Thursday, December 29, 2005

Daily Telegraph Leading Article urges Cameron to honour his EPP promise!!

The item is linked from here.

I fear it is now too late, for were Cameron to really go against his all too obvious natural character and live up to the exact intent of his sole firm pledge - the Tories would have been out of the EPP before last weekend!

Blair, Brown, Cameron and Kennedy - what hope for Britain?

Monday, December 19, 2005

EPP - Six days and counting

Daniel Hannan, to whom Vapid made the promise of having the Tories out of the EPP by Christmas, made a rather weak attempt to further justify the move in yesterday's Sunday Telegraph, linked here.

THE MAIN REASON CAMERON HAS TO ACT THIS WEEK IS THAT IF HE DOES NOT - HE WILL BE EXPOSED FOR THE TWO FACED OPPORTUNISTIC HYPOCRITE THAT THIS BLOG HAD SUSPECTED FROM THE START.

If on Boxing Day morning the Conservative Party is still within the EPP, then Cameron's election to the party leadership would have been gained on the back of one of the biggest lies in modern day politics - and that really is saying something!

Friday, December 16, 2005

Daniel Hannan MEP on Cameron and the EPP

The following quotation comes from the above MEP's web site and is extracted from an item dated 31st October 2005 and titled 'Its got to be Cameron' linked here, in which he urges party members to vote for Vapid. Emphasis has been added by me:


Quote

As regular recipients of these bulletins will know, Conservative MEPs have spent the past 13 years in an unhappy m├ęsalliance with the federalist European People's Party. To his credit, Michael Howard substantially improved the terms of the deal, but the essential problem has not gone away. As long as we sit with the most Euro-fanatic bloc in Strasbourg, people will not believe that we can be trusted on the EU. Voters will assume that we are saying one thing in Britain and doing another in Brussels - and, God forgive us, they will have a point.

Here is an issue which is immediate and vital. It may not set the world alight, but it will be a token of a new leader's good faith - an indication, in Opposition, of how he plans to behave in Government.

There is a clear division between the candidates on this question. David Cameron would remove us from the EPP grouping immediately; David Davis would leave the decision to MEPs, a majority of whom favour the status quo. With Cameron, we'll be out of the EPP by Christmas; with Davis, we'll still have this albatross dragging us deckwards at the next European election.

That alone ought to answer those who wonder how much substance there is to David Cameron. On the one issue which he would have to decide within days of taking over, the one which he must have been most tempted to fudge, he has been unequivocal and bold.

Unquote

How many Conservative Party members voted for Vapid on the basis of this and similar assurances from both MPs and MEPs.

Will Cameron have the balls to stand by his sole promise given in the campaign, or will he cave in to the eurofanatics within his own party and pressure from the likes of Merkel and Sarkozy on the Continent as once again reported this morning in The Times, linked from here.

Thursday, December 15, 2005

FT weighs in once more on EPP withdrawal - Vapid's vacillation drags on!

The latest pressure on the wavering and increasingly hapless looking new Tory leader may be read from here. It is headlined as follows -

EU conservatives threaten Tories with isolation
By Frederick Studemann, Political Correspondent
Published: December 15 2005 17:20


The final paragraph quoted below contains a curious contradiction:

There has been mounting fury among fellow EPP parties over Mr Cameron’s stance. Many feel that the Tories already enjoy a privileged position within the EPP thanks to exceptional terms of association negotiated when the(y) joined the grouping.

Surely if the Tories have been so pampered the other parties should be delighted to see such favouritism come to an end?

Another interesting analysis of the matter appears in the Times of Malta linked here.
What did Cameron promise Cash?

I had earlier reported the 'before Christmas' statement was made at Frimley, but now believe it was there Vapid actually started to backtrack stating he would hand the timing of the withdrawal to his shadow foreign secretary.

The best information I can presently obtain is this from the Guy Fawkes blog on 21st November, linked here:

Apparently Cameron has promised Bill Cash and Daniel Hannan that Tory MEPs will be out of the EPP by the end of Cameron's first week as leader. If wet Europhile Tory MEPs want to make an issue of it - all the better - a fight with them will be a pleasure. A move that will undermine UKIP to the point of extinction and pacify a right-wing base that is a little nervous about where Cameron is going to take them.

So either Hannan or Cash can probably confirm the time scale - if it were only one week then Vapid has already broken his promise - and rather than win over UKIP members to the Tories as was always the obvious intention of the move, it could immediately begin to have the reverse effect.


