Logic?

We are warned by the G20 that there will be a "Global Shock" if Britain leaves the EU.
We are also told that we couldn't survive by ourselves outside the EU in spite of our having one of the world's largest economies and more than half our trade being with countries outside the EU.

Surely these two statements contradict each other. If our economy is sufficiently large to cause a "Global Shock" as a result of our leaving the EU, surely it is strong enough for Britain to survive outside the EU? I suspect that the main shock will be to the EU's economy when they discover they will no longer get subsidies from the UK.

Whose figures do we trust?

"650,000 New National Insurance Numbers for
EU Nationals Despite Official Figures Saying There
Are Only 260,000 Migrants"

The above headline, from Breitbart does not seem to have received any significant coverage from the major media sources, and certainly not from the BBC.

What does this mean? Does it mean that the immigration figures are wrong and some 650,000 new immigrants entered this country last year? Or does it mean that some are collecting two or three numbers, perhaps under different names, enabling them, presumably, to collect several lots of benefits.

Your guess is as good as mine, but I think that we deserve some official explanation.

Unfit to be Prime Minister

A headline is the "Mail Online" claims

'Even if we leave the EU, we won't be able to control immigration': Cameron's counsel of despair as he turns on rebel Brexit ministers 

If this is a true reflection of what Cameron said, in my view he is totally unfitted to be Prime Minister. It is apparently based on his belief that if we are to trade with the EU countries after Brexit, we would be forced to have continued free movement of people. What rubbish, other countries trade with the EU without having EU migrants forced onto them!

If he is admitting that we wouldn't be able to control immigration, what would he say if there was a prospect of war for any reason? "Let's surrender now as there is no prospect of winning"?

The sooner we are out of the EU and have a Prime Minister who genuinely stands up for this country, the better.

Cameron's fantasy

In a speech given in Germany, reported in the Telegraph, David Cameron has said that Britain must stay in the European Union to help “confront the evil” of Isil and stand up to countries like North Korea and Russia.

What on earth can the EU do about either that Britain couldn't do outside the EU? The EU made a mess of their dealings with the Ukraine with Russia coming off best from the confrontation. So he wants them to have more dealings with Russia on our behalf when they've already failed once. As for North Korea, I'd hate to think of the EU trying to negotiate with them, they'd probably invite the country to become a member of the EU!

When it comes to Isil, letting several million mainly Muslim migrants from the Middle East and Africa come into the EU when experts suggest that probably one in a hundred is probably an active Isil supporter was a clearly a great idea! We will be confronting them whether we like it or not when they start terrorist attacks.

Indeed, if the EU is proposing to “confront the evil” of Isil and stand up to countries like North Korea and Russia, we would be best out and looking after ourselves.

The money we pay the EU could be far more sensibly used to improve our own security and deal with Isil at home. As for North Korea, what has that got to do with the EU? It is essentially an American problem and nothing whatsoever to do with the EU which is clearly suffering from delusions of grandeur. If the US can't resolve the problem, it would need far more than a miracle for the EU to achieve anything.

Cameron's remarks, like his previous suggestion that the Calais 'Jungle' would move to Britain if we left the EU, but which has since been proved false as it is the subject of an Anglo-French agreement not an EU agreement, will do nothing to help his case for staying in the EU.

Let's have some real reasons to stay in, if there are any, not scare tactics.

Calais - A Frenchwoman Speaks Out

Calais is a town where various violent pro-immigrant groups are allowed to protest with immunity, but where a peaceful protest by PEGIDA was banned by the mayor and an 80 year old retired Foreign Legion General was thrown into jail for participating in the event.

This link gives a local Frenchwoman's view on what is happening in the town where she was born and has lived all her life.

Everyone should read this!

Note her estimate of some 18000 immigrants in the camp, far in excess of what the UK media tell us.  Just don't expect it to get a mention on the BBC.

More information is in Breitbart.

Democracy - Cameron Style

When it comes to campaigning for the EU referendum, David Cameron has advised Tory MPs to ignore the views of their constituency party and of their local constituents and make up their own minds. Implied in his 'advice' is that they need to consider their future career within the party. Clearly Cameron has already made up his own mind to stay in the EU, and if the referendum is in favour of staying, the implication is that MPs who campaigned in favour of leaving the EU will not see any promotion and could even be deselected for the next General Election when many constituency boundaries are to be changed.

I have never belonged to a political party, until Mrs Thatcher was deposed, I supported the Tories, since when I've become a supporter of UKIP. Looking at the way Cameron expects MPs to treat their constituents and their local party, what would be the point of joining? The local party has very little power or influence; it is allowed to select its prospective parliamentary candidate, but only from a list of prospective candidates put forward by Conservative Headquarters. Exactly what are the benefits of joining the Conservative Party if one doesn't have ambitions to be a politician?

Strange as it might seem, many of our Trade Unions are more democratic. I used to belong to a Union and went to its annual conference on a few occasions. On one occasion, our branch had tabled a motion criticising the National Executive on a particular issue concerning professional engineers. The motion was called to be debated and I was allowed my five minutes on the platform to put forward my branch's views. The matter was duly debated and although we lost, our grievances were fully aired.

Can you imagine that happening at a Conservative party's annual conference? I certainly can't. It is simply a show-piece where the higher-ups in the party tell everyone how well they are doing and why they are doing the right thing, regardless of what members think. Why on earth should anyone want to join an organisation like that? I've never been one for toeing a party line just because I'm told that's what I should do, I like to make my own decisions based on my own conclusions.

Time will tell how many Tory MPs decide to ignore Cameron's 'advice'.

Hoisted with their own petard

The news this week from Australia that the Commonwealth Scientific and Industrial Research Organisation (CSIRO) was to significantly reduce its research into climate change and close down its Climate Division with the loss of jobs for some 350 scientists was about the only recent item of news which has raised a smile as far as I'm concerned.

After all, sceptics like myself are constantly being told that "the science is settled", so why should there be any need for further research?