Tag Archives: Politics

Capital Punishment

Posted on by

A petition is available if you require the illusion of participatory democracy.

My view: The state does a very poor job of most things to which it turns its hand; it has demonstrated little competence when undertaking such relatively simple tasks as mending roads, emptying bins or managing the economy. Why on earth would anyone want the state to have the power to kill people?

Private gun ownership, Concealed Carry permits and a Castle Doctrine on the other hand; that’s a step toward deterring violent crime.

Counting Votes – Ship Shape and Bristol fashion

Posted on by

Bristol City Council have chosen to deviate somewhat from the Guidance manual for (Acting) Returning Officers at a UK general election for managing the local council election, and adopted what will no doubt be called “The Bristol Method”:

  1. Bring the sealed ballot boxes from polling station to the location of the count
  2. Unseal the ballot boxes, and pour the contents into a big pile on the floor
  3. Make sure that each electoral ward’s votes are in a distinct pile
  4. Using a large broom, push all the piles together into one large pile in the middle of the room.
  5. The (Acting) Returning Officer, wearing a ceremonial bathing suit and swimming cap, will then mount a step ladder next to the pile, said ladder to be no more than 1.4 metres in height for the purposes of health and safety.
  6. The (A)RO will execute a swan dive into the pile of votes
  7. After completing 5-10 backstrokes – or front crawl subject to agreement with electoral agents and candidates – the A(RO) will then sit up in the middle of the pile and throw piles of votes above his (or her) head, giggling like a little school girl.
  8. At this point, the A(RO) will retire, and counting will proceed in the standard Electoral Commission approved manner.

Who’s Who in the European Parliament? (Part #1)

Posted on by

Note – this is an article about “Parliament”, not “parliament”

Subsequent to the 2009 European Parliamentary elections, the political representation in Parliament is now as follows (or will be when Parliament reconvenes on 14th July 2009):

Group Seats
European People’s Party–European Democrats 264
Party of European Socialists 183
Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for Europe 84
No Group (including UK Conservatives) 72
European Greens–European Free Alliance 50
European United Left–Nordic Green Left 34
Union for Europe of the Nations 28
Independence/Democracy 21
Total 736
(This does not include the 18 phantom-MEPs that have been elected – and will be paid – despite there being no basis in law for their offices to exist.

I spend most of my time pottering about looking at local politics, but I was moved to undertake further investigation of Europe by my recognition that I have only a vague grasp of how the European Union (EU) actually works. Fortunately no else seems to know either, so I’m in good company.

The European Parliament is the democratically elected (sort of) chamber of the bicameral legislature of the European Union; the other being the Consilium, or Council of Ministers. The Commission is the Executive branch of the EU, headed by a President (appointed by the Consilium, approved by Parliament). This is not the same office as the “President of the European Parliament“, which is analogous to the Speaker of the House of Commons.

The words “president” and “council” gets rather overloaded, so I won’t be discussing the European Council which is a Heads of State meeting, or the quasi-Judicial Council of Europe which is the convening body for the European Court of Human Rights. The Council of Europe also has a Parliamentary Assembly (PACE), drawn from elected representatives in member countries. Yes, PACE also has a President. Suffice to say all the mechanics of a “United States of Europe” are ready to operate as soon as anyone is minded to bring them into force. And many are so minded.

If you were wondering why epithets about Europe are sometimes phrased as “Brussels Bureaucrats” and sometimes as “Strasbourg Fat Casts”, the reason is that the Commission,the Consilium and the European Council meet in Brussels, but the Council of Europe, the Parliamentary Assembly of the Council of Europe and the European Parliament meet in Strasbourg, although the latter also holds meetings in Brussels which involves the entire institution shuttling back and forth repeatedly, for reasons that are too ridiculous to merit further discussion (clue: it involves the French).

Unique Selling Points

So, back to the headline – Who’s Who in the European Parliament? Since it is a supra-national organisation, the elected representatives of political parties in each member state each usually opt to join groups in Parliament representing some sort of collectively “agréable” philosophy toward governance. Importantly, these groups in Parliament tend to be associated with EU-funded party political organisations at a European Level. I would imagine there is some sort of long-term ambition by some European politicians to start branding themselves in national markets using the supra-national group name. In the UK this would seem unlikely, but who knows?

