Tuesday, 20 November 2007

“How do I prosecute an MP for lying? You can’t.”

A few months back I saw a TV programme where a guy was investigating the fact that there is no law under which Members of Parliament can be held accountable for lying to the public. The only resource is to vote them out at election time.

The show detailed his attempt to introduce a new bill, originally called ‘The Misrepresentation of the People Bill’, and since changed to ‘Elected Representatives (Prohibition of Deception) Bill’.

The Bill was finally introduced as and early day motion (EDM), it’s a shame that the only MP willing to sponsor the bill was an SNP MP of all people.

The show was both enlightening and entertaining, and I recommend visiting the website and watching the video clips.

Also check the scoreboard to see how the MPs responded.


Sunday, 18 November 2007

A Crude Awakening

Just recently I watched the movie-documentary ‘A Crude Awakening: The Oil Crash’. Before I watched it I thought it was yet another disaster movie (which have been common lately), with the usual formula of lessons learned and ultimate triumph though new technology. But it wasn’t that type of thing at all, no it was a documentary and far scarier!

A Crude Awakening: The Oil Crash


The Plot summary from IMDB :-

“Supported by a powerful mix of archival footage, NASA shots of burning oil fields, and, often unintentionally hilarious, historical film excerpts, OilCrash guides us on an exotic, visual journey from Houston to Caracas, the Lake of Maracaibo, the Orinoco delta, Central Asia's secretive republic of Azerbaijan with its ancient capital Baku and the Caspian Sea, via London & Z├╝rich. OilCrash visits cities around the world to learn of our future from such leading authorities as oil investment banker Matthew Simmons, former OPEC chairman Fadhil Chalabhi, Caltech's head of physics, Professor David Goodstein, Stanford University political scientist, Terry Lynn Karl, peak oil expert, Matthew Savinar and many more.”

The main themes of the movie are the costs of being dependent on oil and I don’t just mean for transportation and power. I knew oil was used in many by-products but I really didn’t appreciate the true picture. The rapid decline of easily obtainable oil and the future we face with increasingly less oil, for a world requiring more and more oil from less and less places. Increasingly dealing with the future oil sources being what are effectively war zones.

The film also highlights the real lack of commitment of resource and money to finding long-term alternatives to oil. The most memorable part of the film for me was the statement alone the lines that to avoid the worst impacts of the changeover of our economy from oil to an alternative, we would need to begin the process 20 years before the global peak supply of oil is reached, the peak potentially happened 10 years ago or so.

The film revolves around the arrival and passing of the global state of ‘Peak Oil’ which is nicely explained in Wikipedia as:

“Peak oil is the point or timeframe at which the maximum global petroleum production rate is reached, after which the rate of production enters its terminal decline. If global consumption is not mitigated before the peak, the availability of conventional oil will drop and prices will rise, perhaps dramatically.”


I first heard the term Peak Oil several years ago via the BNP website, yes that’s right the BNP website. They maintain a section on their site which is a good introduction to Peak Oil and worth checking out.


While the movie is quite depressing, due to the nature of the subject, there is some optimism in the ability of the human race to adapt, with which I would agree, and add that we would stand a better chance if we elected convictions politicians with vision. Quality leadership is sadly lacking from the usual offering of the Lab-Lib-Con establishment with their big business links.

So if you get the chance see this film you should, and afterwards think whether we have a government which is able to take the UK through the transition from oil to an alternative without disaster, I think not.

Wednesday, 14 November 2007

Dear BNP

A couple weeks back now I sent an email to the BNP for their ‘Your Say’ page, suggesting it was time for a name change. Unfortunately it didn’t make to cut, maybe it didn’t go down well or maybe they just thought I was talking total crap, it’s possible. I prefer to think it’s because they receive so much mail these days not every email can get posted.

Anyway if it had been posted, I was hoping for some comments from others to gauge opinions.

So here’s the email:

Subject: Hi, for the you say page.
To: letters@bnp.org.uk

Is it time for a name change?

I have watched with quiet respect as over the last few years as Nick and his team have modernised the party, but remained true to the core nationalist goals. Internally the party is greatly different to that which split from the extreme National Front of the 1980’s and has since the late 1990’s become a viable option for the electorate to consider. Externally the image of the party to most people remains negative, largely due to the efforts of the establishment, media and leftist groups.

For sometime now I have been thinking that it might now be the right time for the party to consider changing its name. BUT WHY? Bear with me and I’ll explain. For many the BNP has a negative image and they will never look at the parties true message because they are told it is bad. If they were to look at the party policies, I doubt there is much they would disagree with. The BNP needs everyone to at least consider its policies, so a name change would provide a short-term chance to reach new voters, before the new name is demonised.

Secondly it is my belief that most N. Irish, Scots and Welsh have never really seen themselves as British, possibly in part but never as the core of their identity, instead getting this from their national cultural traditions. I suggest that only the English seem to have succumbed to the label British with the English identity under attack from every quarter. In today’s Britain many English themselves have given up calling themselves British which is increasingly a purely legal term, as our beloved governments tell us that every Johnny come lately is equally British.

I would recommend changing the party name to the United Kingdom National Party (UKNP), thereby stating in the name the wish to be the nationalist party for all the UK indigenous peoples, another thought would be to adopt a party colour for identity.

Anyway just my view, what do others think?