We are developing the social individualist meta-context for the future. From the very serious to the extremely frivolous... lets see what is on the mind of the Samizdata people.
Samizdata, derived from Samizdat /n. - a system of clandestine publication of banned literature in the USSR [Russ.,= self-publishing house]
A year ago, Simon Davies of Privacy International had an opinion piece in the Telegraph pointing out how vulnerable ID systems are. His arguments are as valid now as they were a year ago, however, the government has recently intensified its call for compulsory ID cards.
Corruption […] besets most official ID schemes from Australia to Thailand. High black-market demand and huge investment by criminals entices officials to bend or break the rules of eligibility. An ID card system is a gift for corrupt civil servants or contract staff in search of extra cash.
[…] the technology gap between governments and organised crime has now narrowed so much that within weeks of their introduction even the most secure ID cards can be available in the form of blanks onto which individual identity information can be incorporated.
What a gift this would be for criminals. Whereas before they might have carried a copy of a dead person’s birth certificate, and maybe a driver’s licence and a savings bank number – all of which could be checked – they would now possess the ultimate no-questions-asked ID. They would have penetrated the plastic wall of security. Once inside they are safe.
On the positive side, Simon Davies points out, this would keep the Home Secretary busy, as in due course he will be able to announce yet another one of his crackdowns – on ID card fraud.
Here is a quote from an opinion piece by David Heathcoat-Amory MP, the Tory party representative on the convention, published in the Telegraph:
No one in the convention doubts the scale of the undertaking or the huge implications for the way Europe is governed – except, apparently, the British Government, which is completely isolated in maintaining that the new constitution is just a “tidying-up exercise”. In the convention, this caused bafflement and then some hilarity. Peter Hain, the government representative, belatedly declared a number of “red lines” on proposals that he wants removed, such as majority voting on foreign policy, social security harmonisation, and interference in criminal justice procedures. But if these issues are so important to the Government, how can it just be a “tidying-up exercise”?
The truth is that the European Constitution founds a new union, with a single unified structure and legal personality. The existing structure, which secures the rights of member states to make their own decisions and collective arrangements about foreign policy and criminal justice matters, will disappear. The EU will have “exclusive competence” over trade, competition rules, common commercial policy, fisheries conservation and the signing of all international agreements.
Please read the whole article, it’s terrifying in its clarity. To be honest, I don’t know which bit I find more scary. The one about the changes to the UK legal system:
The EU’s proposed criminal justice powers are particularly striking because they allow for harmonisation of national laws and procedures by majority voting. This obviously goes to the heart of domestic policy, particularly for a country such as Britain with a distinctive common law tradition, including jury trials, habeas corpus and rules of evidence that differ from those in most other EU countries.
Or the one about foreign policy:
Foreign policy, which is at present decided between national governments, will change completely. The new foreign minister will “conduct the Union’s foreign policy”. There is provision for majority voting on policies recommended by the foreign minister.
None of the above is new and has been bemoaned on Samizdata.net many times, but it gets more frightening as the process of EU imposition on the UK progresses…
Criminals carrying fake or stolen documents — such as passports and driving licences — will face up two years in jail under the new law. Home Office Minister Beverley Hughes will tell a conference in London entitled Combating Identity Fraud today:
This new offence will enable the police to crack down hard on criminals involved in identity fraud. False identities are commonly used by those engaged in organised crime and terrorism. The new offence would provide the police with the means to disrupt the activities of organised criminals and terrorists in the early stages of their crimes.
The Home Office Minister added the legislation was not solely targeted at organised crime and terrorism.
British troops injured in war are being forced to pay for private medical treatment or join the long patient lists waiting for operations on the National Health Service. A staffing crisis in the Defence Medical Services (DMS) means that more than 10,000 soldiers – the equivalent of 15 infantry battalions – are currently not fit for frontline duty.
Large sections of the Army will be declared un-operational because of the number of troops waiting for surgery unless there is an emergency injection of cash. Commanding officers have been rationing the private treatment but the amount of money available to each unit for private healthcare is not enough to reduce the number of servicemen and women waiting for operations.
One soldier, who was injured on active duty in Afghanistan, has now been told that he faces a 12-month wait for a knee operation unless he is prepared to pay £2,000 for private treatment.
Another soldier who recently returned from Afghanistan after serving with the International Stabilisation and Assistance Force (Isaf) has been told that he will have to wait six months before he can see a specialist about his damaged ankle. He may then face a further year’s wait for an operation. He has, however, been advised that if he were to go private, he could see a specialist immediately and have the operation within three weeks.
In addition to the pain and inconvenience caused by the injuries, service personnel are “medically downgraded”, if the injury prevents them from carrying out their duties. They are unlikely to be able to undertake courses which are physically demanding and cannot be deployed on military operations. Their pay can decrease and they may be passed over for promotion until fully fit.