German Chancellor intervenes over Cameron, the Conservative Party and the EPP

The report of such an intervention appears in The Guardian and is linked from here.

Many in Britain might find such meddling inappropriate, only because the majority in Britain have not been following the reality of their country's loss of independence.

Cameron's increasingly likely abandonment of his firm promise to remove his party from the EPP before Christmas will highlight the truth of where the real power now lies in the non-democratic EU.

So maybe this publicity will prove positive!
Conservative MEPs' (Roger Helmer and Chris Heaton-Harris) brief on the EPP Issue


THE EPP ISSUE

There has been a lot of coverage in the media about David Cameron's decision to take Conservative MEPs out of the EPP group, and a great deal of misinformation. Now Roger Helmer and Chris Heaton-Harris set out the facts as they see them.

The need for consistency

You may have seen the recent press coverage concerning the Conservative MEPs’ relationship with the ultra-federalist European People’s Party. David Cameron has been attacked by several Euro-enthusiasts for promising to end this unhappy link.

It is usually the way in politics that, when a change is proposed, its opponents become hyper-active while its supporters sit back and take things for granted. I hope, though, that, on this issue, those who support the leader’s line will give him public backing. If you are one of the overwhelming majority of Conservatives who would like to restore honour and consistency to our position in Brussels, please tell our new Shadow Foreign Secretary, William Hague. His email is haguew@parliament.uk. You might also like to copy in the leader of the Conservative MEPs, Timothy Kirkhope(tkirkhope@europarl.eu.int), and David himself: camerond@parliament.uk. I am sure they will appreciate your support.

For those unfamiliar with the issue, there follows a short briefing note.

What is the European People’s Party?

The European People’s Party (EPP) is a union of Centrist and Christian Democratic parties founded in 1976 to promote European integration. Its Basic Charter commits it to “compete for the realisation of a United States of Europe”. Its current manifesto advocates:

· A European police force and army

· Single EU seats on the UN, the IMF and the WTO

· A European president and foreign minister

· The abolition of the national veto

· A pan-European income tax, to be levied by the European Parliament

Isn’t the EPP the main Centre-Right grouping in Strasbourg?

No. British journalists keep calling it “Centre-Right”, but the EPP itself angrily rejects the label. It insists that it is “the Party of the Centre”, steering a middle course between the command economy demanded by the Socialists and the free market supported by the Liberals. According to its Basic Charter, the chief goal of economic policy is “social solidarity, so that the fruits of economic success many be evenly distributed”. The EPP campaigns for a high minimum wage, strong trade unions, a larger EU budget, a barrage of “anti-discrimination” measures and an extension of the Social Chapter.

Why do some Tory MEPs want to sit with the EPP?

It is largely a generational divide. Many of the MEPs elected during the 1980s have a view of Europe not very far removed from that of the EPP. Their careers have been built within the EPP, and some of them now enjoy positions in consequence. They fear that, outside the EPP, they would have to start all over again. The Conservatives would still have the same per capita entitlement to committee posts, overseas delegations and so forth; but there is no guarantee that the same people would hold them, since the Tory Euro-philes would be the minority in a Euro-sceptic Group.

Are there logistical advantages to being part of a large bloc?

No; quite the contrary. The British Conservatives are entitled to staff and financing in proportion to their numbers. But all such resources go through the Groups. As things stand, the EPP “top-slices” the Tory financial quota and spends it on various pan-European projects—such as a campaign in favour of the Charter of Fundamental Rights. It even supported the “Yes” campaigns in the recent referendums. It is a similar story when it comes to employees. The British staff are paid by, and answerable to, the EPP. Many of them were hired during the 1980s on the basis of their commitment to federalism rather than any Conservative leanings and, far from answering to the Tory MEPs, they sometimes work directly against Conservative interests. Outside the EPP, the Tories would, for the first time, have significant resources with which to pursue their agenda.

Where would Conservative MEPs go?