So what are the Unique Selling Points (USPs) of each of the groups?

European People’s Party – European Democrats

Formerly the Christian Democrats, the EPP and its less europhile “European Democrat” sub-group are the centre-right party in Parliament, and the group where you might find “conservatives”. The trouble with that theory is that the left-right political spectrumdoesn’t really capture the wide disparities in what different countries regard as socialist/liberal or conservative, left or right.

For example, until recently the EPP contained both Britain’s Conservative Party, leader David Cameron and Greece’s New Democracy, leader Kostas Karamanlis. The former isrelaxed about gay marriage and has been known to partake of the occasional herbal cigarette; the latter is the Prime Minister of a country which recently locked up a group of Bristolian footballers for dressing as nuns, the specific charge being that they insulted the Catholic Church. Is it actually useful – let alone accurate – to describe both the parties which these gentlemen head as “conservative” or “right-wing”? And what does that leave as a basis for describing the EPP?

Looking at the EPP’s 2009 manifesto, their elevator pitch is:

A European Union which is strong for the sake of its people, based on shared values and led by the strongest political family—or a weak Union with an insecure future, applying yesterday’s solutions to today’s problems.

And their policies include:

  1. More money and powers for the European Police Office, Europol
  2. More money for border control agency (gendarmerie) FRONTEX, the European Agency for the Management of Operational Cooperation at the External Borders of the Member States of the European Union. (Interestingly, FRONTEX may havemore helicopters than the Royal Navy).
  3. A Blue Card system for registering migrants (i.e. a skilled worker points system/Green Card system)
  4. A “renewed agricultural policy” (does that mean cutting subsidies?)
  5. Subsidies for “green” technology, and a contention that EU should get 20% of its energy from renewable sources
  6. An emissions trading system for Carbon Dioxide.
  7. “Improving the viability of social security systems” which I presume means higher retirement ages.
  8. Regulatory intervention to create “family friendly” policies – i.e. obligations on employers to accept part-time working.
  9. Support for “Life-long learning” which is a phrase open to many interpretations.
  10. “Language courses, entrepreneurial incentive schemes, vocational training and enhanced job placements are needed to assist legal migrants in integrating into the labour market and society.”
  11. More powers for international organisations  like the International Monetary Fund and the United Nations.
  12. “[A] common defence force with standardised conditions for intervention and rules of engagement for international missions”
  13. “The EU should differentiate its neighbourhood policy in order to suit the specificities of different countries, while at the same time laying down common standards on human rights and the rule of law in a Neighbourhood Charter.” [I have no idea what this means.]

In summary: “Then saith he unto them, Render therefore unto Caesar the things which are Caesar’s; and unto God the things that are God’s.”

Party of European Socialists

The Party of European Socialists – does exactly what it says on the tin. With a history leading back to the earliest days of the EU, when it was just the European Coal & Steel Community. PES continues to rely on the assumption that they will never run out of other people’s money.

The pitch:

We can build a fairer society by putting people first. Let’s take Europe in a new direction.

More than ever before, the European elections are about political choices. It is the choice between our vision of a progressive Europe, proactively fighting for a better future for our citizens: safeguarding employment and living standards against the recession, tackling climate change, promoting social justice, security and fairness in today’s globalised world. Or a conservative, regressive Europe in which the future of our countries and people is left in the hands of the market and of forces beyond democratic control

The manifesto is fifty pages long, so these are some of the representative items, as a stream of consciousness:

“Put an end to tax havens”, “Reform of global finance architecture”, Build high-speed rail lines, Broadband and Wind Farms for everyone, “Common European Asylum System“, Money for energy efficiency and green R&D, a “European Pact for the Future of Employment” – subsidised jobs in the green sector, more scholarships for ERASMUS students, “we want the EU to play an active role in resolving confl ict in the Middle East – with the aim of achieving a two-state solution between Israel and Palestine – not least by harnessing the efforts of the international community”, “simplify the legal framework for SMEs through a statute for European Private Companies”, “The European Central Bank must encourage growth and employment while maintaining price stability“, “a European Social Progress Pact”, “a European Charter for Internships”, “a social progress clause in every piece of European legislation“, “a European framework for public services”, “a European pact on wages, guaranteeing equal pay for equal work and setting out the need for decent minimum wages in all EU Member States”,”European Charter for the Integration of Migrants”, Special attention should be paid to integrating women, young people and the European Roma population, ”We will continue to build a strong transatlantic partnership with the new Democratic leadership of the United States of America.”

And so on. In summary, double human rights for everyone, with brass knobs on, no return and a pact in every pot.

Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for Europe

The ALDE’s origin story requires the use of visual aids and some sort of four-dimensional space-time diagram; one could say that they are a centre-left group that are willing to permit free markets as long as they get a piece of the action.

The pitch:

We share the common values and promote an open-minded and forward-looking approach to European Union politics.
We stand for individual liberty, a free and dynamic business culture, economic and social solidarity, sustainability in taking actions, protection of the environment and respect and tolerance for cultural, religious and linguistic diversity.

The policies:

“to further deepen, reinforce and enlarge the European Union”

  1. European integration
  2. A European Foreign Minister and a European Army
  3. More bureaucrats, less bureaucracy
  4. “A Europe of Security and Justice for all”
  5. Subsidies for Green technology
  6. A single European currency
  7. Less bureaucracy, more bureaucrats
  8. Reduce Carbon emission to Kyoto targets. More Kyoto.
  9. Planned Spontaneity. More Aid, lower trade tariffs on agriculture
  10. A bigger, better Common Agricultural Policy.

In summary: PES-lite

Continues tomorrow (possibly) with Part 2 about the Greens, the Nordic-Left, the UEN and Ind/Dem.

Click here for “Who’s Who in the European Parliament? (Part #2)”

Who’s Who in the European Parliament? (Part #2)

Posted on by

Subsequent to the 2009 European Parliamentary elections, the political representation in Parliament is now as follows (or will be when Parliament reconvenes on 14th July 2009):

Group Seats
European People’s Party–European Democrats 264
Party of European Socialists 183
Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for Europe 84
No Group (including UK Conservatives) 72
European Greens–European Free Alliance 50
European United Left–Nordic Green Left 34
Union for Europe of the Nations 28
Independence/Democracy 21
Total 736
(This doe not include the 18 phantom-MEPs that have been elected – and will be paid – despite there being no basis in law for their offices to exist.

Yesterday I posted about the three largest groups. Today: the fringe.

European Greens-European Free Alliance

This group is a combination of the hardcore environmentalists – including the Green Party of the England and Wales – and the “stateless nations”, the latter of which bizarrely includes representatives of the Scottish National Party and Plaid Cymru. Unique Selling Point: the only group in Parliament led by a self-confessed pederast.

The pitch:

    • build a society respectful of fundamental human rights and environmental justice: the rights to self‑determination, to shelter, to good health, to education, to culture, and to a high quality of life; [i.e. positive rights bestowed upon you by the power of the state, rather than negative rights that constrain the state’s power]
    • increase freedom within the world of work, not only by tackling unemployment but also by widening people’s choices, releasing human creative potential [regulation to create fairer jobs in theory, and fewer jobs in practice]
    • deepen democracy by decentralisation and direct participation of people in decision‑making that concerns them, and by enhancing openness of government in Council and Commission, and making the Commission fully answerable to Parliament. [Decentralise government by, er, creating a European super state]
    • build a European Union of free peoples based on the principle of subsidiarity who believe in solidarity with each other and all the peoples of the world. [see above, to the accompaniment of “I’d like to teach the world to sing.”]
    • re‑orientate the European Union, which currently over‑emphasises its economic conception at the expense of social, cultural and ecological values [see below]

    The manifesto:

    I’ve already read one left-wing manifesto this year, and that’s my quota. This one weighs in at 118 pages. Suffice to say it involves a lot of talk about Climate Change.

