Tag Archives: EU Referendum

The people are mere ‘spectators’

Where the forthcoming referendum is concerned, the title of this article has never been truer. The latest ‘tittle-tattle’ that journalism has produced is the offering from James Forsyth in the Speccie Coffee House blog.

Just why does either ‘campaign’ need to be led by a political figure or anyone connected with the establishment? Just when will journalists recognise and accept that the whole idea of a referendum is that it is supposed to be the people’s choice – and in order for them to make that choice all they need is the facts pro and anti membership of the EU? Just when will journalists, in pushing for one ‘campaign’ or another, be ‘open’and in the case of Forsyth admit that the commissioning editor of his article is married to the campaign director of Vote_Leave?

Much has been in the news about Cameron and his cabinet being able to campaign for either view – ‘In’ or ‘Out’ – but if, as Cameron statedUltimately, it will be for the British people to decide this country’s future by voting In or Out of a reformed European Union in the referendum….. then the question must be asked, should not our politicians refrain from expressing their individual preference on the basis that as politicians it has nothiing to do with them? Unless of course they have a hidden agenda, in which case should we not be told what that is?

We are supposed to have democracy in this country – which we don’t – consequently what exists can be compared to a spiders web; a widening circle of compliant pressure groups and media; and controlling everything, at the centre, a prime minister with his feelers touching every strand of the web of deceit which he has created.

Democratised dictatorship, anyone? That it is, is beyond doubt. I would refer readers to an earlier article and the words of Peter Grant (Glenrothes – SNP) who said: For Scotland, sovereignty does not reside in this place, and it does not reside in those of us who have been sent to serve in this place. It resides for ever in those who have sent us to serve here. Watching the proceedings one could almost see, if not feel, the shudder of fear that permeated those MPs present when it  dawned on them that one of their own kind felt that the people should be able to over-rule them.

Until the media, in all its forms, starts to publish the truth, starts to publish/air the views of those that buy their services, we ‘the people’ will remain mere spectators of an event that is all about us!


Oh, believe me. The greatest egos are those which are too egotistical to show just how egotistical they are.
William Inge, Bus Stop

It would appear, from reports in the media, that Ukip is now involved in internecine warfare, with Patrick O’Flynn stating that Farage is making Ukip look like a personality cult and blaming his team of “aggressive” and “inexperienced” aides.

………as for the “aides”, it has always been Farage’s style to surround himself with sycophants and to get rid of anyone who he thinks might represent a challenge to him.


Does not every political leader surround himself with sycophants (witness Miliband) so that the Dear Leader in question is not informed that he is a complete and utter prat?

Of course, where an income can be created, do not sycophants accept positions in which they must know that, sooner or later, they will be forced to choose between their livlihood and their principles? (As an aside, one has to ask whether Owen Paterson would have accepted a position – had it been offered – in Cameron’s government, bearing in mind the content of his recent speech in the USA?)

The foregoing raises the question of whether we are best served by those who profess to represent the views of those who elect them; only for those elected to be tempted from their raison d’être and thus to be ‘led astray’ by their egotism and a lust for greater power and personal glory. Where is there any sense of democracy per se, if someone can be elected for one job only to be appointed to another – and all without the agreement of those who ‘appointed’ him/her in the first place?

So why the ‘jumping on the bandwagon’ of Farage vilification (the majority of criticism with which I concur) unless we also, in the same breath, criticise every other political leader for the same reason?

It is indeed odd to find those who have criticised Cameron, at times quite vociferously during the last parliament, then urging us to vote for him purely on the basis he promises a referendum on the UK’s EU membership, while subsequently acknowledging that such a referendum cannot be won within the time scale Cameron proposes due to the inability, for example, of anti-EU groups to present a unified opposition (leaving to one side EU procedural reasons).

Just saying………………………..











Browned off

To say that I am ‘browned off‘ with the continual misinformation that the pro-EU side promulgate in their attempts to ‘skew’ the argument about the pros and cons of EU membership, come any referendum is, to say the least, an understatement.

This is not just because of Gordon Brown’s latest article which appears in the Guardian, one about which the Guardian maintains contains an ‘intellectual’ argument. Intellectual – my ****; it contains so many errors of fact that it is not worthy of the term. Regular readers will know only to well the errors to which I refer, that it is therefore unnecessary to repeat them. In any event, in respect of the ‘3 million jobs’ meme ,not only have I written many times on this falsehood but a new report from the Institute of Economic Affairs (IEA) shows that it is not correct.

Then we have Open Europe publishing a new report (on which comment has been passed elsewhere), the first in a series it is understood; and a report that, where accuracy of content is concerned, can only be described as ‘crud‘ – and, as an aside, it has to be said that when considering the Wikipedia definition, where the first such is concerned one could be forgiven for substituting the phrase: a pile of ….; and where the second is concerned, one can only say that the ‘D’ of the acronym is the only action that should be taken on reading such a paper.

That this ‘misinformation’ is religiously repeated by our media without any attempt to research the veracity of what our politicians say not only beggars belief but, bearing in mind the assertion of Simon Jenkins, is an affront to to the readers, listeners and viewers of said media. Matters are not helped in this when our state owned propaganda outlet hosts a discussion programme featuring two people who deliberately lie in order to promote their own arguments – and personal agendas.

EurActiv has what can only be considered a ‘puff-piece’ on the forthcoming general election in which they write that ‘matters EU’ has resulted in Eurosceptism being firmly pushed up the political agenda in Britain. Two points: first, it is doubtful if the electorate in the UK have the faintest idea just how much membership of the EU actually affects their lives, nor have any idea of the extent of how ‘global governance’ affects the ‘laws’ that the EU enacts; and secondly, that in which the electorate ‘takes an interest’ is firmly in the grasp of our political class who in turn ‘control’ that which the media reproduces.

There can be no ‘free and fair referundum’ while the media and our political classes are in cohorts as to what is fed us.

Update: At the time of writing the above I have to admit to not having read the IEA paper -and having so done, have come to the conclusion it too can be classified as ‘crud’, or, a pile of ….. It is full of speculation, not fact; it presupposes certain ‘conditions’, while refusing to acknowledge fact.

Think tanks seem presently to be suffering from a common malaise – they are not thinking!