They could either sit as Independents or form a new Group with like-minded parties. This is easily done: the rules of the Parliament stipulate that a Political Group must contain at least 19 MEPs from at least five member states. There are already 27 Conservative MEPs, and it would be a straightforward matter to attract respectable, Atlanticist parties from four or more other nationalities. In particular, many of the free market parties from Central and Eastern Europe have repeatedly sought to create a new Group under Tory leadership, and cannot understand why the Tories themselves are reluctant to leave the EPP. It is worth stressing that there is no question of sitting with extremist parties, or with parties that have a colourful past, such as Italy’s “post-fascist” Alleanza Nazionale (which is, incidentally, negotiating to join the EPP). It is also worth pointing out that several of the parties currently in the EPP are tainted by sleaze or extremism: Chirac’s UMP was involved in a number of funding scandals, while many of Silvio Berlusconi’s allies have been accused of corruption.

Why can’t the whole question be left to the MEPs?

It never has been before. Every past leader—from Margaret Thatcher onwards—has recognised that this is a question to be settled by the Westminster leader. The question goes wider than seating arrangements in Strasbourg: it encompasses the Tories’ relationships, as a whole, with other parties. Those who are currently taking this line strenuously argued the opposite when it suited them. When, in 2004, Michael Howard reversed IDS’s decision to leave the Group, pro-EPP Tory MEPs insisted that the question was up to him as the national leader.

Isn’t leaving the EPP at odds with David Cameron’s modernisation agenda?

On the contrary, nothing could be more modern than breaking with the 1950s federalist Euro-dogmas of the Christian Democrats. In forming a new Group, the Conservatives would be turning their backs on Old Europe and embracing New Europe. David Cameron has stressed the need for the party to change. It is striking that his fiercest opponents on this issue are palaeo-Tories of an earlier era: Geoffrey Howe, Michael Heseltine etc.

When should the break come?

Immediately. That was David Cameron’s pledge during the leadership contest. Suitable foreign allies are lined up and ready to go. If the issue is postponed, they may start to lose interest.

Does any of this much matter?

Yes. Leaving the EPP was the one firm commitment that David gave during the leadership campaign. He has since repeated it in public on at least four occasions. If he doesn’t deliver on the one thing that is in his gift as Opposition leader, voters will be reluctant to believe that he would deliver on his manifesto as Prime Minister. It is, as David himself has repeatedly said, a question of consistency and integrity. The Conservatives cannot say one thing in Britain and do another in Brussels.


Wednesday, December 14, 2005

Latest reports on Tory EPP Crisis

Times Online heads its report, linked here, 'Cameron's first big bloomer'.

The FT , linked here, titles its report 'Tory leader's snub threatens links with continental allies'

Tuesday, December 13, 2005

Open revolt among Tory MEPs

One week after the announcement of his startling leadership victory Vapid Cameron faces open revolt within his party. The latest report is in The Herald linked here.

Also well worth reading is this analysis of the problems the Tories have with Europe written by the editor of UPI, Martin Walker, titled Walker's World: The Curse of Europe
Drug use and the proposed candidate'A' list.

The full text of Vapid Cameron's Leeds speech setting out his proposals for a candidate 'A' list made in Leeds yesterday, may be read from this link.

Most major corporations when filling positions of responsibility ask the question as to whether the candidate uses or has used illegal substances. They also require that the question be answered!

What, one then wonders, will be the situation with Cameron's super-candidate list. Having refused to answer such a question himself it would be the height of hypocrisy to demand an answer from those aspiring to become his fast-tracked colleagues.

There is nowadays a dividing line within British universities between those who refuse any use of drugs and those who do not. The former group generally look upon the latter with either contempt or pity depending upon whether the abusers are viewed as perpetrators or their weak-willed victims. Graduates from the former group will fill the best positions available, expecting to answer the drugs use question as a fact of modern life throughout their future careers. Knowing the question has been asked gives some assurance that their future colleagues possess their own moral fibre or acuteness of vision to have been aware of the degradation and despair that abuse of drugs so frequently brings.

Simon Heffer in his column in the Daily Telegraph last weekend, linked here, made several good points regarding the difficulties of operating a list to favour the selection of women, of which this seemed the major point:

First, politics is such a disgusting profession these days that, with the exception of a few saintly figures on both sides of the House, most of the participants are so depressingly revolting that few civilised people would want to spend their working lives with them. Inevitably, women have more refined taste in this respect than most men, who are always more suited to the bear-garden. It might just be true that there are so few women in national politics because so few women actually want to go into national politics.

Given the obviously sleazy nature of the new conservative leader as confirmed by his own refusal to answer the drugs question, is it likely that non-drug using British graduates of the calibre sought by Vapid will really be likely to put themselves forward to be associated with the likes of Conservative MPs in particular who have promoted to their head such a vacillating and vacuous man.

