David Davis will be high;ighting….
http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/news/article-23495667-details/The+spy+in+your+mobile%3A+Shops+track+customers+by+tapping+into+phones/article.do
76 Sory, Fitaloon, but I disagree with your on-line dictionary. It is a simple rule of Grammar - a gerundive does not have a plural. In anglicised form, where the word has become a noun, the correct word is Referendums. Referenda sounds more “formal” (whatever that means) but it just happens to be wrong.
47 - “Ireland’s Constitution demands a referendum on EU treaties. To change the Constitution also requires a referendum… er, I think I see the problem here…”
Yet again … no, there was no constitutional requirement to put the Lisbon Treaty to a referendum in Ireland. It’s simply a political convention to do so at this stage.
74 - “Then as now, only a minority of voters bothered to vote”
Turnout was 53% in the end (much higher than initial reports suggested).
I do agree with him that a referendum on Lisbon was a bad idea though. The campaign was woeful.
But this is a betting website - a re-run is still available at 5/2 with Paddy Power.
67 Yes - US constitutional changes do not involve a referendum at any stage in the process. I do not believe that the US has ever held a national referendum, although of course they are sometimes used at state level.
It’s interesting, and perhaps has a bearing on the Europe debate, to speculate on how history would have developed had the American colonies become 13 independent countries in 1783 and not a federation. Today they would probably be arguing about consitutional treaties for the American Union. Meanwhile the United States of Europe would be the world’s dominant superpower…….
Edmund
I think it is just being a long way away brings some sense of perspective which can be lacking.
A couple of points:
1. Would love to have a bet with seant that the Tories will not put any successor treaty to a referendum but too many issues to make it a simple bet. Can we just remember it and agree that we can all berate seant repeatedly if I am subsequently proved right…. Nonetheless, I recognise that seeing the Irish defeat as a problem for the Tories is a minority view.
2. In relation to 43, notwithstanding that the facts were wrong, I
do see the mechanism for changing the US consitution as sub-optimal. Most people seem to think it is pretty much impossible to get an amendment to the constitution through which is less than ideal. (It should be somewhat difficult to change constitutions but not almost impossible).
72.Just topped up my oil tank. Half a tank cost me 10 quid short of what it cost me to fill the whole tank a year ago.
So I am struggling to understand how that figure was reached when you consider the price of oil effects so many aspects of the cost of living.
80. Morus - it was no accident, and if its seemed ’shrill’ that was because those of us exposed to the true nature of the EU’s movers and shakers were so profoundly alarmed by what we experienced.
These views have been around a very long time, it is just that only now are they being so openly expressed. The EU is not a noble, idealistic cause any more - if indeed it ever really was. It is a naked power grab by the political class.
The post at 85. referring to some bizarre counterfactual history in which a United States of Europe would be the world’s ‘dominant superpower’, jocular as it might seem, again reflects the true motivations of the EU elite.
Although Steve Richards makes valid points about the anti-politics mood, I don’t agree with his conclusion. Lots of countries, not just Ireland, have a well-established principle that fundamental constitional change needs a referendum - in Britain the argument has been over whether the current treaty does anything fundamental, a point on which we won’t agree. But if it did - e.g. proposed that we should join the Euro - then I think we would need a referendum, and at least eight other countries have similar rules or practices.
Note that this isn’t necessarily a good thing from the sceptic viewpoint, since it also means that their cherished project of renegotiating how Europe works and/or what membership commits us to has no chance of success, since by the same logic it would need all 26 other countries to approve such a fundamental change, and there’s always going to be at least one that says, “Nah, don’t want that”. Essentially the system means we’ve got what we’ve got now for the forseeable future, bar minor changes: both philes and phobes are going to have to learn to live with it.
The specific issue in Ireland is that their constitution requires that even the most minor change - e.g. altering the size of the Commission - needs a referendum. However, I think Steve is too pessimistic on Ireland. A number of specific Irish concerns were raised during the campaign (e.g. whether not having a permanent Irish Commissioner in the slimmed-down Commission would affect their influence). A joint statement by EU leaders that responds to those concerns, followed by a referendum asking whether, in view of that statement, Ireland agreed, would almost certainly shift the slim 53-47 majority. If it doesn’t, then the treaty really is dead, but given the Ireland-specific objections it’s worth trying to address them and see whether that changes their view or not.
87. It’s ridiculous, we shove huge amounts of tax on it in this country where as commies in China and other countries subsidise oil! We are then encouraged to cut our consumption! Fairs fair - cut the petrol subsidies over there or we cut the tax here! People say that the developed world has the whip hand on this but it does not feel like that to me!
85 Slavery would have been abolished in 1925 (the year after the end of the First World War)? Some French politicians would still be campaigning for the return of Alsace Lorraine and of Lille? Seattle would be part of Canada?
The Conservatives must make it clear that if there is any attempt to force Ireland out of the EU, a Tory government would pull us out of the project in a show of support. You cannot have an arrogant elite bullying a smaller member just because the people have made their views clear!
The only redeaming feature of the EU, is that in theory it stops European countries going to war with one another as we have for centuries. However, if you follow the Steve Richards approach and basically press with intergration without the inconveniance of consulting the electorate, I think you actually make the chance of some sort of war or uprising amongst the populace more likely, not less. People won’t stand for being constantly ignored by the arrogant elite and sooner or later, if it carries on, something will happen (recession, unemployment etc…) to cause the populace in various parts of Europe to explode.
In truth we’d be better off out of this nonsense.
84 - Re those odds on a re-run (from the Irish Times - Mr Martin is the Foreign Minister):
Mr Martin told journalists no one had pointed the finger of blame at Ireland and there was a spirit of solidarity at the EU meeting, which was held behind closed doors in Luxembourg.
He did not rule out holding a second referendum on a redrafted version of the treaty but said it was far too early to decide how to proceed.
“We have not considered any options . . . We don’t want to be left behind, we have always been strong supporters of deepening the impact of the EU on our lives,” said Mr Martin, who insisted that his EU counterparts understood the need to give the Government time and space to analyse the results.
Mr Martin held a bilateral meeting with German foreign minister Frank Walter Steinmeier, who over the weekend had suggested that Ireland could take a break from the union.
Mr Steinmeier said yesterday he hoped for a solution this year and suggested a re-vote might be possible after adaptations to the treaty to address Irish concerns. “There are thoughts about whether the Danish model of 1992 might be a model,” he said, referring to opt-outs granted to Denmark that enabled the Danes to endorse the Maastricht Treaty after an initial referendum thumbs-down.
One potential adaptation being considered by EU officials would provide Ireland with the right to appoint a permanent commissioner.
86 - I think that in a rigid fixed documented constitution then the fact that you have a constitutional or supreme court that interprets and contextualises means that the actual changing of the constitution can be made difficult. It is certainly preferable to the UK example where constitutional principles can have a for sale sign put up in front of them as we saw last week.
89 - “The specific issue in Ireland is that their constitution requires that even the most minor change - e.g. altering the size of the Commission - needs a referendum.”
No it doesnt!!!!!!
89. I think that a lot of the anti-politician mood is due to the longevity of the government. Assuming Labour get booted out at the next election (But you stay as MP in Broxtowe
due to your *secret weapon* ), the political system will get a philip and the anti-politician mood may abate for a while as it did when Tony Blair swept to power.
89, is it Labour party policy that a Yes vote is binding forever and ever amen but a No vote is an obstacle to be overcome?
The people have spoken. Time for a rethink, not to ride roughshod over their wishes, which would be illegal in any case.
The comparison between British and American politics is too depressing to contemplate. Their system has many flaws, but it is, at heart, truly democratic - a black man with a Muslim middle name now nears supreme power - what better sign could you have of a healthy, functioning, expressive democracy?
Meanwhile we, the mother country of western democracy, are trying to hand over power to an UNelected bureaucracy based in a foreign capital, a bureaucracy which, moreover, openly expresses its contempt for the popular will - and seeks to bully and eject member states who dare to exercise it.
And they are aided and abetted by our own government, which solemnly promised a referendum on this transfer of power, and then blatantly reneged on that promise.
Our liberty-loving forefathers would be truly ashamed of us.
