From Across the Pond

Another immigration stupidity

I have occasionally in the past noted several decisions by the Home Office and immigration services in the UK which, to be frank, are either stupid, injust, immoral, or just plain wrong. Well, courtesy of the BBC it appears there is another one. In this one it appears a widower - whose wife died due to gross negligence of a British hospital during childberth - is going to be kicked out. Apparently they Home Office has been trying to deport him since soon after his wife died.

This country, through incompetence, cost this man his wife, cost his son a mother. He wants to live here. The very least we can do is grant that wish. The British State has taken much from him, it is time for it to give a little.

I doubt it will. And once again, laws designed to deal with the criminal end up punishing the law-abiding. It makes me sick.

British Local Elections 2008 - The Night's work

Well it is 3.30 in the morning now, and though the majority of the Welsh results are still to come in I am going to bed. Quite a number of councils are not actually counting the vote until tomorrow so there will be further results tomorrow, not least the London results.

But so far - a good night for the Tories, with possibilities of being something really quite special. At the moment they are have a net gain of 120+ and appear on course to end up with a gain in the region of about 200. Considering they started from being in quite a strong position this is good. They have also made some gains in northern England, and in particular made a few gains in some of the more urban areas, where they have struggled since the mid-90s. Important not to get too cocky about that - they still do not have any seats in Manchester, and where they have gained seats it is in low single figures - but an encouraging sign nevertheless. In southern urban areas they have been much more successful, taking Southampton, and making good gains in Portsmouth and Birmingham. They also appear to have picked up a few seats in Wales, but realistically this should be treated like the north, a nice encouraging sign, but more a development that should be greeted with redoubled efforts than too much fanfare.

The flip side of this is that it has been a horrible night for the Labour Party. They are looking to end up losing 200-250 seats, maybe more. And again, this is from a very low starting position anyway. Both the BBC and Sky are suggesting that their overall vote share may actually come in third place behind the Lib Dems. The talk is that this might be their worst local election result since 1968 - while that sounds impressive I think it is something of a false comparison. And if Ken Livingstone can hold onto the London Mayoralty the whole way these results are viewed will change.

If that is so it turns what was looking to be a somewhat ambivalent night for the Lib Dems into a minor victory. They will gain certain bragging rights. In England it looks like the Lib Dems might actually end up either treading water or losing a very small number of seats. Overall though I wonder if they might not gaining as they are apparently picking up seats from Labour in Wales. If that is the case it will be a second minor victory for them.

British Local Elections 2008

Today it is election time in the UK - local elections. About 4000 council seats are up for grabs throughout England and Wales, the Greater London Assembly, and also the position of London Mayor (currently held by Ken Livingstone). This map from the BBC shows the distribution of these seats - mostly in Wales, the north of England, and in cities. Where I live there are no elections this year.

There are three things that make these elections important beyond their obvious significance on a local level. Firstly, the election of London mayor. This is not important just because London in the capital city, but because London has such an impact on the rest of the country - especially the Home Counties. Secondly, this will be the first set of elections held since Gordon Brown assumed office, and although local elections are usually poor indicators of national mood the people cannot resist the idea of using them in that role. Thirdly, and alongside that, there has been alot of bad publicity for the government recently, most particularly over the reform of the income tax system that has seen the abolition of the lowest rate of tax. People will be looking to see to what extent Labour councillors are punished for the actions of the government.

But there is one thing to bear in mind: Labour is operating from a fairly low base. General unhappiness over the last few years has seen Labour lose seats the last time these seats went to election. Therefore any further losses will be starting to penetrate into the previously safer seats. The Tories have despite this not proved very successful in regaining local power in northern England, and tonight will be a test of that.

The polls close at 2200 and I will certainly be watching the results.

More silly immigration

A short while ago I posted a couple of cases where the immigration service seemed to acting with less than an iota of common sense. Well, I have found another case. I mean, this man has lived in this country, legally, for 29 years and has raised a family here. He's proven himself a member of this nation and community. Why on earth do we want to kick him out?

Again, the downside of reading these cases that do get reported is all the ones that do not. I am quite sure there is plenty of injustice here. Meanwhile, as they go chasing honest would-be citizens, the real criminals go unpunished.

Something wrong with immigration

There are two cases recently of people being given a reprieve from deportation by the Home Office, perhaps because of the Christmas season, which I think are good examples of where we are going wrong as a nation on the whole question of immigration. The two cases are of Al Bangura and the William family. From the information I know, both seem to raise different issues of the same problem.

Al Bangura is a player for Watford football club, which plays in the Championship division. He has been making a career as a sportsman in that club. He is starting to raise a family here, and by all accounts wishes to make his life in this nation. One of the major themes in the anti-immigration talk spouted by so many is that we will be swamped by wastrels who will sponge off the system. This is a clear example of a man who is not sponging off the system, who sounds like he would be a credit to our nation, be carelessly treated.

The William family are Pakistani converts to Christianity, who fled here due to the harrassment they were suffering. The local school especially came out in support of them. The dangers that converts from Islam (to any faith) undergo are well known by anyone with a even a most rudimentary knowledge of the reality of violence in today's Islam. It is a violence not restricted to a fundamentalist few, but widespread in Islamic society throughout the world. Also Pakistan is not precisely the most stable place on the planet now. Both these factors the incompetents and idiots - I won't subscribe malice to this action when incompetency and idiocy will do - are either unaware of or decided to ignore. This nation is meant to be a haven for those who are persecuted and oppressed, regardless of whether that presecution and oppression occurs at the hand of state or non-governmental actors. In particular this deportation just makes a mockery of the asylum system.

