Euroscepticism and foreign policy.

If you've ever listened to a Ukip supporter argue for long enough you'll notice that they constantly talk about the apparent freedoms we're missing out of as part of the European Union and one of these rights seemingly lost to Brussels is an independent foreign policy, with sceptics claiming that if we left the European Union we could strike our own deals with trading partners and forge closer links with the Commonwealth.

I've always found this particular idea to be completely moronic as it is often based on a romanticised and simplified version of the past. In the days of the British Empire the world was a wildly different place with London able to maintain a strong position in world affairs simply because it was head of the largest empire in the world and could martial together the resources of millions of citizens, today that Empire has long disappeared and the axis of power has shifted. As part of the European Union the United Kingdom can maintain a strong position in trade deals and quickly organise sanctions and humanitarian missions in response to changing events. As an individual nation the UK would have a far weaker position in potential trade deals and sanctions/humanitarian missions would be harder to coordinate.

 In response to this i've heard sceptics claim that instead of working with the EU the country should forge closer relations with the Commonwealth but developing a trading union with a Commonwealth nation like Australia (population 22.9m, GDP 18th in the world, 10,000 miles away) would not be preferable to maintaining our trading union with the EU (population 503.5m, GDP 1st in the world, 21 miles away) and would surely require a standardised regulatory structure similar to the current European Union.

As a nation we must stop living in the past and accept the fact that the world is becoming less isolationist and power becoming less concentrated in nature.

Spirit of '45.

I shall hopefully be returning to full activity once again with a slight change in schedule. If everything is normal I should be posting articles every Monday and Friday. Here is an extremely short post I wrote after watching the Spirit of '45 on netflix

In the Second World War the vast industrial capacity of the United Kingdom was focused towards a singular goal, the destruction of Nazi Germany and the Axis Powers. Politics flew out of the window as all parties worked together in order to ensure production converting consumer goods factory to produce goods for the front lines and nationalising mines in order to ensure a constant rate of production. After achieving this victory the country was faced with a multitude of challenges damage from the blitz and the remnants of slum housing from the 30's combined with the near bankrupt nature of the country. Today we face the aftermath of one of the largest financial disasters since the great depression and a housing crisis that has been compounded by decades worth of government inaction. As a result people on the left and right have started blaming migrant communities for the shortage in housing, schools, hospitals and other local public services claiming that the influx of people as overwhelmed the system and led to the current situation but even if this was the case (its not) the current crisis remains and for a solution we must look at the actions of past governments

During the 45 election campaign Clement Atlee and the Labour Party pledged to remove the slums of the past and replace them with quality homes that will provide a stable foundation for the creation of the modern welfare state. After achieving a landslide victory Nye Bevan, then Minister of Health stepped into the role working with town planners and architects to construct attractive low-income housing (that was obviously a massive increase in quality from the slums of the past), nationalising former privately owned hospitals and constructing new clinics to suit the needs of the population. We need to re-kindle the spirit of 45 and empower national and local government not only to construct new homes, schools and hospitals but repair current empty lots and re-open public services forced to close due to government cuts. An end to the damaging policy of austerity and a solution to the public services crisis that does not involve scapegoating immigrants.

A case for re-nationalisation.

When our rail, energy and water networks were privatised the British people were promised a revolution with new capitalist competition paving the way for cheaper and more effective services. Instead of this the private companies have seen fit to record sky-high profits whilst ignoring complaints about poor service, confusing tariffs and constant above inflation price rises that in the case of the energy industry never seem to come down when energy is cheaper in the summer. I've talked about the inefficient rail network in the past and how private companies are glad to pocket the money while leaving the state to pick up the short stick and the same principle applies to the energy and water sectors. Nationalising these portions of the economy with greatly help those in fuel poverty across the country by giving them a permanent break from the extortionate prices rises of private industry.

Critics will highlight the fact that nationalised industry in the UK was inefficient but it does not have to be that way. In the past our nationalised industries performed admirably and we have efficient state-owned companies in the rest of Europe to look on upon for guidance. Instead of pessimistically looking at the works of times we should focus on the benefits that nationalisation will bring to the country and think of ways to ensure that the mistakes of the past are not repeated.

Public Relations 101: Some tips for UKIP

As a political commentator and a fairly argumentative tweeter I have talked to dozens of supporters of Ukip with varying levels of civility, discussing everything from certain types of EU regulations to controversial statements made by junior and senior members of the organisation, and over the months of back and forth arguing  I discovered something rather interesting. When talking to these members one comment is almost expected to appear in the conversation, no it is not a supreme hatred of the European Union, workers rights of a distrust of everything foreign but talk of an organised smear campaign being carried out by the political establishment, the national press and not surprisingly the European Union.

After providing someone with evidence linking Ukip members to offensive comments, whether it is Roger Helmers multitude of inappropriate comments levelled against everything from homosexuals to seal cubs or Nigel Farage's own racist comments about Romanians and other foreign speakers an individual will either mark the publication as "leftist", a statement that does not change the validity of the quotations or it will be marked as part of an organised smear campaign made because the political and media establishment are afraid of the rise of Ukip.

