Prince Charles and the secret veto

Since the creation of the Duchy of Cornwall in 1337 the Prince of Wales’s consent has been sought on laws that affect the estate; from 2005, several ministerial departments have sought his permission regarding numerous bills. That’s the beauty of a hereditary dictatorship – laws can be interpreted to benefit the oligarchy and not the general population.

In a democracy, the government is meant to seek permission from the electorate. Funny that.

The Guardian have conducted another fine piece of investigation into lobbying matters. Members of both Houses, Commons and Lords, are now demanding Clarence House release the details of all information related to specific legislation (which his ‘advice’ was sought). Charles Windsor has a controversial history of meddling with government and parliamentary affairs; there is a distinct separation of powers with this  country, which prevents the ‘Royal’ Household from influencing the political debate.

If Mr Windsor would like to play the politician, then perhaps he should advocate a republic and run for the democratically elected position as Head of State; if not, would he mind keeping his opinions to himself?

Read Full Post »

The final liberal reform begins..

After four centuries, the authoritarian and overtly sectarian Act of Succession will be altered. Those who are unfortunate enough to become a Catholic or an eldest child born with a vagina, currently cannot descend to the throne. Descendants of King George II need the monarch’s consent to marry – which, also, is about to be updated.

David Cameron, a descendant of William IV, has come to the conclusion (finally) that his ancestors might have established a rather unjust method to rule Great Britain. If implemented, Tories have finally defeated Whiggism; a political faction, from the Wars of the Three Kingdoms, opposed Catholics on the throne. After nearly 320 odd years, the final battle between the Tories and Whigs is about to end.

In the 21st century this might seem rather pointless to the average person, but we did engage in several civil conflicts over this very issue….

The arduous and vigorous opposition to the discriminative nature of the hereditary system has been a tiresome affair. The Monarchy remains one of the final illiberal mast of our rather complex constitution. Democratization of the Lords is viewed as main article for liberal intervention, but the Crown is the most overbearing and illuminated beacon of illegitimate and unjustified power.

Hopefully, this is the path towards republicanism; a Head of State, with a democratic mandate, is far more effective than a hereditary oligarchy. But still, this is a welcome and long overdue reform.

Read Full Post »

Mr Balls is, quite frankly, an idiot.

In an article for The Independent, Ed Balls said: “Austerity is not working in Britain.” Well, the FT leads with this news headline:

Recent economic news proves otherwise. Current account deficit, service and manufacturing PMI data has beaten market expectations and borrowing figures have, too. When observing the ONS data files-on borrowing-the government is on course to achieve the Office of Budget Responsibility target (that’s if the Eurozone does not implode). Unemployment level is nothing like the United States or Eurozone. Plus, Britain has experienced record breaking exports.

If austerity wasn’t working, Britain would not be reducing her deficit and the economy would not be rebalancing.

Question is: Why does Ed Balls think otherwise?

Worth noting, his party leader and several shadow cabinet colleagues do not spend hours wishing death upon the British economy – far from it. It seems Mr Balls is desperate to protect the ‘legacy’ of Gordon Brown and refuses to condemn his destructive policies within the Treasury. Ed Miliband, I believe, probably agrees (privately) with the governments deficit reduction plan and concludes protecting the AAA credit rating is vital; however, his Shadow Chancellor is against such public endorsement.

The divisive nature of Ed Balls is casting a shadow over the Labour party. Officials are desperate not to approach the 2015 general election and be perceived as the party, who wanted the British economy to failure.  A message of uncertainty does not win elections (see Cameron’s “age of austerity” mantra).

It is very difficult for Labour to claim any economic credibility when its economic spokesmen is still loyal to the previous Prime Minister and not the current leader.

Read Full Post »

Picture of the day

 

Read Full Post »

Petition: Free and Fair referendum on the UK being in the European Union.

That in the event that a Parliamentary debate and vote (24 October 2011) does not result in a referendum of the British people on membership of the EU that that Parliament be required to debate and vote WITHOUT party whips of any kind, from any of the three main parties. If the vote goes in favour of a referendum. A referendum should be held within six months of the Parliamentary debate with cost not being an issue. The people will decide.

E-Petition

Read Full Post »

Best quote from the EU referendum debate

If the politicians don’t trust the people then why should the people trust the politicians

- Gisela Stuart

Read Full Post »

I still support our referendum promise…

Read Full Post »

As a libertarian, I support Occupy Wall Street and LSX

Dear protesters,

To borrow the phrase from the feature film, V for Vendetta, there is something terribly wrong with this country. Parliament, which Paine describes as the “only republican element of our constitution”, has succumb to vested interests. The accountability of the Executive has rapidly deteriorated over the last thirty years and a benevolent dictatorship has emerged, albeit partially democratic.

The same argument can be directed at the American political system, too.

I wish not to repeat the words from Libertarian Home about why the economic crisis is in relation to the state and not capitalism, but to point out areas in which we agree. Most notably corporatism and its dirty relationship with government. An alliance will be required, between Libertarians and the Left, to break the tyrannical grip of corporate governance – the Left cannot do it alone.

No business, regardless of its size or sector, should be bailed out by the taxpayer. If a business is failing then consumers have no obvious confidence in its model or product – individuals should not be coerced into providing unlimited economic aid. None of us can walk into the Bank of England, or Treasury, demanding a bailout or financial assistance – so why should banks?

Corporate welfare is not an instrument to any true capitalist system; it denies competition and entry into the market. Individuals have restricted choice and the state arbitrarily selects winners and losers. These corporations suck the oxygen out of the market, gets into bed with government and blocks all attempts to introduce competition (see lobbying within Parliament). Large corporations lobby for the government to have more power, and in return the government enacts laws and regulations favourable to large corporations.

Some of you will welcome my support to Occupy Wall Street and London Stock Exchange, others shall dismiss it because I’m a libertarian. The opposition to bailouts and corporate welfare needs to end and us libertarians extend the hand of support to the Occupy movements.

Read Full Post »

An Open Letter To “Occupy Wall Street”

A surprising announcement on Foxnews (which many of its audience thought was abhorrent)

Read Full Post »

Why we should unite with the Left against corporatism

The markets hould be free; I passionately defend the right of enterprise and markets. Competition is healthy for the economy and for consumers, we should be given a wider variety of choices without the state picking the ‘winners and losers.’ It is the individual who decides on what is a morally correct business practice. If we disagree with the product or marketing then our business is taken elsewhere.

If the company then fails, then it fails. Capitalism is about profit and loss, winners and losers. Nobody is bailed out.

In other words, laissez-faire is a proud belief of mine.

The banking crisis, however, is unrelated to laissez-faire or even capitalism. Corporatism is the root cause, along with its close (and abusive) relationship with government. Especially political parties. This toxic relationship has weakened our democracy and the economy, too. How can small and medium size businesses compete against government backed corporations? It is unworkable. And we, the consumer, are unable to make conscious choices without the state deciding for us in advance.

How marvelous is this democracy. We cannot get access to elected officials; but lobby firms, energy companies, corporations and bankers can easily knock on the door of Downing Street or the Treasury. I’ll be detained under the Terrorism Act, if I attempted to visit Dave or George.

The Left might be misguided in their solutions, but they understand the causes of this financial crisis; there is no reason why there should not be a united coalition, between Left and Right, against bailouts and corporate influence. The Tea Party has begun to do, just that, with Occupy Wall street.

Markets should be free, along with government and the people it represents.

Read Full Post »