This is just one example of how Blair’s government is treating the armed forces. The undermining of the British military is a result of a profound distrust of it by the New Labour establishment, despite the fact that the armed forces are the only state entity that has consistently bailed the government out of its botched policies (foot and mouth crisis) and allowed Tony to play a world statesman (Afghanistan, Iraq).
Blair achieved a measure of uncritical popularity with the American public, due to his support of Bush’s determination to depose Saddam. He risked his job and support of his voters at home in order to do that. It may be commendable and we wholeheartedly supported his efforts that resulted in the liberation of Iraq. We did so without any delusions as to his statist convictions, in which near messianic zeal mixes with autocratic tendencies.
However, those on the other side of the Atlantic harbouring inflated opinions about Blair, and occassionally making preposterous comparisons of Blair to Winston Churchill or other great British statesmen, should examine the way their pet foreign leader behaves on the domestic scene. Let the Telegraph article be an eye opener to the true nature of the valiant Prime Minister Blair and his tightly led pack of ministers.
We at Samizdata.net do not trust the man further than we can throw him. So watch this space, we will be reporting on the latest development in Blair’s successful dismantling of other worthwhile British institutions.
Here are extracts from a letter by Geoff Bean, an English dairy farmer, addressed to Steve Williamson, a “Special Enforcement Officer” of the agency in York. The York farmer bought builder’s rubble to make repairs round his farm, but received a letter stating that since his land did not have the benefit of a Waste Management Licence, this depositing of “waste” was in clear breach of the law and requesting that Mr Bean submit to a formal interview under the Police and Criminal Evidence Act (PACE) to “establish” his involvement in this unlicensed waste management operation.
I am in receipt of your pompous and ill-informed letter. How dare you write to me in such terms, as if you were addressing a common criminal.
The “waste” for which he had paid good money was about to be put to valuable use replacing the floor of a barn and resurfacing his farm tracks.
Were I a one-legged homosexual Afghan refugee/terrorist living on the welfare state, you and your ilk would not dare write in such a manner for fear of having all the human rights lawyers in creation round your necks, but as you are speaking to an honest, hard-working and overstressed Englishman, you appear to think you can behave like all too many of the vast and ever-increasing army of totally useless, non-productive, arrogant and bloody-minded officialdom, who are now only too successfully doing more damage to this once great and free nation than was ever achieved by Adolf Hitler.
Mr Williamson repeated that Mr Bean must submit to interview “under caution”. Mr Bean agreed to spare some of his valuable time to assist Mr Williamson in his “futile attempt” to justify his “bureaucratic red tape”, but reminded him that, since slavery in this country had been abolished, he would expect reimbursement at “£150 an hour or part thereof, plus VAT”.
That’s the spirit!
But rejoice ye not, since whether Mr Bean will face criminal charges for his breach of EU law, the agency cannot yet comment…
Update: If you think this is outrageous, you might want to share your thoughts with Mr Steve Williamson himself. And while you are at it, why not to cc his boss, the regional director Mr Andrew Wood. We have done a bit of research and think these email addresses will work, given the format of the Environmental Agency emails.
In a Free Country update Telegraph shows how security imposed by the state, crowds out not only its citizens security awareness but that of its police force.
Would identity cards help police in Bradford, who are having difficulty finding a one-armed, hunchbacked dwarf with a limp and an Irish accent, in connection with a £10,000 jewellery raid?
If this useful combination of aural and visual clues is not enough to track him down, you might have thought a card would help. The history of ID cards shows the opposite – that police start to depend on them, as they have on security cameras, and give up on more traditional sleuthing tools such as, say, eyes and ears.
[…]
Police end up turning a blind eye to criminals, who develop an expertise for card fraud, and come down hard on absent-minded old ladies who leave them on the Tube. And one-armed, hunchbacked dwarves with limps and Irish accents find it easier and easier to blend into the crowd.
The inimitable Alice (well, only by herself) sums up some ‘lightbulb blogs’. In the spirit of pro-Samizdata bias I select two for your amusement:
How many David Carrs does it take to change a lightbulb?
I had thought that the madness of last week’s lightbulb-blowing could not be toppled. I was, of course, wrong. Things are much worse than I thought then, in my light-hearted, innocent, Morris-dancing kind of way, and it is now perfectly apparent to all of us here at Samizdata.net that today’s lightbulb lunacy is tomorrow’s Mysteron plot to destroy the universe. Those who disagree must be conquered in the strongest terms. I refuse either to change the bulb or not change it. It is an outrage that anyone should dare to ask such a thing in the first place. I personally refuse to compromise and demand that they cease forthwith!
How many Brian Micklethwaits does it take to change a lightbulb?