What then will Cameron's 'A' list eventually become, already having excluded fifty per cent of candidates with no reference to character, experience or ability but merely whether their gonads are formed in a way acceptable to the Tory leader?

I have some thoughts on that, perhaps his Alist will be A for 'Abusers' of illegal substances or perhaps just plain A for 'Addict', whatever it finally becomes, serving under a man such as Vapid Cameron seems to be - looks increasingly likely to require 'Amorality'

Monday, December 12, 2005

Tory EU split deepens - while Letwin opts for cash over country!

Kenneth Clarke staes on TV that leaving the EPP would be disastrous, read the Telegraph report from here, while from the same paper Oliver Letwin proves that it's still the same old Tory party as he again puts cash before country, read that story from here.

Sunday, December 11, 2005

I will withdraw the Conservative Party from the EPP by Christmas. (Frimley 23/11/05)

As quoted on the blog The Anglo Saxon Chronicle linked here.
Simon Jenkins on Vapid Cameron

The title of this week's column is "Cameron’s face fits — but he can’t look both ways at once" - the whole article is worth reading and may be reached from this link.

I, naturally enough, particularly enjoyed the section quoted below with my added highlight in red, having coined the nickname 'Vapid Cameron' on this blog even before the announcement of his victory and his public demonstrations of this 'vapidity' as his clearly main defining characteristic! See the postings beneath this. From Jenkin's column comes this:

Hence the significance of Cameron’s most cryptic remark in his coronation speech on Tuesday, “There is such a thing as society: it’s just that it is not the same thing as the state.” This was an enticing dichotomy. Was it more vapidity or did it presage a real constitutional departure?

Collins Dictionary defines 'vapid' as follows:

1.vapid adj Bereft of strength, sharpness, flavour, etc.; flat 2. boring or dull; lifeless: vapid talk [C17: from Latin vapidus: related to vappa tasteless or flat wine and perhaps to vapor warmth] -vapidity n. -vapidly adv. -'vapidness n

The voters will soon also twig in spite of today's polls!
Vapid Cameron failing at first fence

Like a novice showjumper on a knackered mount Cameron has faced a refusal at his first major hurdle and is now returning to make a second attempt to remove the Tories from the EPP as he had so clearly promised.

If the federalist Conservative MEPs really stick to their guns then Vapid's 'career' could be spectacularly through the air and into the dirt on the wrong side of the EU fence. The latest report on the growing rebellion is in the Telegraph linked from here, remember particularly this quote from Shadow Europe Minister which was in yesterday's link:

However, shadow Europe minister Graham Brady said: "David Cameron has made a completely firm, solid, bankable commitment that we will end the relationship with the EPP.

"That does not mean we are going to stop talking to them. It doesn't mean we are going to sit in a corner on our own.

"We believe we can have warm, helpful relationships with a lot of EPP member parties into the future because that is the essential way to proceed.

"But he has been very clear. We are going to end that relationship and seek to replace it with a new group closer to our thinking."

Mr Brady added: "They will not persuade David Cameron to change his mind on this."


So why now wait months - to quote Lady Macbeth - 'If it were done when 'tis done then 'twere well/ It were done quickly.'

So this from today's link, particularly the direct quote from Cameron himself in bold is likely to become long remembered, as why now the necessity for the anticipated months of delay? Many who have suffered the pains of a divorce know the impossibilty of negotiation with a partner before the act of departure!

While running for the Tory leadership, Mr Cameron declared that, if elected, he would sever the relationship between Conservative MEPs and the "European People's Party and European Democrats", the largest faction in the parliament.

He reaffirmed that commitment immediately after he was elected, and said he had asked William Hague, who has returned to the shadow cabinet as foreign affairs spokesman, to put it into effect.

Interviewed on Radio 4's Today programme yesterday, Mr Cameron said: "We will leave the EPP. We will form a new group and we will be consistent Conservative politicians.

"It will happen. It is a matter of months not years."

The party's links with the federalist grouping has been a constant thorn in the side of successive Tory leaders, but Mr Cameron has decided to make it an early test of his leadership.

Saturday, December 10, 2005

Predictably Vapid prevaricates on EPP

Now the withdrawal from the EPP will take place 'within months' . WHY NOT NOW AS PROMISED? Read the Telegraph report from this link.

