Tag Archive: NIck Clegg

A gauntlet thrown down

In view of this article, authored by Nick Clegg in the Guardian’s Comment is Free,  on Twitter and using his Twitter ‘address: @nick_clegg, referencing the article to which I link, I have called him a liar and a charlatan; suggesting that he may wish to ‘see me in court’.

So let us sit back and see what happens next, shall we? This could get quite interesting.

Nick Clegg ‘takes the biscuit’

There is no act of treachery or meanness of which a political party is not capable; for in politics there is no honour.

Benjamin Disraeli  

It has always amused me that politicians, within the Chamber of the House of Commons, address each other as ‘Honourable’. The Oxford Dictionaries defines ‘honour’ as: ‘high respect’; ‘great esteem’. At which point I have to ask exactly why those, within a ‘profession’ in which there is no honour, who appear to have mislaid the quality of knowing and doing what is right, address each other as ‘honourable’.

Today, at his regular press conference, Nick Clegg is reported to have rubbished any idea that either the Conservative Party or the Labour Party would have the right to govern unless they achieved a majority of the votes cast. He went on to say:

…….that they will have right to decide how this country is governed even if they don’t win a majority, which is a clearly preposterous assertion. I think that is taking the British people for granted. I think it is important that we let the British people have their say rather than have people constantly assume that they can decide rather than the British people about how this country is governed.

Did not Clegg fail to win a majority at the 2010 General Election but then decide how this country should be governed? Did not Clegg take the British people for granted? And I should have ‘high respect’ and hold in ‘great esteem’ one whose hypocrisy is beyond belief?

Nothing demonstrates Clegg’s hyprocrisy more than an article he wrote in 2008 complaining about our system of government and democracy. Where the latter is concerned, one can do no better than paraphrase something he wrote, namely: no amount of whooping and yelling by the electorate can obscure Westminster’s guilty secret: the rules of the game are totally stacked in favour of politicians, rendering democracy per se largely impotent.

Unknown to him, Clegg’s trousers must have fallen down because all I can see is bare-arsed cheek!




The ‘Centre Ground’

What may be termed the three main political parties, Conservative, Labour and Liberal Democrats, are all fighting to occupy what, in political circles, is termed the ‘centre ground’ – in other words, attempting to be all things to all men. Why? In order to garner the votes of those 35% that did not vote in the General Election of 2010.

An article in The Economist is headlined: The Reluctant Kingmakers – and it is those reluctant kingmakers that the main ‘big-three’ are courting; not to provide those that did not vote in 2010 with that which they would like to see happen, but purely to garner votes and thus achieve power and position for the successful parties ‘chosen few’. Needless to say the fate of  those selected to be the  ‘chosen few’ will lie within the remit of one person; the leader of the party which has been elected to form the government of the day – ie, the ‘chosen few’ will be appointed by a 5-year dictator.

All politicians would have us believe that they trust the public, a statement that was illustrated by Nick Clegg who said: …..But as liberals, we place our faith in people……

If political parties place their faith in people, then why do we have to be ruled; why do we have to be dictated to? If politicians have faith in the people then why do not politicians recognise that it is the people who are sovereign, rather than Parliament?

Where the political class are concerned I am reminded of a statement attributed to Danielle de Niese: I have to take care of myself. It’s about self-preservation; which to my thinking sums up the attitude of our politicians – they are not one iota interested in our well-being but rather their lust for power over us. While the system of representative democracy continues, so will we be subjected to what amounts to no more than dictatorial rule.

Wherever you look within the ‘political field’ – be that Cash, Hannan, Carswell, Farage, or any other politician who professes to be concerned about their fellow man – and/or the state of our country – all those people have only one aim: they wish to govern us, to rule us; and thus to be in a position to decide our every thought, our every action.

And that is democracy in action? Demos: People; Kratos: power – People Power?

Just asking………


Islam a religion of peace and love – Clegg

Christopher Hope, Senior Political Correspondent of the Daily Telegraph, reports that Clegg said:

“An unspeakable act has been conducted in their name. Yet while this has provoked feelings of frustration and anger – it flies in the face of the peace and love that Islam teaches……”

Nick Clegg gave a speech at the Hugh Cubitt Peabody Centre in Islington today and either the words Hope attributes to Clegg were uttered at a different event or there would appear to be a little rewriting involved. A transcript of Clegg’s speech has been issued by Inside Government and the words Hope provides do not appear, in their entirety, in the transcript.