Yesterday I posted about this article. Tomorrow I am going to post about this blog, which related to an earlier posting of mine here, about this rather interesting subject from last Thursday, which I’ve been wondering about for weeks, to do with car parks. I wonder whether anyone will comment or not? Sometimes they comment many times, and other times they don’t. It’s hard to predict these things. In the meantime, I might watch Friends tonight. Not sure yet, depends whether or not I blog about lightbulbs.
A new EU directive, that goes into effect on July 1, will require all Internet firms to account for value added tax, or VAT, on “digital sales.” Computerworld reports how overseas Internet retailers may see their European profit push derailed by one of the oldest drags on business: tax.
The effect of the law will be an additional 15 to 25 percent levy on Internet transactions such as software and music downloads, monthly subscriptions to an Internet service provider and on any product purchased through an online auction anywhere in the EU.
The VAT tax is not new burden for European dot-coms that have been charging customers VAT since their inception. Their overseas rivals though have been exempt, making foreign firms an obvious choice for the bargain-hunting consumer. David Melville, general counsel of UK ISP Freeserve, a division of French ISP Wanadoo, rejoices:
It’s a massive competitive disadvantage. It’s good to see at last it being eroded.
Freeserve has lobbied furiously for the past two years to get the loophole closed, saying its chief rival AOL UK, the Internet unit of AOL Time Warner, saved 150 million pounds ($249.7 million) in tax payments over the years.
Shock, horror! How about lobbying the EU comissariat to abolish the internet sales VAT in the EU instead?! I thought not.
For example, on eBay, a UK seller will pay six pounds to list an automobile and 35 pounds for real estate, both 20 percent increases that include the UK’s 17.5 percent VAT charge. Some analysts predict that the new tax will decreases sales in the short term, which will hurt American dot-coms such as eBay and Amazon, given their expectations of higher growth in their overseas business.
But European firms feel justice have been done.:
The old way certainly gave non-EU companies a leg up during a very crucial stage in the development of the market.
Please note the assumption that it is acceptable for governments to meddle with competitive markets and ‘equalise the race’. The EU businesses behave in a way that is not surprising, they are happy to see their overseas competitors weakened, however, I fear their victory is rather Pyrrhic.
Citizens of the Czech Republic, about to vote in the referendum on their country’s entry into the EU, were shocked to find in their inboxes yesterday an email from their Prime Minister. Is this e-politics? They do not think so and they certainly are not impressed. The Prime Minister spamming, er, addressing the nation.
I don’t know who thought up the campaign, but I know that if a commercial product were marketed this way, the company would be doomed.
He also provides the text of the email. Judge for yourselves:
Dear citizens,
The moment of a serious decision is close, which should be made by each of us confidently and independently. It is a decision that is beyond the boundaries of the everyday political disputes and squabbling. We are deciding the future of our country for decades. Those who say that the decision we make this Friday and Saturday is a ‘draft’ one are wrong. This is not the case. The referendum is binding and the result will determine whether the Czech Republic enters the European Union or whether it will chose a long period of isolation. Every one of us has experienced a moment in his life when an opportunity was missed and it never came back.
Vladimir Spidla
Prime Minister
Although the blogger intents to vote yes, he lists a number of arguments used by the anti-EU campaigners: the EU’s murky financial management, scandals regarding selection of agencies (presumably refering to allocation of EU contracts), the idiotic pseudo-documentaries on TV insulting the viewers’ intelligence, the scandal with real EU citizens (perhaps some local affair), leaflets full of newspeak and arguments notable by their absence and concert by one of the divas of Czech pop.
Despite the obvious sarcasm, it seems that the level of anti-EU campaigning in the ‘New Europe’ is pitifully inadequate. They have a lot to overcome as the EU propaganda gives a powerful incentive to the average Czech citizen. Tomas Kohl explains:
People from UK or abroad know little about the quality and range of arguments presented here to convince the public to say Yes. Instead of focusing on heavy issues like economic and monetary policy, questions about sovereignty, foreign relations, the government plays the game of nonsense issues and tries to lure us with sweet promises of a better tomorrow.
Following are the main selling points of the ongoing pro-EU propaganda, paid by taxpayers:
The borders will disappear, people will be able to travel freely
We’ll be able to study in EU countries for free
We’ll be able to work anywhere in the EU
We’ll get a large chunk of money from Brussels
More security
Tomas’s appeal to the British is touching:
I just pray the Brits won’t accept that damn Constitution that is coming their way. Britain has been the most prominent power player holding Europhile madmen from doing the worst things for some time. If they lose, we can elect conservative party in 2006 and it won’t matter anymore. Guys, wake up!
Yeah, let’s wake up and do something… It might be a good idea to notice the countries that we know so little about and care even less. After all they did come out in support of the Anglosphere, incurring the wrath of Chirac in the process and jeopardizing the candies he was graciously considering handing out to them. The civil societies there are still very fragile and without a heavy-weight ally they stand no chance against the EU Federasts.