Friday, December 09, 2005

The Drugs Question

Dennis Skinner MP, the acknowledged master of the cutting parliamentary barrack, was yesterday banned from the House for the remainder of the day for accusing George Osborne the continuing Shadow Chancellor of having used cocaine. Read the Telegraph report from here.

The conclusion I draw from this privilege protected accusation and its wide reporting in the press is that the statement is most likely true and that Vapid Cameron's defence of his friend in the leadership campaign was at best misplaced. If it is not true and no evidence exists for Osborne's use of cocaine then sooner or later the issue will presumably be settled in the courts.

The drug question will continue to haunt Cameron's new conservative party which increasingly appears to be New Labour Mark II with the so far only obvious apparent objective of keeping its prototype in power, AND that just as Blair's reduced majority appeared to give some hope of a re-emergence of parliamentary democracy via Labour's own disgruntled backbenchers.

Vapid was admired in the media during the campaign for refusing to give a direct answer to the question of whether or not he had used illegal substances. The thinking public will however assume from this lack of a straight denial that he surely did.

While the majority of Conservative Party members and much of the nation's youth might consider this of minor importance, those responsible for legislating, administering or enforcing the law will surely have to give considerable thought as to whether they will in the future be able to serve under a government led by individuals who seem to have in the past knowingly indulged in illegal activities, albeit ones for which they have as yet tobe brought to account.

Wednesday, December 07, 2005

The knives are out for Vapid!

As foreseen on this blog, the media annihalation of the non-entity that is Cameron, has not been long in taking off! It was predicted here that DC would be mutilated and mangled by the media well before the next election!!!! At this rate he will hardly last until the next council elections.

Witness these quotes from a BBC report which overall is one of the most effective character assassinations I have yet to see, and may be read in full by clicking here.

Jeff Randall, writing in The Daily Telegraph where he is a senior executive, said he would not trust Mr Cameron "with my daughter's pocket money".

"To describe Cameron's approach to corporate PR as unhelpful and evasive overstates by a widish margin the clarity and plain-speaking that he brought to the job of being Michael Green's mouthpiece," wrote the ex-BBC business editor.

"In my experience, Cameron never gave a straight answer when dissemblance was a plausible alternative, which probably makes him perfectly suited for the role he now seeks: the next Tony Blair," Mr Randall wrote.

Sun business editor Ian King, recalling the same era, described Mr Cameron as a "poisonous, slippery individual".




'Vapid' - After PMQ maybe Prat would be more apt!

The SNP MP Salmon probably summed it up best as 'a debate between Fettes and Eton'

Simon Heffer also makes some good points in his column in the Daily Telegraph this morning, written of course well before the embarassment in the Commons at lunchtime.

The Conservatives - What a bunch of no-hopers to have democratically elected such a plonker, one who has managed to make his complete lack of leadership credentials startlingly obvious less than twenty four hours in the job. With Hague it took a year or so, IDS some months and while admittedly Howard's failings were obvious well before his annointment at least the media and general public gave him a few weeks breather. The verdict in the media this time (as was obvious on the Radio Four PM programme) can be only delayed by their own shame at their earlier misplaced enthusiasm (or duplicity?)

May I now suggest the English Democrats to bemused ex-Tories - perhaps one (or more) perceptive and thoughtful Conservative MP is wise enough to read the writing on the wall and make a bold change of loyalties.

God knows the country badly needs it!

The Guardian report on PMQ is linked here, the Heffer column from here.

Tuesday, December 06, 2005

Vapid Cameron and the EPP

Only one firm commitment, that I can discern, was made by Vapid during the leadership campaign - that being the withdrawal of Conservative Party MEPs from the EPP Group (federalist to its very core) in the European Parliament. Let's see what now transpires ......and when ......and if!!!!

A perfect chance to see if I have read things wrong!
'Vapid' Cameron looks set to win

The Conservative Party appears headed for oblivion today. We will know at four o'clock Brussels time.

If the Bookies, press and pundits are correct then the nothing that seems to be David Cameron (who this blog will refer to in future as 'Vapid') will ostensibly take over the leadership of Britain's still main opposition party.

With Simon Hughes seemingly positioning the LibDems to steal the English Democrats clothing that may not long be the case!

The British people can hardly be worse served if the leadership result is as predicted. The English people even less so!


Monday, December 05, 2005

'Tory Party faces meltdown ...' The Times

The report from the online edition of the paper may be read from this link.