During ‘the floods’ the public has been fed a ‘load of tosh’ by our political class (all of them!) which has been dutifully parroted by that section of our society known as the media. For sure our political class have, unknowingly to the public, ensured that parts of Somerset have been ‘levelled’ with up to 10 feet of water in places, but the one thing they have not done is ‘levelled’ with the public where the cause of flooding is concerned.
While understandably Somerset has dominated the news, other areas are still experiencing high levels in their rivers. Driving back from Camberley this afternoon, I crossed the river Windrush at Newbridge and witnessed the fact that river is still considerably higher than is normal. Further downstream from Newbridge is Northmoor Lock and its associated weir – just past which the Windrush feeds into the Thames. In view of the higher than normal levels at Newbridge, one can but wonder whether the sluices at Northmoor have been ‘regulated’ to spare areas further down the Thames – but again, I digress.
Not once, listening to Parliamentary debates, or reading/listening to our media, have I heard one politician mention ‘Sites of Special Scientific Interest'; the Birds Directive; the Habitats Directive, or the Conservation (Natural Habitats Etc.) Regulations 1994 by which the latter is better known in the UK. When I write ‘one politician’ I can hear the groans from some readers of WfW; accompanied by their thoughts that I am about to ‘have a go’ at Ukip and Nigel Farage – and how right they are!
Ukip employ ‘researchers’ – at least that is what they are called – so why did they not produce a report such as this? That would have enabled Ukip and Farage to ‘grab’ the news agenda; have thus enabled Ukip to ‘drive’ the debate; educated the public; and, more importantly, have provided Ukip and their spokesman untold publicity. Instead we were treated to Farage publicly stating that he knew not how the European Union ‘influenced’ the actions of the Environment Agency; and purely for that reason calling for a public inquiry. The man is an MEP of 15 years standing – should he not know about that which he complains? Of course, had he not thrown one researcher, worth his weight in gold, out of his pram in a fit of pique, perhaps he and his party would be better informed and thereby be more of a political force than they are? But again, abject apologies, I digress.
Digressing once again, I note that Ukip spokesman appear to possess good ‘heads of hair’ – why? Should they not all be bald, having torn their hair out at the roots in frustration of their leader being unable to hit the nail on its head?
(At this point it becomes necessary for the insertion of what might be termed a ‘declaration of interest’. I have always publicly acknowledged the expertise of the author of this linked report where his ability as a researcher is concerned. Before any accusations are levelled at me as one who is a sycophant of the author I should make known that I am no longer an active member of The Harrogate Agenda ‘hierarchy’, having resigned nearly a year ago due to a serious – and, on my part, deeply felt – disagreement over the methods of furthering that movement.)
The British public lack information about the European Union, its effect on their lives and that of the governance of this country – and they do not receive that knowledge from any of the Conservative, Labour or Liberal Democrat parties because all three of them, in one way or another, wish the UK to remain a full member. One has to ask why does the one party, whose basic raison-d’être is to make known that information, continue to exist while it does not fulfill the objective it should – unless of course it is but to further that which some of us believe: namely to keep its leader in the limelight, while keeping him in a lifestyle we would all like to enjoy.
Much is made in the media by political commentators that Ukip’s ‘support’ will disappear come May 2015 and the general election. That it undoubtedly will can only be laid at the door of Ukip and their penchant for missing the open goals that are presented to them on a plate.
Where our politicians, be they MPs or MEPs, are concerned, when cashing their payslips and submitting their expenses; why is it we metaphorically hear the accompanying words: More please, sir. It is not about time that we made a ‘Dickens’ of a row about this waste of our money vis-a-viz democracy?