A small step in the right direction.


Decommissioning of the information contained on the database will begin at noon on Friday

No comment required. Obviously, they are going to investigate, and I’m sure if there was any wrong doing, it will all be properly sorted out.


Bit like it was for Ian Tomlinson, eh?


Police – out of control. Elected Police Chiefs with real power NOW!

Don’t believe a word of it. It’s all Daily Mail propaganda.

Oh, hang on…… (emphasis mine)

However, Google brought my attention to Nick Starling, an Iraq war veteran who despite no doubt being brave, clearly has the sort political policies most ordinary people would run and hide from.

Right. SO, this guy is some kind of KKK nutter, or something, yes? Erm, no;

Less government
Lower Taxes
Free markets
The economic principle of incentives versus constraints

Are we really saying that most people want to pay more tax, have even more government, centrally planned markets, and constraint over incentive? Me thinks not….

Now, I don’t agree with Nick’s (the American one, not the petulant school teacher one) assessment of Iraq / Afghanistan, but the rest of it looks spot on. I’d hate to be an individual in Nich’s class*, being told that wanting to be left alone, or pay less taxes was ‘not normal’, especially if that dude was a Liberal Demcocrat. I can feel mt teenage blood boiling.




* actually, precisely because of teachers with opinions like Norfolk Blogger, I despised school. Every single moment of it. If you didn’t follow the centre left consensus, you were a ‘Tory’. When you argued otherwise, and tied your English teacher in metaphoric knots, it suddenly wen’t from sitting cross legged in front of the class saying ‘let’s discuss’, to being red faced and angry and threatening petulant 14 year olds with expulsion for making you look like a Guardian reading, ill informed, tit. Apart from Economics, where I had one of the best teachers in the world. I couldn’t understand why he was a member of the SDP / Liberal alliance. All of the other Fibbers I had met were arrogant Social Democrats with Volvos. Looking back, I know realise he was one of the few proper (i.e. classical) liberals left in the old Liberal Party. It’s a shame he is dead now, as I would like to return and shake his hand. ‘The problem with you, Harry, is that you are a bit of an anarchist. You are also exceedingly lazy’. Although I hadn’t a clue what that meant as a 14 year old ~ guilty as charged!

That the minimum wage damages the work prospects of the least skilled is simple economics. Every person’s labour has value ~ a surgeon can command a higher wage than a warehouse picker, and so on. Clearly, setting a minimum wage that two parties can agree on for a job as ‘x’ instantly condemns those who’s market worth is less than ‘x’ to a life of benefits. External training may alleviate this, but most training and skill enhancement that is valued by employers is achieved on the job, as it were. Todays picker becomes tomorrows shift leader, next years supervisor, manager, etc. Pricing the least skilled out off a chance of the first foot on this ladder has is consequences.

These people are, to a large extent, invisible. The benefits system is so complex and clumber some, with such incredible marginal withdrawal rates that I suspect that many on long term benefits aren’t aware how unemployable the minimum wage has made them. Sure, they know that they can’t walk into a job that would make working worthwhile, but they probably don’t know that a minimum wage job is out of their reach ~ minimum wage jobs that give them an extra £5 a week for 40 hours work make no sense at all (your bus fare would wipe that out) so they seldom apply.

Now, let us assume that IDS actually manages to come up with a simplified benefits system that doesn’t punish people for working. Suddenly, it would be worth doing that part time cleaning job, a bit of casual sweeping in a builders yard, etc. Then, horror of horrors, some people are going to find that the minimum wage has priced them out of a job. They can’t say to the gaffer ‘give us a months trial on £3 an hour, and if you’re happy take me on at £5’, because that would be illegal.

Could we see the minimum wage issue being debated again? At the moment, to oppose it has one caricatured as some kind of Victorian Villain, sending children up chimneys and down pipes for a penny a day. However, if the people the minimum wage was designed to protect find it is preventing them entering the workplace, the debate may be very different indeed.

I was going to write something on this subject when Iain Dale posted this article on his blog, but walked away and calmed down a bit.

I’m sorry, Iain, but you are so totally wrong on this subject it hurts. We don’t have the death penalty in this country, thankfully, even for appalling crimes such as those of Ian Huntley. If found guilty, we put the convicted in prison, often for the rest of their lives. Note, that is the punishment, and it occurs only after one has been found guilty by a jury, and sentenced by a judge who has heard both the prosecution and defence witnesses and evidence.