According to the transcript, Clegg ended his speech with a quote from the Quran,; verse 32, Chapter 5:

“If anyone kills a human being, it shall be as though he killed all mankind, whereas if anyone saves a life it shall be as though he saved the whole of mankind.”

Perhaps I may do likewise:, quoting verse 51, Chapter 5:

” O ye who believe! take not the Jews and the Christians for your friends: They are but friends to each other. And he amongst you that turns to them is of them. Verily Allah guideth not a people unjust.”

Peace and love? It would appear not.


Not another lie?

Richard North, EUReferendum, has posted on the subject of Nick Clegg’s “phone-in” on LBC in which Clegg repeated the oft-made claim:

“that about three million, one in ten jobs in this country are dependent now, one way or the other, on our membership of the world’s largest borderless single market”.

Let us rewind to 31st October 2011 and Nick Clegg, Today on BBC Radio Four:

“There are three million of our fellow citizens, men and women, in this country whose jobs rely directly on our participation and role and place in what is after all the world’s largest borderless single market with 500 million consumers right on our doorstep… isolation costs jobs, costs growth, costs people’s livelihood.”

This figure of three million jobs has been quoted since 2000, here by Stephen Byers (Trade and Industry Secretary) and here by Tony Blair. In the same year a report was issued by the South Bank University in which the figure of three million is mentioned. Yet another report was published in 2000 by the National Institute of Economic and Social Research in which it is stated that: “detailed estimates from input-output tables suggest that up to 3.2 million UK jobs are now associated directly with exports of goods and services to other EU countries” and went on to state that: “there is no reason to suppose that many of these [jobs], if any, would be lost permanently if Britain were to leave the EU”.

From Hansard of 2011 a figure of 3.5 million was mentioned during a BIS debate in the HoC about overseas investment, based on an analysis apparently conducted in 2006. Further, a BIS report from February 2011, on the UK Government Response to the European Commission Consultation on the Single Market Act, stated that “the single market has also contributed to increased growth of at least 1.85 per cent and the creation of 2.75 million new jobs across the EU since 1992.”

There was a further report in 2008, by the predecessor to BIS namely the BERR, which found that: “approximately 3 – 3.5 million British jobs are linked (both directly and indirectly) with exports to the EU”.

An extensive search of the EU website has failed to produce one report by the Commission about any UK-specific estimates of the number of jobs created as a consequence of EU membership.

Another interesting fact is that, if this figure of three million can be traced back to 2000, it seems a tad strange that current estimates are the same as those made twelve years ago – not least because we have seen a significant recession during this period.

With all the instances of politicians being economical with the actualité, it is becoming obvious that they have no intention of promoting accuracy in any public debate – which is a surprise (not)!



The deep-seated problem in the Labour Party (or any other party come to that)

To which picture the caption is one of two parts: “There but for the grace of God would I be” and “Make the most of it Ed, your days are numbered.*”

And to illustrate the careerist/ambitionist aspect of our present system of democracy one could change the picture to one of George Osborne or Vince Cable and the sentiments of the caption would be just as pertinent where the object of loathing was, respectively, Cameron or Clegg.

I’m reminded of a section of the lyrics to a Sandie Shaw song, one entitled “Puppet On A String”:

“I may win on the roundabout
Then I’ll lose on the swings
In or out, there is never a doubt
Just who’s pulling the strings
I’m all tied up to you
But where’s it leading me to?”

The answer to the question posed, unless we act now and change our system of democracy, is one of political servitude.

Which, in turn, begs the question where, in our present system of democracy, is the “demos” (people) and “kratos” (power), or people power?

Just saying/asking…………….. (again)

*Where Umunna is concerned, the captions apply to both Eds!

Another ‘stitch-up’ for 2015?

Nick Clegg is reported to have said that if there is yet another hung parliament as a result of the 2015 election, he would be open to forming a coalition with the Labour Party. Setting to one side the question of whether there would be sufficient Liberal Democrat MPs* to even make the question of a coalition possible, what I find interesting is this quote:

“If the British people said that was the only combination which could work would be those two parties…….”

This can only be taken to mean that the British people would be given the opportunity of agreeing to another coalition government by means of a referendum, or similar (or has Clegg once again failed to synchronize brain and voice box).