85 - I don’t think 13 countries with broadly the same political systems, all based on the English system, all sharing the same social and economic backgrounds, and all (in the political sphere, anyway) speaking the same language are in anyway comparable with the situation in Europe, then or now!
re 72 It’s the % that an index has increased over the last year; not the current rate of increase extrapolated to a year. See
http://www.incomesdata.co.uk/statistics/rpitable.htm
Methodological details on ONS site.
average overall increase of 4.3% is very believable to me. Energy and food obviously up by more but other bills by about that. And some things less or even falling - e.g. clothes, white goods, communications. And housing costs probably up less, too.
Bear in mind the rates for households does vary a lot around this 4.3 (or 3.3) average.
83 - I think Fitaloon is using ‘the New Latin’, Augustus - after all, the Church has the ‘Sacra Congregatio de Propaganda Fide’ - surely we accept that it is ‘propaganda’ not ‘propagandums’ (from the gerundive form of ‘propagare’)?
I just think referendums is a very ugly word, and that referenda is much more pleasing to the ear…!
That said, I would not argue Latin with an educated man who bears the name of Rome’s greatest Emperor!
88 - And you were right, EWR, so I apologise for not realising as much sooner. I am still a Europhile at heart, but every vestage of the current European Union needs to be turned upside down, and a more flexible model introduced, otherwise I think serious discussion of leaving will become inevitable.
OK, On Topic, the results of MORI are exactly what I was expecting. People are genuinely divided and unsure on 42 days and David Davis has a chance of winning people over to his cause during his campaign, but what people like is the fact that Davis has taken a stand. They may not agree with him on 42 days, but they rather like the fact that after all these sleazy and slef-serving MP’s, here in a top politician actually putting his principles before his carrer.
Why do the public like it? I think the public are in the mood for insurection. people are fed up with bullying, hectoring and all round dictating that the arrogant elite of mainstream politicians have forced on them these last few years. We are herded around like cattle. We pay shocking rates of tax. We are bullied and spied upon. Our views and opinions of routinely ignored. Everything is difficult and the governing class sem to view us with contempt and despise us. Even have the hitherto problem free service of rubbish collection has been reduced to a fiasco, with fortnightly collections leaving rotting food in stinking, maggot infested dustbins for two weeks. The government has pushed and pushed and pushed and people have reached their limit. By making his stand, David Davis is tapping into this mood of rebellion. People have had enough and ultimately this will transfer itself into probable wipe out for Labour. That is when the boil will be lanced and the loathing for the political class will reach its peak, but in the meantime, people like David Davis and maybe fuel strikers, will earn the respect and support of more and more people.
83. “A number of English words come directly from Latin gerundives; for example, addendum comes from the gerundive of addere, to add; referendum comes from the gerundive of referre, to bring back;”
Note the words “come directly” whilst the Latin referre is gerundive, the English referendun is not gerundive as English does not have gerundives.
Every dictionary I have consulted gives the plural as referenda or referendums
Q.E.D. (now that is gerundive!)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gerundive
93. No Taioseach is gonna want to rerun the referendum unless he absolutely has to. There is a serious risk the Irish will be outraged and say Feck Off - No means No.
Who can say? And if that happens the government falls, I’d have thought.
So the Irish will hold out as long as possible. And it therefore all depends on whether everyone else ratifies - there are 8 countries still to complete. I’d say the Swedes are only mildly doubtful, Poland likely to ratify, Britain almost certainly (for shame).
But the Czechs are a very different matter. Their constitutional court might even rule the Treaty inadmissable (it decides in September, and ratification is on old until then). If the Czechs say No, then Ireland is off the hook, there will be no revote, and Lisbon falls.
Whatever happens, the appalling behaviour of the EU elite in the past week has done incalculable damage to the image of the EU (which was so poor in the first place). The europhiles have turned the electoral setback of the Irish No into a very severe moral defeat for their cause.
Steve Richards article wasn’t the only one to take this type of line - Will Hutton in the Observer had this to say:
…But referendums work best for the demagogue, the dissimulator and scaremonger, as Hitler and Mussolini, lovers of referendums, proved.
He also wrote:
Crucially, the treaty contains a clause that states that do not agree to its provisions are required to leave the European Union. The existing treaty can certainly be made more obviously Ireland-friendly within its existing provisions, but beyond that, the EU will have to get tough and invoke the clause.
which I found strange since the Treaty doesn’t pass into force until ratified by all states.
Kas [79] I think RPI has cost of mortgages rather than house prices in it. So as house prices fall this is more than offset by interest rate increases. RPI is going up faster than CPI because mortgage lenders are increasing the premium they charge borrowers over BoE base rate
101 Not according to the Romans. They thought Trajan best Augustus merely lucky. Hence after 117AD all future Emperors were greeted with the prayer that they be more fortunate than Augustus, better than Trajan.
106, you’re mistaken about EU law.
Real law has to be voted on, passed, accepted and enforced.
EU law it seems is simply the collective word of the unelected bureaucrats.
Simply staggering that people are bleating about people voting being anti-democratic.
105 - “No Taioseach is gonna want to rerun the referendum unless he absolutely has to. There is a serious risk the Irish will be outraged and say Feck Off - No means No.”
Sigh. We’ll have to agree to disagree on that. But I do seem to remember something about a re-run referendum before. What was that now? Oh yeah, Nice 2.
Also you are wrong to isolate the Taoiseach on this. It is the Oireachtas that passes the bill to put a referendum to the people. It is difficult to blame the Taoiseach and government alone for that when it is well known that all parties (except Sinn Féin) voted for it and indeed the main opposition were probably leading the clamour for it (Fine Gael being the most pro-Europe of all the parties).
Just because you would be outraged at a re-run and just because it really wouldnt suit your political outlook doesnt mean it wont happen. It wouldnt actually be breaking with past convention - not re-running it until we said yes would be breaking convention! Hence 5/2 is good value right now - certainly much, much better than the 1/4 on no re-run.
107 You may be right. I heard some bod explaing it on radio 4 this morning, i could well have misheard the bloke.
107 - Yes, but Kas is right to say that the gap between RPI and CPI is narrowing and likely to narrow further. House price falls (and falls in BOE interest rates over the last year despite the fact these largely aren’t passed on) has seen to that.
100 - Absolutely, the whole “who can believe the figures” thing is nonsense. It is right that some people are very hard hit by fuel and food bills but inflation is an average and it is always the case that it moves at different rates for different people.
108- Trajan was clearly better.
I think the public quite like a politician with some principles, seeing it’s so rare these days to see a leading politician actually stand up for something even in the face of public opposition.
http://lettersfromatory.wordpress.com
108 - Octavian (Augustus) would have got nowhere without the finest military tactician and general all rounder Agrippa.
110. You’re a twerp.
Are you seriously suggesting Cowan would prefer to have another perilous, potentially humiliating vote - or would he prefer to see Lisbon abandoned, and everyone move on and forget about it?
Which do you think he wants? The former, yeah, right. He just looked so happy after the last vote. He loves risking his career.
I’m making no comment all on the internals of Irish politics, and I don’t care who supports what - I’m merely stating the obvious truth: that the Irish political establishment would prefer ALMOST anything to a revote.
However they may have to revote, such is the determination of the euroelite to ignore or override Irish popular will.
For that reason I agree with you on the odds, if nothing else. 1/4 on no rerun is ungenerous. I’d say a revote is still unlikely - because of the reasonable chances of Lisbon being derailed elsewhere. e.g. Prague.
I’d say the chances of no rerun is about 2/3.
105. Isn’t the Treaty up before the German Courts because it may/does breach their constitutional rules? Not the right of the government to approve a treaty, but the actual *content* of the Treaty?
Last I heard Merckel had signed it but couldn’t complete the ratification by submitting ratification to Brussels until the courts rule. And if they say no, will the euroweenies suggest side-lining Germany?
Re: changes to the US Constitution. There’s one enormous difference (I think - tell me if I’m wrong) the US voters have an option of a re-call election. Any politician who doesn’t listen to the public can find himself out of a job. It would tend to concentrate the mind.
117 - I don’t think it is up before the Courts because the German President has already said that he will not sign it now that the Irish have rejected it, as to do so would breach German law.
(75 - “Endoring”. Jack, this is so so so you. Neither one, nor quite the other, but perhaps the best of each
)
Smeaton is definitely not running against David Davis as he is off to the US. Perhaps he prefers the Land of the Free.
115 Indeed what a fool Agrippa was for not reaching for power himself. Trajan of course was his own General and a superb one at that.
