miscellany

...by this (emphasis mine):

Lesley-Anne Alexander, the RNIB's chief executive, said: "Mr Clarkson's description of Prime Minister Brown is offensive. Any suggestion that equates disability with incompetence is totally unacceptable. We would be happy to help Mr Clarkson understand the positive contribution people with sight loss make to society." [From Clarkson apologises for PM insults (From The Oxford Times)]

I can only conclude that even they acknowledge that Clarkson's remark was at least two thirds true!

Was this where Gordon Brown got his mad analogy of last week from? Or is the country as a whole just saying "let's keep the Titian, it's less costly than Gordon Brown".

If Gordon Brown is mentally unfit for purpose, can we claim all the debt he is mounting up is "odious debt", worthy of debt forgiveness as the actions of a person unfit to sign a contract?

Apparently Davos had a Moroccan theme for its last night parteee. Since this is a world trade event, I wonder if they got to sample some of the country's finest export.

Ingenious, but it should be you and I making the tax on this stuff, not criminal gangs and terrorists.

The wonder of Woollies? Can you really sell any old crap, let alone Pick'n'Mix, online? What next, Zavvi gets the concession rights to Virgin Galactic flights?

Oops - I had better stop - even markets have got frit by my idea for declaring the UK's national debt "odious" it would appear!

I had a go at the Guardian Friday politics quiz today. It said I got nine out of ten, and that the one I got wrong was a question about how many Prime Ministers had had a State Funeral since the turn of the nineteenth century. I reckoned four (Wellington, Palmerston, Gladstone and Churchill), they claim three. Who is correct? Or have I missed something?

By complete happenstance yesterday, I have a surprise Santander sponsor's ticket for tomorrow's British Grand Prix at Silverstone. Apart from once or twice being dragged through the cold countryside when I was seven years old to watch the RAC rally stages in North Yorkshire I've never been to such an event so I thought I should probably try it once.

I do support motorsport in general as I do believe it is the way the industry creates more efficient vehicles and technologies that eventually feed through into production cars and I do watch all the F1 races on TV. Though all this Max Moseley bad business does sour it a little.

But who do I support? The ticket comes because of a relationship between Abbey/Santander and Oxford Brookes University that was originally established when Alonso won the title a couple of seasons ago - Alonso lives in Oxford and set up some sponsorship deals for Spanish students to come and study at our School of Technology. But obviously he's no longer in an Abbey/Santander sponsored car. I have a small natural bias towards the "English" boy, Hamilton, and he of course is in the same car.

But, just watching the qualifying a new possibility arises. Apparently Heikki Kovalainen lives in Oxford too and is in the right sponsor's car and is the front runner in qualifying. He describes Britain as his adopted country (I wouldn't if I hailed from Finland I suspect!). Whereas the British born one has adopted Switzerland allegedly because despite all his good luck and fantastic income he can't be bothered to contribute his dues to Britain.

It would be nice to see a "British" winner of the British Grand Prix and eventually the championship again. But I think the answer is clear for tomorrow, go Oxford! go Santander! go Kovalainen!

Not a lot of people know this, such is the popular perception of the city of Kingston upon Hull that I rarely even admit it to myself, but Haltemprice and Howden is my place of birth. To be more precise, Woodgates Nursing Home, North Ferriby. At the time my folks lived in Woodlands Drive, Anlaby and my dad worked for Northern Foods.

We returned to the area when I was eight and lived in West End, South Cave for a year or so. I went to Hymers, dad worked as Finance Director at Moore's of Hull (then an Opel and Colt main dealer), with a chap who would become a life-long friend, Ben Moore. I remember the school bus from Elloughton into town, getting a taste of silage when on a school trip to Bishop Burton Agricultural College, the (much tastier) Stroganoff at the Cave Castle Restaurant, the horses in the field behind the house (I see it's been developed now for housing from Google Earth), standing in a crowd around Hull Parish Church to see the queen on her Silver Jubilee tour of Britain (and the beacon on the hill up behind South Cave come to think of it that was lit on Jubilee day tiself) and discovering snails of all things down the lane leading to the A63 (we were allowed to play near the dual carriageway in them days without being taken into care!).