Where coalitions and the present relationship twixt Cameron and Clegg are concerned, there appears to be a rather telling expression on Clegg’s face in the picture that has been used – but I digress……

Anyway, methinks that Master Clegg is getting a little too big for his boots and that he is counting his chickens before they have hatched. In any case, where current opinion polls are concerned, Clegg might not be an MP and it might then be necessary to ‘commission’ a post for him in sprout-land Brussels.

*Afterthought: the way things are going Clegg might not be the only party leader who only just scrapes into double figures where the number of seats obtained is concerned – eh, Mr. Cameron?


There’s choice – and there’s choice

So, we read that Cameron is more committed to the Coalition than when he and Clegg made the initial decision following the stalemate at the general election back in May  2010; a point with which NIck Clegg seemed to concur when playing down talk of them being ‘at war’. It can be the cause of no surprise that both speak as they do because the alternative, being in opposition, is not that attractive – at least not when they have both had a taste of the ‘good life’.

It is important to note that both men are planning a new ‘slimmed-down’ agreement setting out the Coalition’s plans for the remainder of this parliamentary term. So for the second time within a period of less than three years the British electorate are to be presented with a document/manifesto on which they have not been given the opportunity of expressing an opinion. Such a document has no place in a democracy, in fact it is more akin to an edict produced by a dictatorship. Oh, wait………

The majority of the electorate will no doubt let the planned ‘slimmed-down’ agreement pass them by, while shrugging their shoulders in resignation and one can understand such a reaction; although conversely one can but be amazed that they have allowed their democracy and political process to be highjacked by those they have elected without raising their voices in dissent. On the other hand, in fairness it could be argued that they have never been informed that besides representative democracy there are other systems in being which would allow them to control political excess and emasculation of democracy.

It is that which the Harrogate Agenda hopes to produce for the approval of the electorate, the opportunity to debate a number of proposals for change; because, as Cameron once famously said, we cannot continue as we are. The final proposals that are put to the electorate will either be accepted, amended, or dismissed outright – but the important point is that it will be the people deciding their own future and not two self-centred, career politicians telling them what they must do and how they must behave. For this one reason alone it is of paramount importance that people become engaged with the Harrogate Agenda and partake in its deliberations and the discussions being held. My one plea to those that read this and other like-minded blogs is that they will engage family, friends and neighbours, urging them to become involved.

Just asking………..


Comments prior to heading to Harrogate

Richard North, EUReferendum, comments on the Guardian article which informs us Nick Clegg is mounting a challenge to David Cameron over the timing of negations to repatriate powers. As an aside to this the Express is reporting that Ed Miliband is ruling out any referendum for the time being as he feels the issue was “not a priority” and that most people were more worried about living standards than a vote on our links with Brussels. Membership of the EU has no effect on living standards? FHS!

In his penultimate post leading up to the ‘Harrogate Meet’ Richard North also tackles the subject ofpeople powerwhere unwanted laws are concerned. Where the introduction of law is concerned, perhaps one idea is to delay ‘Assent’ for 28 days which would allow the people to organise a referendum before any possible ‘damage’ could be done – at present a Bill receives ‘Assent’ within days. Where I disagree slightly with Richard North is in his assertion that allowing the public to make law could be abused – methinks I shall have to ‘bend his ear some more’.

The Guardian carries a report on government plans for ‘swift justice’, commenting that it could resolve court cases within hours. If the Guardian – and the media in general – reported actual news then they would know that justice is already meted out within hours – Roger Hayes?

Anyway, understandably, posting today will not occur again until the evening as it is about a four-hour drive to Harrogate (with a stop on the way). No doubt a great deal of the journey time will be spent debating representative democracy with The Boiling Frog………


The Deputy “Reichsführer” has spoken

Politics Home reports that Nick Clegg ‘expects’ “everybody” in the Government to abide by the Coalition Agreement and get behind House of Lords reform. 

“We’ve had a discussion within government about what the shape of this legislation would look like, and we’ve agreed it collectively.”

Really? And when was the Coalition Agreement put to the people for their approval? Consequently, where is the mandate for the Coalition to implement this policy? To whom does the constitution of our nation belong – the people, or the political elite?

When will any member of the Coalition admit that, in effect, what they carried out following the general election of 2010 was but to impose on the electorate of this nation, a dictatorship?

Those in the Coalition may have decided on what House of Lords reform should look like and may have collectively agreed it, but the people haven’t. If the United Kingdom is a democracy, should not the people have so agreed – and if so, when did they so do?

And representative democracy is of the people, for the people, by the people?

Just asking……….





Hosted By PDPS Internet Hosting

© Witterings from Witney 2012