113 I know Trajan had Spanish links but didn’t he have connection to Arles? My memory is hazy.
I wonder what the hero Smeaton thinks about, as of next year, being one of the first in the UK to have to carry a government ID card?
http://tinyurl.com/6cugtf
Governor of Bank of England letter to Chancellor Darling.
To summarise - We are doomed, all doomed.
106 The eurofanatics have as much contempt for the rule of law as they have for democracy.
121 - Yes but there is a lot to be said for being and wielding the power behind the throne.
118. Aaah. So we couldn’t have 26 - 1 anyway - German law would forbid it. No wonder their knickers are in a twist.
120. Good for him! I hope he enjoys his trip. He has earned it.
83
Just looking this up and agenda is the plural of agendum which is itself a gerundive.
So the statement that a gerundive does not have a plural appears to be incorrect.
126. addendum …. with the current Treaty, that is.
121 He probably thought he didn’t have the political skills to do the top job successfully. And his humble birth would have made him unacceptable to the Senate.
116 - Sigh. It’s Cowen. And sigh - to disagree with you is not to be a twerp, imbecile, liar or traitor. It’s not at all clear that the government and opposition want to avoid a re-run at all costs. Indeed if there was something obvious that they could get an assurance, opt-out or renegotiation on it would almost certainly be in train already. Believe me.
I’ve no idea how likely the Czech’s or Swedes are to derail the whole thing beforehand (I suppose I’m over-optimistically, from a betting point of view, discounting the chances) but a re-run is the only consistent option I’m hearing discussed at home to solve Ireland’s situation. Granted it’s early days yet.
125 The trouble is it is easier to remove the power behind the throne than the throne itself. History is littered with examples. Over here the ‘Kingmaker’, Wolsey, Peter Mandelson etc all fell when their Masters had had enough of them. Agrippa of course supposedly ended up being poisoned I think.
84 and 95
that all depends on whether or not you think the Irish Supreme Court has the competance to rule on these matters. As I understood it the ruling stated that anything that required a change to the Irish constitution required a referendum. Since the Irish government admitted that the Lisbon Treaty would require the Irish Constitution to be changed it seems obvious that as far as the Supreme Court ruling is concerned, a referendum would be necessary.
If it was not then why didn’t the Irish government follow Brown’s example?
So thats Kelv (M) out. John Smeaton out. Now who are Labour going to put up to try and state their case for them? Over you Gordon!
131 - Why is it ‘Ireland’s situation’?
Nice was sold as the Treaty to enable the EU to manage expansion, its only since rejection of the Constitution that its been claimed we need another treaty to streamline processes for an expanded community.
The Constitution/Lisbon Treaty objective was to move the EU away from principle of unanimity in key areas towards the federal model of majority voting (with a relatively high threshold based on double majorities). It also removed the need for further changes through Treaties, setting a process for amendment within the Treaty. There were safeguards, for example increasing the power of the Council of Ministers as against the European Commission (though a power battle has been going from Commission to reduce any negative impact on their powers and from Council to take more direct control from their side), giving national Parliaments more say and introducing the new concept of Council & national Parliaments reducing the Acquis Communautaire.
The federalists are now stuck - they can only proceed if the principles on amendment and majority voting are implemented but these have been rejected when put to the popular vote. Their reaction though has damaged their argument. Trouble is the Eurocrats are all Hillary Clintons, just don’t know how to accept defeat and just keep on and on and on.
130. I think what the Senate would accept was flexible at the point of a sword. Remember the Centurion slapping his sword to them and saying “Either you make him Consul or this will!”
110 Neil
“Fine Gael being the most pro-Europe of all the parties”.
I agree although at first glance the stronger Fine Gael areas (outside Dublin) were the ones most strongly against Lisbon.
123 - I think the tenor of the letter is not that we are doomed but that the MPC cannot really tell what the balance of inflation risk is due to global price uncertainty and that ergo Monetary policy is now basically guesswork, highly educated guesswork, but guesswork nonetheless.
41. I think so, but I’m just reporting what I’m hearing.
43. There is plenty of desire to change parts of the US constitution - the existence of the electoral college is a good example - and it doesn’t need all the states to agree, just 3/4.
80. I disagree. There are various policies that are supported by very large swathes of the American public, and have been attempted by Presidents, only to fall down because of the influence of moneyed interest groups. Most House members are so desperate to get funds for their reelection campaign they need to pay more attention to such interest groups than their electorates.
85. The American colonies all spoke one language, had the same majority culture, the same majority religion, the same political traditions, had no natural borders between them and had tiny populations. To pretend its the same is pretty barmy. Most crucially, the people of Europe think of themselves as different people. Perhaps one day there will be a European demos, but any case for that really has to ask the constituent peoples whether they want to be part of it (and needs them to have a say in the institution beyond the appointed party lists in a rubber stamp chamber).
89. Hang on, so Ireland will get special concessions because it had a referendum and rejected the treaty. Why on Earth didn’t you lads do that for our country?
137 Fair enough, but many Senators were themselves military commanders. Had Agrippa used force to become Princeps, almsot certainly some of the other commanders would have sought to challenge him.
141 True but given Agrippa’s popularity among the Capite censi of the Legions they would have been hard pressed to find the men to oppose the greatest Roman General of the day.
141 - I think actually Agrippa was the muscle in a tag-team. Octavian was undoubtedly pretty astute politically but was probably not too hot on the military side so Agrippa gave him that. Agrippa was also heftily responsible for the rebuilding of Rome so that Augustus could claim that he had ‘found it brick and left it marble’.
Richard North sending a petition to No 10 requesting ratification be abandoned.
Link to sign on Coffee House.
140 - But those moneyed interest groups are most effective when forcing a Congressman to take a populist view. A Congressman representing a district (like MT At-large) where the IInd Amendment is taken very seriously cannot easily afford to be pro-gun control because the NRA would target him. They can’t/don’t do that in New York or Massachussets, but Emily’s list might.
I recognise that lobbying groups are a malign influence, but they operate within a system where every district is understood politically on the issues, and Congressmen are much more likely to vote as their district wants rather than how their party demands. We don’t have that in the UK - individual responsibility for voting record - rather an MP lives or dies by his party’s record. I think that is bad for local democracy.
144. Petition at http://petitions.pm.gov.uk/Abandon-Lisbon/
143. I think actually Brown was the muscle in a tag-team. Blair was undoubtedly pretty astute politically but was probably not too hot on the economics side so Brown him that. Brown was also heftily responsible for the rebuilding of Britain so that Blair could claim that he had ‘found it brick and left it marble’.
by James Burdett June 17th, 2008 at 10:56 am - as adapted by Baskerville.
History, huh? Mainly bunk.
So Ireland will have a permanent commissioner? It will be the only one of 27 countries to have this. Imagine the uproar when this leaks out. I think it’s a non starter. Either all 27 countires will have permanent commissioners (and that was judged to cause “logjam”) or none will.
I still don’t see an easy way out and I guess everyone hopes “events” will solve the problem. It seems clear the Franco-German plan to bully Ireland, the Czechs, etc has failed. Guess that was Plan B. Now for Plan C, which will probably come out later this week.
147 Had Brown been in Agrippa’s position, he’d have led the army to a catastrophic defeat.
Referendums allow the people to speak clearly without interpretation or filtering.
Representative democracy allows the people to speak through a collection of distant mouthpieces.
Which then is the more democratic?
149: Even the likes of Ed Balls wouldn’t have followed Brown into battle. Supporting a failure to maintain your political career is one thing, your life another.
131 - welcomed to the deranged world of the Euroboors!
There’s just no point in arguing. For Sean T is ‘the way, the truth and the light’ - so praise be!
146 Pointless. The Liberal ‘Democrats’ will troop into the govt lobby in the Lords and ratify this abomination.
149 - Yes I think it was Burnside of whom Lincoln said that he had snatched ‘defeat from the jaws of victory’. I think that Brown would have lived up to that, indeed it seems he does.
I think there is an important difference between the rejection of the nice treaty and the rejection of the lisbon treaty and that is the turnout. Nice was rejected by only 35% of the electorate and therefore it is reasonable to rerun the vote on grounds of legitamacy. the lisbon treaty however was rejected on a turnout of 53.1% which is far higher than most people thought would be required for the no vote to win.
Not only does this legitimise the result but it also points to a ’sea change’ in the irish electorate towards the EU. In the past 5 eu referendums, the number of no votes has remained fairly constant at around 520,000. this time round the number of no voters jumped 300,000 to around 830,000.