    Summary:

    Harbingers of the Endarkenment. If you see these guys winning elections in your area, then you might want to learn how to make a stone axe:

    Choose a fine-grained basalt, diorite, granite, quartzite, or other granular material that looks like it has enough strength to hold together under the stress of chopping wood. Usually, the finer the grain size, the stronger the tool. Remember also, that small grain size means more work but the tools will last longer.

    Test the stone by hitting it with a hammerstone or rock hammer. If the stone breaks easily, discard it. You’ll want tough stone. [continues – best to print this out in case of electricity shortages.]

    European United Left – Nordic Green Left

    The Communists and the Terrorists Freedom Fighters.

    The pitch:

    [GUE/NGL] is a confederal group where each component party retains its own identity and policies while pooling their efforts in pursuit of common political objectives.

    Notwithstanding the different approaches that its various components may choose to follow, the Confederal Group of the European United Left is firmly committed to European integration, although in a different form from the existing model. We want to see integration based on fully democratic institutions with a priority commitment to ensuring a new model of development aimed at tackling the most serious issues facing us. For us, these are: large-scale and increasing unemployment; ensuring respect for the environment; creating a common social area that provides equal rights at the highest level for all citizens; and,  meeting the needs of those who are forced by poverty in their countries of origin (for which Europe bears a heavy responsibility) to seek their livelihood in the Union. We want a Europe that operates on a basis of complete solidarity in order to bring ever closer  the real parameters of the economies of each Member State and, accordingly, we oppose the efforts of the most powerful countries to impose their policies on everyone else. [i.e. you should be taking orders from us, not them]

    The manifesto: Comprehensive.

    Summary: Bork, Bork, Bork.

    Union for Europe of the Nations

    Honestly, I’m not sure how to describe this group. Members include the Polish SRP and Lithuanian Peasant Popular Union, who could perhaps be best described as Farmers Unions. and Lega Nord who are Northern-Italian separatists. Formerly included Irish Fianna Fáil MEPs, who left to join the ELDR (part of the ALDE) but no one has told the UEN webmaster yet. Vaguely right-wing-ish, I suppose. Not exactly Eurosceptic, but certainly with more emphasis on state sovereignty – states rights, perhaps – than most groups.

    The pitch:

    [The UEN is] united by the values that derive from the respect for the individual which form the basis of European civilisation†and determined to defend the principles of liberty, solidarity and equality between individuals†

    [The UEN is] convinced that the European Union can only be built and prosper if  tradition, sovereignty, democracy and the identity of European peoples are respected;

    [The UEN is] convinced that the European Union must develop as a force that creates stability in the world and that encourages dialogue between peoples† [I don’t know what all the crosses are for]

    The manifesto:

    [The UEN wants] a European Union founded on the right of peoples to express themselves by democratic means [;] that promotes solidarity [;] to protect the legitimate interests of all the people [;] considers the family as the basic unit of our society [;] defends the quality of life and which protects the environment and the updating of the rules governing animal health and welfare in order to reflect new scientific developments; which seeks to overcome the problems of overcrowding and urban decline in our cities and promoting the development of suburban, mountainous and island regions and which safeguards rural communities and defends the traditional rural way of life in order to protect the quality and diversity of traditional produce from different countries and regions [;] a Europe capable of driving forward the single market [;] a Europe which pays particular attention to small and medium sized enterprises [;] a Europe against all forms of racism and discrimination [;] a Europe which co-operates effectively to combat international terrorism, organised crime, illegal immigration, trafficking in human beings, pedophilia, sexual abuse and sexual mutilation [;] a Europe where the Member States decide themselves on their priorities in foreign and defence policy [;] a European Union which seeks to strengthen relations with the United States [;] a Europe which is generous towards less developed nations in particular in Africa.

    Summary: Group most likely to leap a Dodge Charger over a dried-out creek bed yelling “Yee Haw!”. May include Hot Pants.