We do no throw people to lions anymore. We lock them up.

So like it or not, Huntley’s punishment doesn’t extend to allowing other convicted criminals to hand out summary justice in the form of boiling water and razor blades. When calculating a sentence, the Judge doesn’t think ‘Mmmmm, I’ll give the perv ‘x’ years, that statistically should see him recieve ‘y’ amounts of random violence from other inmates’.

Thus, the Prison Service do indeed have a duty of care to Huntley. They obviously may have failed in this respect, and like everyone else, he has a right to challenge this in court, which is the correct place to decide if there have been any failings, not on the front pages of tabloids and reactionary Tory blogs. Take the following, for example;

I suspect many people would award a medal to the man who slit Huntley’s throat. Did prison officers turn a blind eye? Perhaps. If so, who would blame them?

Now, if you are of the opinion that he ‘deserved it’ and ‘had it coming’, then if you believe in innocent until proven guilty, your only option is to argue for a return to capital punishment, branding, or some such, after a jury trial. I find it obscene that one could cheer from the sidelines at the possibility that prison officers were turning a blind eye while other criminals carried out a serious assault.

Yes, Huntley is a sick, twisted individual. Yes, his crimes were deeply upsetting, ruined many lives and robbed two children of their futures. For this, he should spend the rest of his life behind bars, not on the torture racks of other similarly unpleasant individuals.

Weekend tunes

Nothing to post today, so I’ll wimp out and drop you a tune.


I don’t care what the words of this song mean or signify, I’ve no clue. I do know that I was hopelessly in love with Harriet Wheeler, from afar you understand, and although that they were oft regarded as the wimpy, commercial end of indie music at the time ~ not something a Spaceman Three fan would admit to his friends, I loved Reading, Writing & Arithmetic to bits.

I got laid to this album on more than one occasion. What’s not to like?

“This was very black and white: Two of your officers who, despite the fact that I know you have given them guidelines because I have a copy of it, who totally disregarded them and were either so completely ignorant of the law, or decided to ignore the law – they were just going to say they knew the law better than the person they were talking to – they were very seriously intimidating. I find it quite worrying that I don’t think you are taking this quite as seriously as I think you should be.”

Anna Raccoon is right. If indeed he cannot ‘..guarantee photography guidelines will be rightly interpreted’, one of the following must happen.

  1. He should stand down, and be replaced with someone who will guarantee that officers will be sufficiently knowledgeable of the law, and be able to demonstrate a level of sufficient self discipline to respect that law, or
  2. Officers who continue to illegally harass innocent people should be sacked and replaced by those who don’t.


It isn’t difficult. Of course, if we had elected police commissioners, instead of ACPO protected bureaucrats, then the pressure to do this would increase.
Update ~ It appears that we can add ‘Rail Enforcement Officers’ to the list of petty thugs who like to intimidate and illegally detain innocent photographers. Jolly good.

Erm, OK.

They have found two. In the same area, from the same ‘batch’, which I assume will be the spider equivalent of ‘brood’ or ‘litter’. And how do they know this?

“It is likely they came from the same place.

“It would be too much of a coincidence otherwise for two breakouts and they cant survive in the wild for long with the UK climate.

Not going to be much of an invasion, is it chaps? I am only slightly less surprised that the spiders didn’t appear to have read their Napoleonic history than by the lack of any mention of this being caused by AGW.

Or, perhaps the RSPCA are aiming for some new bans and restrictions. They like promoting them, you know.

I had basically given up this blog stuff ~ after having to kill off the Nation of Shopkeepers, and then being able to return here, I found I had said all I had to say. I knew where my politics were after a long journey, and the election just killed me off. Shite all round. I was so wrong with my predictions that it was painful. Not painful because pride ‘was fucking with me’, but because I wasn’t prepared for the Tory hating Fibbers to do such a U turn, abandoning their civil liberties policies as quickly as Dave’s promise not to hand over any more freedoms to the EU was burnt to light EU wide DNA swapping fucktardary. I never claimed to be a sage, just a man with a few rants. Fuck me, my mates are bored of them, so I didn’t see the need to bore you all endlessly.