In short this rejection unlike the nice rejection can not be considered illegitimate, and to ignore the 53% turnout and vote again, which is higher than most of our local election turnouts would be extremely undemocratic and should be argued against by even pro-european countries. If the EU no longer stands and represents democracy then what is its point??
Agrippa was not really a Roman through his lowly birth. He would never have been accepted as princeps. Where as Octavian was Caeser’s son by adoption. Agrippa could have power through Octavian, but never have it for himself.
Machiavelli would have been proud.
“Balls: British economy well placed to ride out difficult times”
From Politics Home, some refreshing honesty from the government.
Balls talking Balls again.
143/149etc. Worth remembering that Augustus Carp was:
.. the mock autobiography of Augustus Carp, a self-aggrandizing, stuffy, puritanical oaf, who indulges in numerous vices in the name of Christianity, rationalizing his own weaknesses while condemning others for the same acts. Great fun. Written by a noted Physician.
Not much to do with Latin or Romans, emperors or not.
Shouldnt the govt just hold a reverse auction to select a candidate for H&H?
Given the 42 day legislation went through on monetary deals they should just ask for people to submits bids for standing. Maybe Jordan would stand for 50 grand, maybe Timmy Mallet would stand for 600 quid….i dont know. I would stand against Davis for 100 grand if you are listening Gordon.
156 Considering Spaniards, Slavs and Africans all became Emperors subsequently even Brits if you wish to include Constantine who was proclaimed in Britain I’m not sure that applies. Maybe he just didn’t want it enough. Anyway see 132.
What would Gordon or the Labour party gain by putting up against Davis. I can only see downsides! Davis’s actions have confused potential Conservative voters, many of whom are in the 420 day camp.
161, that was later though, right? I know Septimius Severus was the first African emperor following the death of Pertinax (around the start of the 3rd century) whereas Augustus was much earlier.
I’ve not had time to read the whole thread. Just a thought on Davis.
We are contiually told that 42 day dtention is popular with the public. But how does that look when measured with likelihood to vote? Could it be that those against it are more likely to go out and vote. I suspect they are, which may be why the figures don’t look bad for Davis.
155 - But the whole basis of the no campaign (well, the marginally less crazy part of the no campaign) was not to derail Lisbon or the EU but to come back with something better. If they come up with something better not only would the mainstream parties be able to put something to the people but much of the no campaign should support them in doing so.
161,
They became less chosey as time went on. One of the complaints against Pompey Magnus, was that even though he was one of the wealthiest men in Rome, he was not from one of the first rank famalies. Where as Caeser had impecable lineage.
As the Empire ossified, the rules changed. Don’t forget that in theory Rome was still a republic when Octavian was fighting alongside Agrippa.
161 - Constantine the Great was indeed pronounced Emperor of Rome at the Iphal Barracks in York (still active)
“Woe is me, I think I am becoming a god” Emperor Vespasian on his death bed.
Its one of those quirks of history thats always appealed to me. The civil war between the Boni (Pompey, Cato et al) and Caesar was that they did not want a dictator. The events of that war are what led directly to a dictatorship in the form of Augustus Octavian.
If Davis had resigned and said he was opposed to all detention without charge (Liberty’s position) everyone could understand or disagree.
The public can see the choice between a theoretical desireable principle, no detention without charge, and the desire to maintain security and freedom from fear and death for the vast majority that may impinge on the rights of the very few who have given cause for concern over terrorism.
They find it hard to see the principle between locking someone up for up to 4 weeks for terrorism or up to 6 weeks.
They probably consider it a question of whether that many days (or even more) are needed for everyones security.
I share their difficulty in seeing the ‘principle’.
166 Vespasian was the first person to become Emperor who wasn’t from the top ranks of the nobility, but that was still a hundred years in the future.
Constantines statue can be found outside York Minister. He became Emperor around 312AD, around 330 years after Octavian became the first Emperor. Shows you how long the Roman Empire lasted in its different guises.
170 - Yes and he had made his name in the conquest of Britain, notably conquering Vectis and subjugating Cornwall IIRC.
167 It’s still an active Army Barracks? Fascinating.
161: Are we talking ‘African’, in the way the son of a British colonial administrator in Kenya is ‘African’?
162: If they ran a candidate that concentrated on attacking DD as an egotist at odds with his own party wasting tax payers money calling an unnecessary bye election the focus wouldn’t just be on what DD wants it to be on.
170,
The begining of the end of the Empire. Wasn’t Vespasians son Germanicus (who ended up dead before his father?) Germanicus been a brilliant General?
170 Was he. What was the status of Galba, Otho and Vitellius.
David Davis’ stand stirs the pot.
What would add a little spice is if a couple of Conservatives in marginal seat follow suit.
169 The English Civil War is popularly believed to have been Parliament versus the King. It resulted in a theocratic dictatorship with Parliament first hollowed out by purges then dismissed.
175: Wasn’t that Claudius’ father?
Downing Street: all government ministers to abjure their pay rises for the next two years…
Cromwell became King in all but name.
The war of the roses started out as a difference not between the King and the Duke of York, but the Duke of York and the Duke of Somerset and the Kings wife. It went downhill from there.
175: Yes Germanicus was Claudius father and Vespasian’s son was Titus who was Emperor for 2 years after his father but died of illness.
172 He also fell asleep when nearer was singing and playing the lyre, which showed good judgement on his part. He was one of the very few Emperors who comes across as quite a nice man.
174 He was most likely a Berber.
175 No. His sons were Titus and Domitian, both of whom outlived him.
176. Galba came from one of Rome’s very oldest families. Otho and Vittellius were a bit less blue-blooded, but both their fathers had been consuls.
180. But expenses will rise….
179,
he might be, I’d have to check
183 Nearer? Nero.
183,
Getting mixed up. So many Emperors, so little time…
174 - Interestingly Berber is the root of the word Barbarian.
145. But what becomes the “popular” view is the view that is formed once one side of the argument can make their case much louder than the other side. Those moneyed interest groups can easily air commercials which distort what is going on, such as the “they choose, we lose” healthcare ads. Whereas interest groups for the other side of the issue which aren’t connected to big money have a much harder time to change public opinion in their direction. There are roughly equal numbers of Jews and Muslims in the US, but no-one can deny politicians would worry a lot more about offending Jews than offending Muslims (even pre-9/11) because of the money of AIPAC and others. And many of these moneyed groups can get their funding in one place (say NYC) and target an individual seat somewhere else, and run ads not even about the issue they are supposed to be about.
You are left with a system where politicians are more worried about offending wealthy constituencies than anything else.
186. Was that why Nero forcibly retired Vespasian prior to the Jewish revolt Sean?
188: Not what the Greeks thought non Greek speakers sounded like?
Also whilst we are discussing the Roman Imperium I always find it faintly amusing that one of the Imperial titles still survives and the holder is still resident within the bounds of Rome.
190 Yes. But it saved his life, because Nero didn’t regard him as a threat, and so didn’t kill him.
180 Apparently they are all going to take the Spelman approach to childcare costs to compensate.
192. Its even more amusing to remember that Julius Caesar was also once Supreme Pontiff (High Priest of Rome). Indeed it was the only legal office he actually held when he crossed the Rubicon.
Cromwell became King in all but name.
Indeed, and with a degree of absolute authority that Charles I could only have dreamed of. In the name of ‘parliament’, a dictatorship was created.
And now in the name of ‘democratic values’, the EU plans to erect a despotic state.
Read the Governor’s letter to Darling. The major risk is that commodity prices, particularly oil, get embedded into the manufacturing and retail costs and this gives another twist to the inflationary spiral that is then exacerbated by a falling pound. If this happens there will then be major, major pressure on pay deals, particularly those 3 year ones. And of course this all runs into the election timetable where the Government will be caught by falling living standards.
146 seanT hasn’t signed it yet!
192. And the Latin language is the only one God understands to carry out exorcisms. Bit of a coincedence right?
And we all know what happen to the Cromwell and the protectorate.
The King is dead, long live the King!
199. Well of course she only speaks Latin.
192 I also find it interesting that the Paegan title & position Pontiff is still in use today.
Indeed, the Vatican, where the Vates priests resided, is now home to the Catholic Priests.
You could say the Roman Catholic church is a good mix of paegan Imperial Roman, with a good dose of Judaism and a smattering of christianity,
199 - Indeed. In fact drawing together a couple of strands of this thread one could argue that the events of the first Good Friday are an object lesson in the dangers of referenda.