Another Czech blogger sums up his thoughts on the issue in a graphic succinctly named “Entry to the EU”.
Thousands were slaughtered on the streets of Liberian capital of Monrovia during the intermittent civil war in the mid-1990s. Now there is more killing as clashes between troops loyal to President Charles Taylor and the well-armed rebels have intensified. The French military commanders based in nearby Ivory Coast felt they had no option other than to order an evacuation of United Nations staff and foreign diplomats from Monrovia.
But unlike in Sierra Leone in 2000, when British troops remained in large numbers on the ground for months, the French commanders ordered their men to leave Liberia as soon as the foreign passport holders had been rounded up.
Our sole mission is to proceed with the evacuation of Europeans and other foreigners upon the demand of the French government.
The rebel groups now fighting for control of Liberia have been accused of voodoo-driven atrocities that have almost become the norm in west Africa – with prisoners cut to pieces so rebel soldiers can eat their vital organs.
For Liberians who did not have the option of being rescued, the immediate future looked grim and thousands of Monrovians continued to gather around the city’s main soccer stadium desperate for sanctuary. Fanny, a Liberian refugee who had trudged for two days to reach the stadium said:
There’s no food anywhere. People are dying. The Americans must come. We want peace.
The nanny state is invited to strike again. The British Medical Association (BMA) is proposing a 17.5 percent VAT on high-fat foods like biscuits and processed meats to solve obesity-related problems, which cost the NHS roughly 500 million pounds a year. BMA spokesman Dr Martin Breach informs us:
There is an epidemic of obesity in the UK. You are what you eat and if that is the case the British public have a huge problem. Charging VAT on saturated foods found in processed meat products like sausages, pies and pastries, butter and cream, may help save some lives.
According to government statistics, one in five men and one in four women is obese. Obesity is a serious risk factor for heart disease, high blood pressure, stroke, diabetes, muscle and respiratory problems and certain types of cancer.
One of the opposing arguments is that a punitive ‘tax’ on fatty foods would in fact work as a regressive tax since those on lower incomes generally tend to eat larger quantities of cheap, high-fat food.
Belinda Linden of the British Heart Foundation has the solution:
We need to educate people about the benefits of eating healthy foods and make them more responsible for their health. We also have to be sure that a ‘fat tax’ does not just end up penalising the poor without actually changing eating habits.
That’s right. Change their eating habits, educate the masses! Be a nanny to the whole nation!
But the BMA has even a better answer. They say that the tax would hit food manufacturers hard and have little effect on the poor.
A fat-tax will remove food manufacturers’ incentive to pump food full of fat. Instead they will fill processed foods with healthier ingredients and better selections of meat. Fat is a cheap by-product of the meat processing industry – they have mountains of the stuff and are desperate to use it, so they use it as cheap padding in foodstuffs.
Yes, let’s fool around with the markets, the food manufacturers, supply and demand. That always works! And it is much more fun that finding out what really makes people fat!
They are assuming that their medical conclusions are absolutely right when it come to understanding the way human body processes fat and what its fat consumption ought to be. They are not taking into account results of recent research that more or less vindicated the (in)famous Atkins diet that sees higher consumption of unsaturated fats as positive and desirable. No, they are going to tax fat in one big lump regardless of whether there is any scientific rationale other then three decade of their stale dogma. Atkins may not be absolutely right either, who knows, but rather than finding out, let’s mess with the markets, prices and taxes to teach people that they are not allowed to eat what they want.
Ah, but they need to be treated for serious and expensive ailments resulting from their over-indulgence on the National Health Service and at taxpayers’ expense. Fine, denationalise the health service and let people carry the responsibility for their actions.
Soon there will be a tax on dangerous sports (serious injuries), driving, cycling or walking in towns (high accident rates), watching TV (makes you fat and stupid), and breathing in London (likely to get asthma and allergies).
This is the world in which the Big Brother marries the Nanny.
The Samizdata people are a bunch of sinister and heavily armed globalist illuminati who seek to infect the entire world with the values of personal liberty and several property. Amongst our many crimes is a sense of humour and the intermittent use of British spelling.
We are also a varied group made up of social individualists, classical liberals, whigs, libertarians, extropians, futurists, ‘Porcupines’, Karl Popper fetishists, recovering neo-conservatives, crazed Ayn Rand worshipers, over-caffeinated Virginia Postrel devotees, witty Frédéric Bastiat wannabes, cypherpunks, minarchists, kritarchists and wild-eyed anarcho-capitalists from Britain, North America, Australia and Europe.
All content on this website (including text, photographs, audio files, and any other original works), unless otherwise noted, is licensed under a Creative Commons License. Powered by WordPress & Atahualpa