Ah! The A63. Blessed road, for it leads you away from Hull! The landmarks along the way - Howden Abbey, the high bridge over the Humber before Goole, Drax power station are all signs that you are approaching civilisation!

And then, inexorably it seems, it draws you back too, and so, with me just a year or so into a boarding school career, my folks moved back to Hull, and I find the street we lived in there, Maplewood Avenue - one of the worst hit in last years flooding I believe - is more or less the very easterly most road in the Haltemprice and Howden constituency. I remember big rows between my mother and father during school holidays. I remember finally uncovering the fact I had suspected for some time - that Santa Claus was actually my mother with a bag of Boots cotton wool stuck to her chin. But dad was back at Moore's meeting the new wife, so I remember divorce. And depression. I remember getting caught smoking by my mum the first time. I remember trying to make lager from a Boots kit. And her wondering why she had found a condom in my coat pocket when she washed it!

My sister did most of her secondary schooling at Willerby, and they went to church at St Luke's in Willerby. I learned to swim at the Haltemprice Leisure Centre. I discovered a friend at school 200 miles away (and not a mile too many!) who at the time lived in Malton so we shared most of our train journeys to and from school as far as York. When I got back in touch with him after school, my father was living in Driffield and his in Cottingham, so I've spent a good few nights out in Cottingham on Sam Smiths and Hull Brewery Co beers.

So actually, a pretty significant place for so much of my formative life. But the days when a boy from Hull had to deny his city and support Leeds if he wanted to support a top flight football team are over. I still managed to feel a little glow of pride on hearing that Hull City FC had made it into the premiership!

Can anyone help me find this quote and who said or wrote it. It's to do with when a government does something or other nasty that may affect the citizens they have lost their legitemacy and the citizen is no longer obliged to follow their decree. My hunch is that it was perhaps Locke but I can't find what I'm looking for anywhere. Anyone help?

"Feel the Fear and Do It Anyway" is one of those lifestyle/motivational books that several colleagues about fifteen years ago swore by but to which I gave a wide berth. But maybe I should have read it...I've been out canvassing tonight, something about which I have an irrational phobia.

I don't think Lib Dem colleagues actually understand what I mean when I say that - they think I'm joking, making light of it. But I really am not. The thought of ringing strangers' doorbells and asking them what even I consider to be a pretty personal question about who they are likely to vote for puts me on the edge of a panic attack.

I can't explain it - I guess that's why it's an irrational fear. It makes me feel guilty afterwards too as I never get as much done as others out with me. But if anyone knows of an instant cure I'd be grateful to hear about it!

Sod the European Union and loss of sovereignty. News arrives this morning that two state owned investment funds - The China Development Bank and Temasek, the investment arm of the Singaporean government, have between them taken a 10% plus stake in Barclays Bank.

Now, there's nothing new, or inherently threatening, about overseas money investing in UK companies, but in this case there are two issues.

First, these funds (as with the Qatari bid for Sainsbury's last week) are themselves so wealthy because of state protectionism. China in particular is not operating on the same economic "rules" as most of the west, what with pegged exchange rates and state control of assets generating this cash.

Second, Barclays is a bank, and as such in an incredibly privileged position. It is part of a cartel of a few organisations that effectively have the ability to create our money. A few choice quotes should suffice to show how awkward this could be...

Reginald McKenna, Liberal Chancellor of the Exchequer in 1915 and later Chairman of the Midland Bank, at the time the world's largest bank:

"I am afraid that ordinary citizens will not like to be told that the banks can, and do, create and destroy money. And they who control the credit of the nation direct the policy of governments, and hold in the hollow of their hands the destiny of the people."

Meyer Amschel Rothschild:

"Give me control of a nation's money and I care not who makes the laws."

Robert Hemphill (a director of the Federal reserve Bank of Atlanta in the 1930s):

"This is a staggering thought. We are completely dependent on the commercial Banks. Someone has to borrow every dollar we have in circulation, cash or credit. If the Banks create ample synthetic money we are prosperous; if not, we starve. We are absolutely without a permanent money system. When one gets a complete grasp of the picture, the tragic absurdity of our hopeless position is almost incredible, but there it is. It is the most important subject intelligent persons can investigate and reflect upon. It is so important that our present civilization may collapse unless it becomes widely understood and the defects remedied very soon."