Why have we gotten to this state, when legitimate claimants are being shipped off? The paranoia whipped up by many outside groups, including I have to say the Conservative Party, is one reason. Indeed, given their much higher public role I hold the Tory Party to particular account in this case, but they are not alone.

The fear of illegal immigration, or efforts to tackle illegal immigration, basically fail to address the problem. For a very good reason, and it is the same reason why laws to restrict the legal use of guns or knives fail to correct criminal use of guns or knives. You are restricting the liberties of people who wish to follow the law, while doing nothing about those who already flout the law. The way to deal with illegal immigration is not to make the process of legal immigration and asylum even more complex, or to make that process more difficult. In these situations you only end up doing great harm to the very people whom you wish to immigrate to your country or are most in need of asylum. The way to deal with illegal immigration is through proper sanction against the illegal trade itself.

I hope in both the above cases the victims of our system emerge triumphant. But I know that many more cases, equally at fault, will go uncorrected. It is to our great shame as a nation that we close the doors on both those who wish to become part of the great idea that is the United Kingdom, and those vulnerable and in danger who need our protection.

Daft statement by Menzies Campbell

"The public might have been less willing to give him [Tony Blair] the triumph of three consecutive general election victories if they'd known the extent to which ethical values would overshadow pragmatism," Sir Menzies said.

That is a quote from this BBC article. Apparently Menzies Campbell thinks that cold-hearted politics and decisions are more important than ethics. It says, I think, more about Menzies Campbell than it does about Tony Blair that he views such, and it is not to his credit.

The broader point of the article itself goes some way to show, in addition to the above statement, that to be openly religious in this country is to be discriminated against, viewed as being somehow suspect, and generally to become a figure of opprobrium. If on our national stage people are unable to express their religion freely, how on earth should we expect ordinary folks on the ground to?

Flabbergasted

That was my first reaction to the news that the confidential details of up to 25 million people - half the country - have been lost in the post. That was my first reaction. After a little more thought it was just surprise that something like this has not happened sooner.

A small act of incompetence has created this scenario, and it will be interesting to see what, if any, resonance this has when it comes to the next election. For my own part is just confirms my general skepticism that government can be trusted to do anything efficiently or responsibly.

Trident agreed

The House of Commons this evening voted 409-161 to renew the Trident system, which essentially means developing the next generation of SSBNs (BBC article).

There was a rebellion amongst some Labour MPs. I do not know for certain, but I suspect the usual sort of suspects as there has always been a fairly strong anti-nuclear streak in the Labour Party. Indeed, it is thought to be one reason that Labour and Neil Kinnock lost the very winnable '92 election. The Tories backed the government, as they were always going to do.

I am quite happy with the outcome. I suppose the overall media spin will be negative, but that probably says more about British journalists and journalism than it does about the nuclear deterrent.

Of course, with Russia continuing on its current course, and with developments in North Korea and Iran, when this next comes up for discussion, in about five years time when the contracts are issued, this could very well not be the somewhat academic deterrent it currently is.

Prince Charles

Stories repeat themselves, and on story that is currently repeating itself in Britain is the role of Prince Charles. Currently there is a court battle over whether a newspaper should be able to publish some private journals that have come into its possession. There are always those that object to the fact that Prince Charles is as entitled to his political view as any, and in view of the fact that he is the heir to the throne particularly entitled to share those with the government. After all, the Queen is no longer young and (though I hope and pray the day is still far off) she could pass away at any moment. Thus surely it is in everyone's interest that the would-be monarch be familiar with various issues, hold opinions on them, and have the confidence to be able to express himself freely with Ministers.

The current intrigue is over some journals the Prince wrote during the handover of Hon Kong to China in 1997, where he says some rather unflattering - even hostile things - about China. I have to ask, why precisely does anyone object to that? Likewise he has well-known views on other issues, not all of which I agree with, but are frequently quite in line with public opinion (his stance against GM crops is one example).

Tony Blair has now spoken in Prince Charles' defence - though realistically it is very hard to see him not doing so, and with Tony Blair (like most politicians) impossible to know for certain whether or not he is being sincere.

I rather suspect that part of the ire that causes this sort of ruckes now and then is general disbelief that Charles remains generally popular. To a certain eye he is the stereotype, or even the caricature, of the aristocracy. They blithely forget (if they ever bothered to think about it) that Prince Charles has probably rubbed shoulders with more 'ordinary' people than they can ever hope to manage. Partly this is through his charity work such as the Prince's Trust, and partly just simple arithmetic. He has been in public life for over thirty years. Just how many new schools, wards, units, bridges, (ad infinitum) has he opened. Just how many engagements has he been at where he has spoken to a few people - two there, half a dozen here. He is, so I have been told, one of those people (perhaps not unlike George Bush) who is far more charismatic in person that through the media lens. He has met thousands and thousands of people, people who have decided that the cartoon-imagery of the press is inaccurate. Whatever the outcome of the current kerfuffle I rather suspect Prince Charles will emerge in the long-term unscathed, possibly even better off.

I do however, in view of certain leaks the last view years, think he should take a long, hard look at some of his companions.

No Smoking

In a free vote the House of Commons has voted to ban smoking in all pubs and clubs. And so the invasion of the State continues, and equally so do our liberties. Smoking now, what in the future. The logic of 'public health' is pernicious. It has such broad possibilities. Where does it end? I hope to hell I'm wrong, but knowing the nature of government, of bureaucracy, I rather suspect not.

I think this is a black day.

For the record I am a non-smoker, who has never smoked (saving a few cigarettes when I was at uni on odd drunken occasions).