192 Which one?
Spelman on Ministry of Truth.
Brown speech on terror coming up on Sky..
202 - You could say that the Roman Catholic church is the continuation of the Roman Empire by other means.
202. Don’t forget a good dose of Mithraism and a touch of Sol Invicus too. Afet all we celebrate the birth on the sun every 25th on December….
193 “172 He also fell asleep when nearer was singing and playing the lyre, which showed good judgement on his part.” - To be fair I think Vespasian was fortunate that he was in the Country as it turned out during the Piso Conspiracy and thus survived to become Emperor but as Nero was a psychopath he didn’t need to think you a threat to kill you. It could easily have gone the other way for Vespasian clearly Fortuna smiled on him.
205 - Why did I read that as Brown speech OF terror….
204. what was that in answer to?
204. what was that in answer to?
202. Of course the terms “Christos” and “Logos” are both Greek. And the bulk of revelation comes from Persian Zoroastrianism.
183 I think Viellius’s Dad though had not been of great stock and only became Consul through the favour of Claudius.
James B you are confusing a referendum with a mob. The difference is the same as between those mass meetings rabble-rousing trade union shop stewards used to hold, where someone not holding up their hand in assent was marked out, and a properly conducted secret ballot after a period of discussion.
Linking Catholicism, the Roman Empire and spleen-venting Euroscepticism, leads me to think I should recommend the blog of His Grace, at http://www.archbishop-cranmer.blogspot.com - one of my favourite blogs on the web.
He seems to consider the EU a Catholic conspiracy and is opposed, whereas coming from the other side of the Tiber, I would only now support it if it were.
My plan for all European law to be written in Latin (a supreme version, above the various vernacular translations that I believe have equal status at present) and Outsourced to the Jesuits in the Vatican would save much money, but probably contribute to His Grace’s blood-pressure not inconsiderably.
207. And many of the Catholic Saints had their mythos developed to take the place of Celtic and Germanic deities that local populations felt attached to.
214 - tongue firmly in cheek on that one.
Brown: “must do more to protect liberty and security equally”
Morus As the office of the inquisition still exists - is it still dominated by Jesuits - surely that would suit the Brussels bureaucrats rather well.
183 There’s also the story of Titus complaining to him that a tax on lavatories was beneath the Imperial dignity. His response to hol a pile off Gold coins to Titus’s nose and ask if they smelt. When he said no he replied well that is strange because they come from…………
159 Well done, Fitaloon! Describes me to perfection!
217
james B you really shouldn’t encourage the Richards tendency like that. They are pompous and vainglorious enough as it is.
clever speech by Brown
215. I’ve asked before but I don’t think I’ve ever been about long enough for an answer. Where are you from/living, Morus?
218 Well Brown has mentioned liberty so he has totally defused the DD bomb then, so that is alright. We are safe, he will keep us warm and comfortable as our freedoms are flushed away.
Now I wonder who else used to talk about liberty and fraternity and ensured they were safe with only moderate loss of key bodily parts, starvation and massive inflation.
207 - My favourite Mithraic temple is also in York, and went from being dedicated to Mithras (a fellow god of Roman soldiers, along with Mars) to becoming the Church of St Martin-cum-Gregory on Mickelgate - St Martin being the replacement saint for Mars/Mithras once Constantine converted.
214 - Indeed. The correct name for rule by the mob is ‘Ochlochracy’
224 - I am London-based now, Socrates, though once lived in England’s second-city in the shadow of the Minster. Once upon a time, I hailed from Cardiff in South Wales.
223. Yes yes Rod. I’m sure his ratings will soar next poll.
226. I always find the amount of continuity amazing. It was only in 27 BC that Augustus was declared “divi filius”, the precise term that Latin Christians used to spread the message of Jesus in the empire as the “son of God”.
229 - Indeed probably why so many of them were used as Lion food. Insecure tyrants rarely tolerate a challenge.
227. Making your US insight all the more impressive!
197. The currency markets don’t seem to like the content of Mervyn’s letter. The pound is down over a cent against the dollar and the euro today.
The question for Gordon Brown is will he defend his views, like he is trying to do here, by fielding a candidate in the by-election?
I am not convinced.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1027112/Liberty-kept-safe-terror-says-Brown-Davis-warns-continuing-threat-civil-liberties.html
232 Matt J yes but the news wires have it that this is a result of Uk inflation which is odd as EU inflation on the same measure is higher and interest rates lower.
So Rod has dropped any pretence of impartiallity now has he? Not seen any spurious average polls of polls graphs lately either!
234.
Brown: “The first liberty is to be kept free from fear.”
I know it’s something of a cliche to denounce everything that comes out of a politician’s mouth on the subject as ‘Orwellian’, but, heck, it stands up here.
Just saw Brown on Sky…I cant listen to him anymore..I tried but he is both dull and wrong…not a winning combination….I wish he’d do us all a favour and put himself out of this misery…anyone who thinks this man has any chance whatsoever of regaining public respect and popularity is an idiot. All the hopeful talk of swing back on here and using stats from previous aprliaments by the Lefties on here is utter garbage unless they get rid of Brown.
If he really wants to win the argument stop being such a coward and put up a Labour candidate..I know he is scared stiff of elections normally but surely this is one chance to regain some of his lost credibility.
232. That means I just made about £3000. Hooray for the mighty euro!!
237 - Remind me which government has been stoking up apocalyptic terror warnings and creating a climate of fear. If Gordon believes that the first liberty is freedom from fear then his government by their actions have been supressing that liberty.
Er, so if the first liberty is being kept safe from terrorists, why are Labour incapable of even keep secure files safe? It doesn’t make any sense! The idea that this government can protect people, when they can’t even keep private security files out of the public domain!
And if Brown is so sure of his case, let him put someone up to defend his position.
235. The difference is that Trichet has given strong signals that the ECB is prepared to raise rates to tackle inflation whereas King has just said that basically there’s nothing they can do except hope and wait.
196 - Since we’re delving into the mists of time, the notion that Cromwell possessed even greater degree of absolutism than Charles I in the period of personal rule is not really accurate. There will actually three Parliaments (not including the nominated “Barebones” Assembly of Saints)during the Protectorate, and all were as troublesome and disputatious as any of their Tudor or Stuart predecessors.
(Incidentally, Cromwell’s first Parliament also effectively abolished a number of rotten boroughs).
Up the Roundheads….
237. Yes, Brown’s comment is the preferred line of dictators throughout the ages.
Hands up who feels ’safe’ with this nutcase and his pathetic band of followers in charge?
Brown’s ploy on terrorism is rather like the Conservatives’ use of Europe and the Euro a few years ago. Yes, the public may be onside with regard to 42 days’ detention, but this is not a really important issue to many people, just like Europe has always been a minority interest.
The economy and the general competance and sense of direction of the government are much more important, and here Brown scores poorly. I would have thought that violent crime would for most people be a much bigger fear than terrorism, which is always going to be a blank swan type event.
242- No King has said in his letter that they could raise rates and agressively force inflation back down but at the risk of massive growth retrenchment and huge misery for everyone that would be counterproductive. I can’t wait for the internal stresses in the Eurozone when Trichet puts rates up, it could be pretty ugly.
231 - You are too kind! Am I right in thinking that you are British, but Chicago-based?
245 Of course I mean black swan!
243. Err Yes John, but what happened to those parliaments when they became ‘troublesome’? He purged them or closed them down. And he emasculated local government too, by putting army officers in charge of the regions.
By the end of his period in charge, there was no effective check on his authority and Britain was a military dictatorship in all but name.
246- “when Trichet puts rates up”
Trichet does not decide himself. All decisions are taken by the Council of governors where he only has one vote.
248 - I quite like the idea of a blank swan, actually!
Just as black swans are the unexpected occurrence that destroys a paradigm, so the blank swan is the omen of unspeakable stupidity that confounds even the best-layed plans.
There’s a book in that, if you can be bothered…
@237:
Freedom is Strength, didn’t you know?
I’d like to ask the coterie of Inner Party members that hang around this place if they agree with Big Gordon that ‘The first liberty is to be kept free from fear’.
163. “I know Septimius Severus was the first African emperor following the death of Pertinax”
I thought he was a professor at Hogwarts.