I'm not going to go into details about how Nigel Farage a privately educated former conservative whose only real work experience is in the financial sector is really a part of the establishment or why the party is funded by wealthy millionaires with a grudge against the conservative party but I will give some advice on future conduct. What Ukip and its supporters need to understand is that reporting the news does not and has never been considered part of a smear campaign and perhaps in the future they should stop making comments that the majority of the population find offensive especially if they want to represent the same people on a local, national or regional level. Ukip can only become a mature political party once they stop with the paranoid assumption that everyone is out against them and no longer resort to childish and petty insults when they are challenged to a reasonable debate on immigration or asked to make a policy statement that does not immediately go back to the EU like the Deputy Leaders favourable position on the privatisation of the National Health Service. Until then Ukip will always be a wasted vote.

Greens vs Labour

Labour have constantly attacked the coalition government for not doing anything to solve the current cost of living crisis but it is the Greens not Labour that have the real progressive solution to the problem, a worrying sign that the party has long abandoned the successful policies of Atlee and instead turned towards the neo-liberalist policies of Tony Blair that accelerated income inequality and created an unfair housing market.

The Green Party support the creation of a living wage, an item of legislation that would mean working class families would no longer have to depend on state money for basic requirements like the monthly food bill or energy bills. This is a real progressive solution that people on the left side of the political spectrum should be supporting with full force especially when you consider Labours alternative simply provides a minimum wage increase that would have families across the country still relying on government money despite being employed. The establishment of a living wage would restore some pride to these people, relieve a portion of the national budget (that could then be invested elsewhere) and even contribute to increased consumer spending as those previously living on the breadline would be in possession of disposable income.

On energy Ed Milliband garnered controversy and criticism from the right-wing community when he said that a Labour government would help those hit by the increasing cost of living by freezing energy prices but like others this solution does nothing to alleviate the crisis especially when combined with the party's lacklustre approach to stagnating wages. Whats needed is a radical approach designed to directly tackle the problems of the energy sector, the greed of private companies involved. The Greens plans to nationalise the energy market would ensure that fuel bills are kept consistent all year with price increases that don't constantly rise above inflation, the same can be said with the rail companies and with this we have a recent to look at and analyse. When the East Coast mainline was nationalised it was in complete disarray, the result of complete incompetence from the private company that ran it into the ground yet after a few years of being under state-control the company managed to record a sizeable profit while investing record sums on infrastructure improvements, keeping customers satisfied all while not raising ticket prices above inflation yet despite the obvious success of the franchise and the benefit it gave the commuter and taxpayer the government is going ahead with its plan to sell the franchises to another private contract. Who are the only ones opposing this on a national level, is it Labour? A party that allowed the railways to be privatised ? No. It was the Greens..

The Green Party are the only political organisation that will tackle the rising cost of living, protect vital public services, protect the environment and put an end to the climate of fear and hatred surrounding the immigrant population. Labour have long abandoned the left and its time to remind of that via the ballot box.

Vacuum Cleaners and Brussels.

A few weeks ago I was debating with someone about the benefits and negatives of the UK's continued membership of the European Union when they suddenly claimed that the European Union was going to ban hoovers, a rather ludicrous claim that I immediately asked him to support with evidence. After being linked to a rather inefficient Daily Mail article that did not even bother to quote the directive in question I went off in search to find my own information and discovered that like other stories promoted by sceptics it was only partially true. The EU regulation in question shall eventually restrict  the power of vacuum cleaners to 900 watts (2017 implementation) as part of a general direction directive designed to cut energy requirements across the European Union by 2020 and does in no shape or form ban hoovers.

After some more searching I found another common misconception was people thinking this legislation would make hoovers more inefficient and lead to more energy being wasted as people would have to use the device for longer to get the same result. In reality the opposite is true with new ecodesign and labelling regulations ensuring that consumers will get a better vacuum cleaner. In the past no legislation existed that enforced standards on the performance and reliability of vacuum cleaners and companies could sell inefficient machines without risk of punishment and the creation of such regulation will ensure the development of new machines that will reduce household bills and benefit the environment.

Global warming is one of the largest challenges facing this planet and regulation like this is desperately needed as reducing energy consumption makes it easier for member states to replace polluting  non-renewable sources of energy with renewable power plants. Instead of being a weapon to strike the EU with the sceptics have accidentally stumbled upon a perfect reason of why the union should exist, as only through the international cooperation fostered by the EU can we create methods to tackle the thread of climate change.

Mangoes: An EU adventure.

The European Union is often blamed for a lot of things by eurosceptics whether it is the decline of the British fishing industry, flooding in the South West or a whole host of other myths and half-proven tales, the sceptic is always quick to seek out a story and turn it into a stick to beat the EU with.

I recently became aware that the European Union was being blamed for banning mangoes from entering the UK, a story that was so wild at the time that I actually failed to believe it and assumed it was a hoax, certain eurosceptics however seemingly had no problem with using it as part of their arsenal so I decided to do some basic research on the story and find out it was true or complete and utter tripe. What I found was certainly interesting and actually confirmed the Ukip story that mangoes had been banned across the European Union, what the sceptics conveniently failed to mention was that the EU had imposed the ban after finding several large shipments of the fruit had been contaminated with fruit flies, a threat that not only endangered the health of citizens but also to agriculture across Europe.

While it is understandable for British Asians to be annoyed about a possible problem with obtaining Indian mangoes in the future it is perfectly understandable for the European Union to issue this ban in order to protect EU citizens and agriculture. As an invasive species alien intruders like Asian fruit flies could seriously damage businesses across Europe and biting into a seemingly fresh mango that has been infested with fruit flies is disgusting and certainly not good for consumer confidence. It seems to me that this is another example of sceptics trying to turn a non-story into scandal and another reason to factcheck every ludicrous claim you hear on social media outlets.