I was also pissed off with LPUK, if I’m honest. I’ve met Chris Mounsey a couple of times and he is a genuinely smashing chap. Can’t hold his wine after a long session drinking ale in the pub, and he should have made an effort to live nearer St Pancras so I didn’t have to endure a piss ant trip on public transport with the mother of all hangovers on a Sunday morning, but these small things I can overlook. Joking aside, and perhaps one shouldn’t criticise a man who will open his residence to a total stranger who has missed the last train back to Nottingham by one pint, I do think his decision to lead LPUK was wrong. He could have guided LPUK to write a manifesto that made ‘Road to Serfdom’  look like an ‘A’ level Politics fail, and he would still have been ambushed on the Daily Politics. Jeremy Clarkson, P. J. O’Rourke, and Penn Jillette could all have been similarly ambushed, and I’m sure many of you may think that they hold some pretty decent opinions of the wrong handedness of the state.  The Devils Kitchen was fantastic in a similar way, and thus, ironically, made him poor choice for leader.

But that aside, I don’t like little childish shits re-writing history to gain a few more vanity hits. So, messrs Boatang & Demetriou, I say to you this.

Allow me to start with a quote from one of your latest ‘let’s kick the bees nest’ posts.

Much of the firestorm that started all this off was because we left the LPUK (Libertarian Party UK) and levied some criticisms over that party’s direction and manifesto, and the lack of the development and democratic discussion of the manifesto. Amongst other reasons.

That is one of the most dishonest comments visa vi LPUK I have ever seen. However, more of that in a bit.

You fell out with a number of libertarian bloggers, some of whom have nothing to do with LPUK whatsoever, and then posted on LPUK’s members forum a combative post entitled ‘what’s the beef with B&D’, if my memory serves me correctly. Many people gave you perfectly polite advice that you were overly sensitive and rude to people who disagreed with your position, and that you both appeared to accuse anyone who felt that your proposed solutions were too state heavy as ‘extreme right wing anarcho capitalists’ or some such nonsense. You had a go at me, ffs, for arguing on your blog, that planning permission should be abolished and replaced by property rights courts. Your reply was along the lines of that ‘I wanted a free for all, blaa blaa blaa, x doesn’t have a right to do what he likes if it effects y’s property’, which despite my best efforts to explain (and it is pretty bloomin’ obvious if you think how a ‘court’ works), you defaulted to your standard position that I was some kind of extremist nut job.

You take criticism appallingly, however well articulated and argued, you often retreat to abuse, not just to swear bloggers but to many, many people who share different views to you.

You hijack the word ‘libertarian’ to the extent that anyone who doesn’t take your exact views (which you have just described in the same post as both ‘libertarian’ & ‘minachist’ which mean very different things to different people), as some kind of rude extremist (who you invariably then call a ‘cunt’ or some such).

Frankly, it would be funny, yet for the statement I’ve quoted at the beginning of this post.

I am no longer a member of LPUK, but I was there from the very start. I saw how the manifesto was developed, in full site of members, I have seen how policies were developed, again with full member input, they have all been voted on at AGM’s, or put out through the LPUK forum, etc, etc, and they are all broad, minachist policies so far removed from anarcho capitalism such that they are probably one of the most moderate collections of policies that any libertarian party anywhere has put out.

And yet you still bitch and moan, on and on and on and on and on. Boo hoo, we weren’t treated fairly, Boo hoo, everyone but us is an extremist, blaa blaa blaa.

Sirs, you are the most persistent trolls I have come across in my 16 or so years on the internet. Christ, you are more self obsessed than some of my old sparring partners on Usenet. But hey, you know what?

You’re just not very good at it, as is self-evident when you have to make completely false statements against people and organisations that have been demonstrated to be nonsense time and time again.

So, we have the party who opposed the wars shacking up with the party that started illegal wars. We have the party who claim to champion civil liberties shacking up with the party of big brother authoritarians. We have the party of low taxes for the low paid shacking up with the party of stealth taxes and the elimination of the 10p tax rate.


And the justification for this? We have the party of proportional representation shacking up with Labour to get the non-proportional Alternative Vote system, a stitch up by the big three to permanently exclude smaller parties from the system and give us endless, large state, EU loving, back scratching deals.

Nick Clegg and a ‘new type of politics’? Don’t take the piss.