The full data set from the Washington Post/ABC Poll are up. The figures included leaners are
McCain 42% .. Obama 48%
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/documents/postpoll_061608.html?hpid=topnews
249 But IIRC he had to disband the Major Generals rule as it proved too unpopular and aroused opposition even within the Army. As for Authority well the check was his own Generals, it was because they opposed it he could never accept the Crown. Perhaps better to view it as an Oligarchy. Even Cromwell was not totally all powerful.
250 Am I right was Trajan from Arles.
245: Sure, it’s a minority interest now, but if and when the next terrorist attacks happen who can keep the country safe turns into a major issue.
Presumably that’s also why Cameron’s keeping his distance on this.
BTW, I’m not saying the 42 days thing is any use in practice - the whole decryption rationale is clearly a load of cack - but I think the fearmongers in the government know what they’re doing here.
253- JK Rowling has never ruled out the fact that she chose the name in reference to the emperor… Cruelty in the name of the greater good?
Brown is meant to be an intellectual, well read in political philosophy and he comes out with an anodyne comment like that which shows no understanding. It echoes all those excuses made for Communist dictatorships that though they lacked rights, rule of law, were subject to arbitrary arrest and summary justice they had guaranteed employment.
Fear of what? There are a number of fears and our constitutional provisions developed in attempt to balance those fears. Davis is surely standing for freedom from fear of arbitrary arrest, fear of state interference in our private lives.
247. I have been recently yes, but I’m back in the UK for the present.
254. You asked the other day where a McCain win could come from. I think the only way this can really happen is if he takes three out of Virginia, Pennsylvania, Ohio and Michigan. The idea he can take Wisconsin or New Jersey is dreamland, IMO.
257. Well, while they are so useless at even keeping files safe, it won’t be Labour.
245 - Were a terrorist attack to occur, other people far better qualified than Brown, are more than capable of keeping the country safe using existing powers.
The man is a bottler, utterly incapable of making a quick decision. People would experience unwarranted suffering whilst he dithered and dawdled.
256- Punter
No. As far as I know, Trajan was born in Italica (a roman colony in Spain).
Arles was founded (as a colony) by Cesar Incidentally archaeologists have just discovered magnificent statues in the river Rhone in Arles, among whic a very beautiful head of Caesar http://www.culture.gouv.fr/culture/actualites/communiq/albanel/cesarles08.htm
260 - Fantastic - are you coming on Thursday evening?
257. “but if and when the next terrorist attacks happen who can keep the country safe turns into a major issue. ”
If an attack does happen, it proves that the security measures
are (necessary*/not working*)
If an attack does not happen, it proves that the security measures
are (working*/not necessary*)
* delete according to prejudice.
It’s like every time there’s a gun-related massacre in America - both sides’ arguments are reinforced.
236. so much for freedom of speech then..
Interesting article by Marc Ambinder on the general stability of the polls and the underlying messages for both Obama and McCain :
http://marcambinder.theatlantic.com/archives/2008/06/your_electorate_folks.php#more
267. yawn…your attempts to pose as a persecuted martyr won’t convince anyone.
Please forgive me, but I was sent this article entitled ‘Harry Potter and Machiavelli’s Half-Blood Prince’ which I actually found quite amusing.
257 - I offered a bet that I could encrypt a file which would withstand 42-days’ worth of decryption attempts, and no-one took me up on it. Not entirely fair, as pb.commers are unlikely to have the same equipment as the police, but I would be providing the file immediately (no search for a computer) and identifying the one that you needed to open (not hundreds of red herring files).
The case for 42 days was, IMHO, not proven, but there is some vaidity in the argument that you might need longer as we become more prolific in creating evidence of our crimes, but also more technically capapble of masking that evidence.
http://ukpress.google.com/article/ALeqM5ib0YIYDyvlQPK0HXoUKG8QSI4VsQ
269. Maybe I’ll resign from pb.c and demand an election on the question of inviting me back…
@269:
If Rod’s a persecuted martyr, when do we get to burn him at the stake?
Oh, Thursday evening. I get it, it’s *that* kind of barbecue.
243 - Yes indeed he did: Cromwell was no democrat. But, unlike Charles I, his regime did not impose illegal and arbitrary taxation, nor have an extended period of personal rule. The Protectorate did need the ‘legitimacy’ of a legislature providing supply and the redress of greviances, which neither James I nor Charles I really accepted.
That’s where I take issue with the claim of equivalence between the 1630s and the 1640s-50s.
The Daily Mail ladies are revolting
http://tinyurl.com/47frj4
269 - Exactly. Remember he’s the one who claimed on his very site, “The BNP is for poofs”. And from his many previous ugly emanations here, he wasn’t joking.
270: Right - one problem with the whole encryption argument is that it seems incredibly unlikely that anyone’s going to run into encryption that they can crack in 42 days but not in 28 or whatever we’re up to now. Basically if the encryption’s done properly 42 days won’t get you anywhere near, and if it’s done wrong you shouldn’t need anything like 28 days.
Another problem with the claim is that since the government can already jail you for failing to hand over your encryption keys, if anyone’s got encryption they can’t crack they should be able to charge them with that for the time being to buy them time to work on the encryption.
So like I say, clearly absolute cack.
Doesn’t mean it won’t persuade voters though, especially if they’re scared.
270 but that doesn’t stop it from being cack as a rationale for detention without charge. Not providing the key is itself an offence.
272 you can’t resign because of the constitutional principle that you must serve your full term, this is far more important than your own feelings or beliefs - on PB ‘full term’ means life.
@274:
The protectorate laid the groundwork for the model of tripartite constitutional governance that persists to this day: head of state, government-in-council and parliament.
There was always a dramatic irony in that it took Orwell’s execution of a monarch to establish the principle of constitutional monarchy.
273 But you are allowed to wear leather hotpants if you really want to.
@275:
GET A NEW AGA YOU IDIOT.
Hope this helps.
281
80. Morus - “I can no longer support European integration, and would like to see a stop on all future measures until the character of the EU is changed.
I rejoiced when I heard the Irish had rejected the Lisbon Treaty, and hope that any future attempt to pass major constitutional reform is scotched until the unelected mandarins of Brussels are forced to remember for whom they work.”
Agreed.
I, like you, was a Europhile until very recently. I used to even do Streetwork for the Scotland in Europe group, and way back attended meetings of the European Movement.
If those twats contacted me now I would tell them where they can stick their EU. It is not a sunny place.
I am still tremendously pro-Scottish, pro-French, pro-Italian, pro-German and pro-Scandinaviahn and pro-European. I am just anti-EU.
278
Just out of interest, is keeping Rod on PB.com for 42 days supposed to punish him or us?
283 welcome on board - that’s how most of us painted as swivel eyed EU haters for years have always felt.
@278:
Fundamentally, anybody who mentions ‘encryption’ as a justification for 42 days is either being deceitful or* a technically illiterate buffoon.
As Morus points out, I could create a simple, public key encrypted message that would take the most powerful computer on Earth longer the age of the universe to brute-force.
Or I could use a one-time pad, in which case the message is mathematically provable to be undecipherabl.
[*That's not exclusive-or, btw, we are talking about Labour here, after all.]
274. Wrong - Cromwell did impose arbitrary taxation, e.g. customs duties not sanctioned by parliament (cf. the Cony case). And the rule of the Major Generals might as well have been personal rule. As for the ‘legislature’ it consisted either of an enormously ‘purged’ group of individuals, a nominated group, or was simply nonexistent.
We can also add interfering with judicial independence to this list, plus tampering with the franchise in order to produce ‘appropriate results’.
Cromwell did all the bad things Charles I did, and more.
O/T No wonder Darling bailed out the Rock..
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1026974/Revealed-The-secret-plans-Northern-Rock-pull-plug.html
254. Some of those figures are stunningly favourable for Obama:
If the election for the U.S. House of Representatives were being held today, would you vote for (the Democratic candidate) or (the Republican candidate) in your congressional district?
Dem 52%
Rep 37%
Do you approve or disapprove of the way George W. Bush is handling his job as president? Do you approve/disapprove strongly or somewhat?
Strongly approve 10%
Somewhat approve 19%
Somewhat disapprove 14%
Strongly disapprove 54%
Do you think things in this country (are generally going in the right direction) or do you feel things (have gotten pretty seriously off on the wrong track)?
Right track 14%
Wrong track 84%
If McCain were elected president, do you think he’d (mainly lead the country in a new direction), or (mainly continue in George W. Bush’s direction)?
New direction 38%
Same direction 57%
Thinking ahead to the November presidential election, what is the single most important issue in your choice for president?