    Independence/Democracy

    The grumpy old curmudgeons of Parliament. Eurosceptics to the core,  this group includes the UK Independence Party. Their commitment to the cause would be more convincing if they’d keep their fingers out of the till.

    The pitch:

    The main goals of the Group are to reject the Treaty establishing a constitution for Europe and to oppose all forms of centralisation. Some members within the group, notably the United Kingdom Independence Party (UKIP), advocate the complete withdrawal of their country from the EU.

    The manifesto:

      1. Rejection of the European Constitution
      2. No to a European superstate
      3. Respect for traditional and cultural values
      4. Democracy, freedom and co-operation between sovereign states
      5. Respect for national differences and interests: Freedom of votes

      Summary:

      No Income tax, No VAT, No Money Back, No Guarantee. But they are Eurosceptic.

      Final cut-out-and-keep Summary:

      So those, along with the EPP, PES and ALDE are the groups that exist today in Parliament. Some of these groups are also European state-funded parties; some of these groups contain multiple state-funded parties; some don’t.  I hope this has helped you to gain a better understanding of the people running your life. I, for one, welcome our new supra-national overlords.

      Group Philosophy
      European People’s Party–European Democrats Authoritarians
      Party of European Socialists Looters
      Alliance of Liberals and Democrats for Europe Technocrats
      European Greens–European Free Alliance Flat-Earthers
      European United Left–Nordic Green Left Splitters
      Union for Europe of the Nations Rednecks
      Independence/Democracy Moaners
      No Group (including UK Conservatives) Billy No-Mates

      English Democrats – new Mayor of Doncaster interviewed by BBC. Hilarity ensues.

      Posted on by

      Note – BBC Bristol haven’t objected yet to me posting short segments of their programmes on You Tube as long as they are attributed; hopefully BBC Sheffield have the same view.

      This is a segment of The Toby Foster Bigger at Breakfast Show from BBC Sheffield, in which Toby interviews newly elected Mayor of Doncaster, Peter Davies (Eng Dem). Please try not to gnaw through your knuckles when listening to this, as it really is quite painful. A full transcript is available at Luke’s Blog, which was originally published at Andy’s Org.

      Doncaster, a city large town in the North of England, is one of relatively few local authorities in the country to have a directly-elected political chief executive – a Mayor. This is a good idea, and I prefer this model of municipal government to Bristol’s “cabinet+chief executive” model where an executive cabinet is formed from elected councillors and express their policy through an appointed Chief Executive.

      To avoid further confusion – the concept of an elected Mayor is distinct from (e.g.) the civic office of Lord Mayor of Bristol, which in our city performs the honorary role of “first citizen” and the legislative role of chairing meetings of the full council.

      Anyhow, on June 4th, the voters of Doncaster elected Peter Davies of the English Democrats. Interestingly the election used the Single Transferable Vote (STV) system, and Mr Davies squeaked through ahead of an independent on the basis of second preference votes. None of the major national parties were even close to being in the running.

      Followers of Bristol politics may recall that the English Democrats were the party that hijacked a popular local Facebook group and turned it into a campaigning platform.

      The best one can say about this interview – being extremely charitable – is that perhaps Mayor Davies was ill-prepared to discuss detailed policy points. Perhaps he was expecting something a bit more light hearted – “getting fitted for chains of office” and “settling in to the office”. Regardless – the key learning point: there is no such thing as a friendly media interview if you’re nominally right of centre;  prepare for the worst.

      Some of his points did actually have a reasonable argument behind them. There is a good rationale for getting rid of “diversity” departments, but employment law, contracts of employment and public sector unions all mean that it is not just a case of pointing at people Alan-Sugar-style and yelling “You’re fired”.

      The interviewer also offered a non-sequitur that for a Council to cut in-house translation services “is, under the European Court of Human Rights it’s illegal.” But this is simply incorrect. There is no legal obligation from the ECHR or anywhere else to translate routine local authority publications and documents into non-native languages, although there is one relating to criminal charges. Regardless, such a service could be offered more efficiently – on-demand telephone translation or even with Google Translate.

      Related Links