Franklin D Roosevelt:

"The real truth of the matter is, as you and I know, that a financial element in the large centers has owned the government of the U.S. since the days of Andrew Jackson."

It's not that there should not be overseas investors in our commercial banks and so on. But that our commercial banks should not have the ability to create fiat money on their own initiative but in our name. We must either privatize the money supply or nationalize it - but if we allow other governments to take over the function through acquisition we can forget worrying about losing sovereignty to the EU and other such arguments, we will have handed real sovereignty, through control of our money supply, to foreign governments.

<!-- technorati tags start -->

Technorati Tags: fiat money, monetary reform

<!-- technorati tags end -->

Over at Guido's he's got a discussion going about the possibility of pursuing a private prosecution after the CPS decided not to press charges in the cash for honours investigation. At the very least such a challenge would force all the evidence out in the open. There is still apparently some notion that Lord Levy and others will themselves prosecute the police for wrongful arrest, also thereby bringing all the evidence out - if they dare.

I can't imagine many readers of these pages do not also keep an eye on Guido's blog but in case you don't, I've got a link to Guido's Pledge-Bank entry in my sidebar (or here) for you to sign up to support such a move. It does NOT involve any financial commitment at this stage - it is merely to try to gauge the level of potential support. So if you want to see the peerage posse have their day in court, you might think about signing up to this.

Remember - a decision not to prosecute is not the same thing at all as an acquittal - it merely means that the CPS don't think they can prove something beyond a reasonable doubt in court. The posse should not be so smug or shrill in their denouncement of the investigation when it seems clear from the CPS statement that there probably are areas where there could be a case to answer.

In an article intended to solicit opinions under the heading "Should the Government attempt to curb house prices?" The Telegraph yesterday posed some very pertinent questions about the potential effects of government tinkering with house prices. Amongst all the various responses online at least - that it's all down to immigration, freeing up planning to release more land (presumably except anywhere near where the author lives), hitting second homes, buy to lets and so on - not one mentions the real solution - Land Value Tax.

But the questions they ask need to be answered by Land Value Taxers, particularly "Single Taxers" such as myself - those who propose eliminating all other taxes as far as possible and collecting the entire value of economic land as the sole revenue source for government (or, as I would prefer, for distribution as a Citizen's Income following the elimination of the state!). For what we propose would indeed reduce house prices and so put at risk what many home-owners and property investors see as their rightful wealth.

We have to offer responses as to why first, it's not their rightful wealth, that they have done nothing to earn the uplift in values they have enjoyed, and second, that the wealth itself is a chimera and their "loss" can be compensated for.

Anyone with an eye on the property market knows the issues as set out:

First time buyers are being forced into record levels of debt to get on the proper ladder, new figures have shown, with houses now less affordable than ever.

According to the Council of Mortgage Lenders, the average house buyer needed to borrow 3.37 times their income in May - the highest figure recorded.

Rising interest rates, continuing house price increases and an average stamp duty bill of £1,458 are all combining to price first time buyers out of the market. They now account for just 35 per cent of all mortgages taken out by people buying a home.

But I want specifically to address the questions they ask:

Should the Government attempt to make homes more affordable or should the market be left to its own devices?

Land does not and cannot operate as a properly free market. Unless you can find a way of creating unlimited amounts of it, and all locations have equal access to all other locations, locations are effective monopolies.

Is it reasonable for young people to expect to be able to buy their own home? Do homeowners who have benefitted from the boom deserve their windfall?

Should the Government ease planning restrictions to increase supply of new homes? Should stamp duty thresholds be altered to give first time buyers an easier route into the market? Should there be restrictions on second homes or buy-to-let mortgages?

Or do young people simply have to make the best of a bad situation? Should they live at home longer, as young people do on the continent? Should we accept that it is no longer feasible for us to be a nation of homeowners? How would you feel if the Government took action which reduced the value of your home?