Economy/jobs 33%
Iraq 19%
Healthcare 8%
Gas prices/Oil/Energy 6%
Regardless of who you may support, who do you trust more to handle
…the economy?
Obama 52% McCain 36%
…the war in Iraq?
Obama 46% McCain 47%
…healthcare?
Obama 53% McCain 33%
…gas prices?
Obama 50% McCain 30%
…energy policy?
Obama 51% McCain 36%
Do you think [NAME] views on most issues are too (liberal) for you, too (conservative) for you, or just about right?
Obama:
Too liberal 36% About right 52% Too conservative 5%
McCain:
Too liberal 19% About right 40% Too conservative 34%
Regardless of who you may support, who do you think is the stronger leader?
Obama 46% McCain 46%
168.
““Woe is me, I think I am becoming a god” Emperor Vespasian on his death bed.”
Sure it wasn’t John Prescott? Couldn’t he resign in Hull and stand against Davis? Or would that be being too useful?
287 Still on the plus side he made Britain a real world power for the first time. Routed the Spanish, awed the French and founded an Army based on merit.
283
That description means you are now standing alongside the vast majority of commited Eurosceptics.
Like you I am tremendously pro European. I ahve spent almost my whole life working in and around continental Europe and include amongst my best friends French, Germans, Italians, Norwegians and Dutch - the last being Godfather to my children.
There is absolutely no correlation between being Eurosceptic - opposed to the EU and even in my case wanting to leave entirely - and being anti-European. Personally I side with the publishers of ‘These Tides’ who represent anti EU groupings across the whole of Europe and are committed to freeing not just Britain but all the European countries from the centralising control of the EU.
286 - I’ll sign-up to the technically-illiterate buffon faction then!!
Seriously, as I’ve said - 42 days is not justified, but there might be a general principle that longer than 28 might be needed if the nature of evidence-gathering changes as it has done over the centuries. Encryption is one example of this.
The ‘refusing to give over passwords’ is a despicable law - it could never be proven to be refusing rather than ‘I forgot’ given the pressure that terrorist suspects are uder, and the expected complexity of any good password. Also, it breaches the right not to incriminate yourself which is implicit in British law, if not as obvious as the USA’s Vth Amendment.
281 - “The laughable thing is that most people would say we’re well off. We work full-time (I am a writer and Ross has his own media company), earn good wages, send our youngest daughter to private school and usually have a couple of holidays a year - one ski-ing, one sun.”
I think that is proof if proof were needed that they cannot afford a new Aga, or a boiler, and will just have to go on spending £13,000 a year on heating.
Also, I wonder what the youngest daughter has done to get this favoured treatment? If I was the oldest daughter, I would be pretty annoyed that my parents were p1ssing away thirteen big ones a year on an inefficient heating system whilst I toiled at the bog standard comp.
291. No-one I think would take issue with the notion that Cromwell was an exceptional military commander. But that is not what this discussion is about.
Yvette Cooper World at One
“Blather blather blather, credit crunch, global problems, blather blather blather”
What a waste of an interview.
242 Matt J it is a strange letter from King where he seems to think he can do nothing about ‘ commodities, energy and import’ prices but at the end still say that the MPC ‘ remains determined to set interest rates at the level required to bring inflation back to the 2% target’.
As so often it appears to be mixed messages which compares starkly with the Trichet aggression which is raising hackles in the Spanish government and the German unions.
My concern is that while the Euro zone is protected from the pressure of imported prices to some extent with the sky high Euro, in the Uk were are going to fall into the 1970’s trap of blaming it all on oil (or whatever external ogre we pick this time) and throwing up our hands and saying, ‘What can we do? Oh, I know, raise prices and pay me more.’
That got us into a pretty decade-and-a-half pickle then and took some serious economic medicine to get it back on track.
And while we suffered the Bundesbank did its damndest to kill inflation and the German economy surfed to bigger and better and the DMark was the currency to hold. Trichet is trying to do the same thing but now the southerners are part of the package and that changes the equation.
Will history repeat itself. We already have flared trousers and flower power shirts.
265. Unfortunately, I have plans. I will come one day though.
283. Pro-English?
295. But what he did with his power was important was it not. Apart from the admittedly huge Catholic exception he was also religiously tolerant for his period in History.
293. Surely the best argument on the 28 days vs 42 days is that you can achieve at least the same amount by doubling the funding and personel of all anti-terrorism groups, without the liberty-eroding problem. You could pay for it by scrapping ID cards and the national identity register.
294.
You do not have to cook food at all. Cold meats, fish and cheeses have a fantastic varity, most vegetables are better uncooked and those that aren’t can be blasted for a couple of minutes in a microwave which consumes peanuts. I have a toaster for when I need a little variety. Surely Agas are for owning strings of horses and wives?
293 - I think the principle ought to be that pre-charge detention should be at the minimum necessary not the maximum you can get away with. I think it is counter-productive to draw such a huge distinction between terror suspects and other suspects. OK terrorism is a different form of offence but is it that different? I think that the more we separate out terrorism and apply massively different rules the more we actually legitimate it as a tactic. Why can’t we make more use of murder and treason laws?
287 - Bugger. Two elegant posts eaten by Smithson’s bloody spam trap. Forget about the commentary. Read and judge for yourself
http://tinyurl.com/66ld7n
298. Socrates - “Pro-English?”
Yes. Relatively speaking! (ie. relatively pro-English, for a Scot)
I consider myself to be an Anglophile. Eg, I favour English self-determination and English self-government. I could also create a long list of English things/inventions/people I like, eg. fine bone china, Colmans mustard, Portsmouth gin and Michael Caine.
304.
PS. But I still frar prefer France or Italy!
300 - If you can recruit the people to do it, why not?
I have to say, it used to be that Civil Liberties campaigners would be far more worried about doubling the ranks of the more shadowy organs of the state than a two week extention in pre-charge detension. Times have, in some ways, changed.
I would much prefer to have a much larger police and ant-terror force than ID cards, because one is possible, and the latter is an absurd fantasy.
@293:
You said:
I offered a bet that I could encrypt a file which would withstand 42-days’ worth of decryption attempts, and no-one took me up on it.
Unless I’m missing something, Morus, you’re actually agreeing that encryption is a poor argument for 42 days.
274 John O ” But, unlike Charles I, his regime did not impose illegal and arbitrary taxation, nor have an extended period of personal rule. ”
Cromwell’s whole regime was illegal so any taxation was illegal.
Charles I’s extra parliamentary taxation was not illegal just unpopular and parliament demanded the right to approve it. Some of it, such as tunnage and poundage, had existed is one form or another for many centuries, and continued under the new regime in other forms.
We have to distinguish between parliamentary claims and reality. At no point had the Crown agreed parliamentary vetoes on all these ‘royal and ancient charges’, it was something they claimed and Charles had to gradually give in to.
304,5. Fair enough. While I disagree with your (ultimate) views on the Union as I am attached to the United Kingdom, I think if I were Scottish I’d probably be against it.
303 - That should have been ‘my’ commentary that was so cavalierly suppressed by Smithson. In essence, I think EWR fails to distinguish bewteen the (albeit sometimes unattractive) tress and the wood that as Martin C mentions, formed the basis of our constitutional structure.
21/106
If I remember correctly, one of the points Nick Cohen made in ‘What’s left’, was that the middle class liberal left have accepted that their wish list is not saleable to an electorate, so they’re trying to avoid them by going through organisations like the EU.
http://www.amazon.co.uk/Whats-Left-Liberals-Lost-Their/dp/0007229704/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1213706822&sr=1-1
free speech is alive and well. Just because your veneer of impartiallity has been stripped away too show the red within does not mean you have to attack other posters.
As Clive Dunn always said “They don’t like it up ‘em”
That story by Diana Appleyard is completely barmy. Does she live in a castle, close your windows? I read it at the weekend immediately thought of Caroline Phillips’ Tornado Hell in Kensal Rise.
My favourite bits in it, bar the heating costs, are her friend who couldn’t drive up from Oxfordshire as it would cost £300 presumably she was coming up in a tank as that works out as 7mpg.
Secondly her 20 year old daughter having to work part time this summer while they scrape by on >£80k pa.
and there’s http://ourmaninnewcastle.com/2008/02/20/diana-appleyard-and-the-hate-mail/
if you want another reason to dislike her.
308 - It was sort of arguing both ways.
In the good old days, the only form of evidence was human witness, and that didn’t take long to round up. Maybe a letter that could be fetched from the other end of the kingdom in three days.
Now, I send 4-500 emails a day, am rarely off the phone, encrypt everything, am watched by CCTV and tracked as I travel. I leave an audit trail of evidence so vast (compared to previosu generations) that it inevitably takes longer to sift through it. On top of that, I could delay much of that evidence gathering with simple and free encryption - no difficult stuff, just every folder would need an extra bloke for three or four days, and I have hundreds.
So - I originally offered the bet to show that even I could slow up the process to make a longer period necessary. I wanted to show that, whilst 42 days is a silly choice and has not been justified, we have to accept that the period might have to change as we change, and as evidence-gathering changes. Either that, or we have to consider a different system - investigative justice, like in France, or a different status post-charges.
However, as you and Edmund have pointed out - I can probably encrypt a file for so much longer than 42 days that the 42 days is clearly completely unrelated to encryption strength and difficulty, and so invalidates the idea that this was the good reason for it.
So - 42 days has not been justified by the encryption argument, but a general argument about whether we can extend the period for that reason one day (without inevitably destroying habeas corpus) is I think separate.
303. You’re not exactly helping your case John - a few excepts:
‘the Major-Generals…persuaded Cromwell that it was possible to manage the elections to produce a result favourable to the government….’
‘…Despite Cromwell’s misgivings, campaigning for the elections began in August 1656..’
‘…Out of approximately 400 MPs returned, 93 were judged “ungodly” and prevented from taking their seats at Westminster.’ (sounds rather like today’s Iran, doesn’t it?)
‘Outside Parliament, the exclusion was condemned as a worse violation of the constitution than King Charles’ attempt to arrest the Five Members in 1642.’
and in the Second Session …
‘Rather than allow the petition to come before Parliament, he went to Westminster on 4 February 1658 where…he dissolved the Second Protectorate Parliament only two weeks after it had reconvened.’
So there we have it - gerrymandering, illegal exclusion of elected members, and finally (yet again) the parliament (which Cromwell didn’t want in the first place) shut down altogether.
Please explain how any of this was better than the antics of Charles I.
301
Or for an even cheaper option which will have just as muchif not more effect, get an independent panel to take a serious look at the benefits and any possible drawbacks of allowing phone tap evidence in court and of allowing post charge questioning.
Both of these would probably have as much - if not more - effect on the fight against ‘terror’ and would not infringe as much on basic liberties.
316 - Yes but in Cromwell’s eyes that didn’t matter because he was on a mission ordained by God wheras Charles I was merely on a mission ordained by God.
@315:
However, as you and Edmund have pointed out - I can probably encrypt a file for so much longer than 42 days that the 42 days is clearly completely unrelated to encryption strength and difficulty, and so invalidates the idea that this was the good reason for it.
That’s what I thought you were saying, and I agree wholeheartedly.
The point is, I can encrypt something using a one-time pad, and unless I turn over the key, you will *never* decode it. Provably.
Now, that would probably stand as an argument for indefinite detention without charge for Gabble/Denis McShane. But there you go.
318. Indeed, his interest in ‘godliness’ greatly exceeded his interest in constitutional notions.
317
That was a very poorly phrased last post from me. Apologies.
316 - Disagree. I present my case ‘warts and all’ (to coin a phrase). But look at the wood. All the attempts by Cromwell and the Major Generals ultimately failed within Parliament itself: that’s the point. It existed, it sat, it argued, it disputed. Furthermore, there was demonstrably a vigorous extra-Parliamentary what we would call today civil society of religious and political ‘dissidents’.
Does that sound like dictatorship? Did that happen in the 1630s when Parliament was disbanded with every intention that it would never meet again?
Hey, we’re not going to agree but I’ve enjoyed the debate.
The Coffee House reports Brown has been advised to look more relaxed.
If I were you, Gordon, I would not do this, nor go and get a Darling tan, as the voters might interpret it as not having a care in the world.
They want you to worry, and be seen to worry, partly for reassurance and partly as your penance.
289. I would hazard a guess that *every* bank in the UK now has such a policy, ready to be implemented at an instant. Every bank manager will know what Code 42 (or whatever the magic number is) is and what to do when he gets the call from corporate HQ.
Slowly walk to the door, announce to all customers that the store needs to close due to an operational failure, lock the door, switch off the cash machines, get all the staff together and tell them to collect their things and go home.
More news will be available as it comes………
322 - And my final point ;). Of course, there was a third Parliament too….
I’ve just had a thought. I always imagined 42 days was an entirely arbitrary number that Brown & co just dreamt up. Now I remember it’s the answer to life, the universe and everything! There is a plan in the madness!
Morus@315: Interesting question whether overall evidence-gathering has got faster or slower as technology develops; As far as contacting witnesses goes, the fact that you can phone, e-mail, skype or poke someone in a few minutes where you would once have had to have someone physically get a message to them and potentially bring them back must make it immensely quicker to follow up leads. The corollary is that you have far more data that you could conceivably look at without pestering everybody.
There’s some interesting discussion on that here:
“Drowning in data - complexity’s threat to terror investigations”:
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/07/06/90_days_terror_law_analysis/
322 - I think we have to be wary of associating the presence of a legislature as proof of the absence of tyranny or dictatorship. Plenty of tyrannies have legislatures. Plenty of dictators have maintained the veneer of legitimacy with popular assemblies.
It’s should be round about now that somebody suggests we have a re-run of the Putney Debates, but that’ll probably have to wait until we’ve despatched Gordon and his little pals.
Gordon Brown has defended the use of CCTV, ID cards and the DNA database - saying they protect civil liberties.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7459053.stm
John O “Does that sound like dictatorship? ”
Yes, a very repressive military dictatorship.
The parliament - although it does not deserve that name - at the time of the Major Generals was hardly a representative body of anything but the regime itself. 106 members were prevented from taking up their seats as they were not Godly enough ie not what the regime expected.
42 days is not justified by the difficulty of decrypting data - you can already be done under RIPA if you do not hand over software codes to the police.
Of course RIPA raises civil liberties issues of its own …
And the [url=http://www.theregister.co.uk/2007/11/14/ripa_encryption_key_notice/]first case[/url] involves animal rights activists.
328 - Agree. It’s not their existence, still less their size, it’s what they do with it.
My rule of thumb is the degree of contested votes (e.g. nil in Hitler’s Reichstag or the USSR Supreme Soviet). On that basis, the Protectorate Parliaments at least had something going for them.
332.
Okay, I’ll try the link again:
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2007/11/14/ripa_encryption_key_notice
New thread - Could low turnout turn Henley into another Bromley?
322. No we’re not going to agree John because you are wedded to an outmoded, though very quaint, ‘Whig’ version of history in which each epoch represents but another vital step toward the glorious constitutional perfection of today. But I’ll have one last go -
The Cromwellian parliaments existed, sat, disputed, and got closed down. Cromwell ruled by decree for much of the time, including on matters of taxation.
On all the crucial constitutional matters that the Civil War had supposedly been fought over, Cromwell’s record was as bad, if not worse, than that of Charles I. Who won the competition to dissolve the most parliaments? who engaged time after time in excluding elected members? who subjected the country to a period of military government? who zealously engaged in extra-parliamentary taxation such as the decimation, illegal customs duties etc.?
We are supposed to take solace in the idea that out of all this chaotic process of arbitrary rule interspersed with random constitutional experiments, our modern constitutional arrangements somehow evolved. But that is Whiggish nonsense, trying to make a virtue out of a vice.
Cromwell was a ‘brave, bad man’.
334 - You get the last word. Mind you, I could do with a whig with the ever receding hair-line
163 &161. We have to be careful to not fall into ‘black history month’ trap, in which we have very dubious claims about African influence over European development, which do not bare up to even the lightest scrutiny, but the argument goes that the fibs are justified because it builds up confidence in communities with low self esteem.
The claim (and the inference) that Severus was a black African (bbc) is easily shown to be otherwise, he was, born in what is now Libya, but of entirely Roman descent, indeed his family was of the higher Roman social orders, he certainly was not african in any known definition of the term.
Steve Richards’ article not being praised in the Comments section.
Gaz - “Severus was a black African (bbc) is easily shown to be otherwise, he was, born in what is now Libya, but of entirely Roman descent, indeed his family was of the higher Roman social orders, he certainly was not african in any known definition of the term.”
Are the Berber community not African? Certainly not black, but still African!