Cheating

When you can't win fair and square those on the socialist left usually resort to cheating, although it's something they share with politicians in general. It means that they use their "ends justifying the means" mantra to ignore the wishes of the many or subvert votes (in the case of politicians simply going ahead and doing it anyway) to get their own way, or rather the way of the activist and leadership.

The RMT are a classic example of this, lead by a man who is a committed socialist (read communist) who decided New Labour weren't socialist enough for his union so set up his own political party to a resounding failure to get votes.
He's been spoiling for a fight with the government (any government) for a while now and sees a chance to send New Labour into the dustbin of history by making them unelectable via strike action. Except that it might be that his membership did not agree with him, but that's ok, you can always find extra votes when on the left (or a Lib Dem) simply by making them up.

Times.

Arsonists struck in the dead of night on April 19 last year. By dawn, the East Usk signal box in Newport was a burnt-out shell and police had started an investigation into the “suspicious” fire.

Few could have imagined that, a year on, the charred ruin in South Wales might have a role in preventing the national rail strike planned for next week.

The East Usk signal is one of 11 “ghost” boxes that Network Rail claims were wrongly included in the Rail, Maritime and Transport union’s strike ballot. The three votes listed from the Newport siding should be disqualified along with all 25 from signal boxes that have long disappeared, the company will argue today in the High Court.

While most were closed this century as automation spread along the railway, one of them stopped operating in the 1960s. 

Chalford signal box, near Gloucester, opened on August 2, 1897, at the bottom of a four-mile hill below Saperton Tunnel. It is still revered by some railway enthusiasts for the safe passage afforded to “auto-train” services in the 1930s – shuttle trains with a cab at both ends that plied the line to Gloucester. But it signalled to its last goods train in 1963 and its last passenger service a year later.

Nonetheless, one RMT signaller appears to have been included in this year’s ballot.

Network Rail says it has unearthed scores of inaccuracies in the signallers’ ballot, which show that the union has “manifestly failed to comply with the requirements of the Trade Union and Labour Relations Act of 1992”.

The vote was so close, its lawyers will argue, that just 112 of 4,556 signallers balloted would have been enough to swing the vote against the strike. Network Rail says that the inaccuracies in the ballot account for almost 300 potential votes. 

As well as including signal boxes that do not exist, the union omitted 26 that do, accounting for almost 100 staff, the company said. Network Rail argues that in 67 other locations, the RMT sought votes from more employees than work there. It says, for example, that the union asked 11 members to vote at South Tottenham, where it employs three signallers; and 33 at Crewe, where Network Rail says it employs 24 people. 

It's a tactic obviously learned from New labour and it's predilection to ballot rigging by postal vote, after all why trust the membership to agree with you when you can simply rig the votes to agree with what you want. Cuts out the inconvenient middle man so to speak, the moderate who simply wants the money to keep coming in to pay his mortgage rather than have his year ruined by getting no pay because it's been decided (not by him) to strike about possible redundancies with a view to loss of safety.
Democracy is a foreign concept to many socialists, useful if it goes their way, but why take the chance...

The RMT are a classic example of not taking a chance, if the reports are true, they would not be on strike this coming weekend anyway, so they decided to cheat, fortunately they got caught, wonder how many other dodgy ballots have been won by phantom voters though.

More about → Cheating

Musings on PR

Over the past few days I have been musing on why some on the left think PR would be in the best interests of Britain, in the Commons for several reasons, however it seems to me that...

1)It Would keep the Tories out for a Generation (which is why many on the left now favour it). However it's a very bad idea to set up any system that would keep ANY party in uncontested power for years IMO. That's a recipe for the decay of state institutions, leads to public ennui about politics, and could lead to a road of the loss of democratic responsibility or even revolution (worst case scenario).

2)The Lib Dems would have undue influence on the government. Part of the problem I have with the Lib Dems is that they know they wont be in power so can say almost anything they want, this means that their fringe loons have influence way beyond what would be considered normal in any party, just look at their EUphilia and green policies.

3)Labour, barring a nightmare (In Coalition with the Lib-Dems), would be in power for decades, no doubt with a similar method that they use now to ensure no proper debate in Parliament thus avoiding that the majority of votes are debated simply because of the secret dealing for influence that will go on between minority parties to ensure a vote is passed will make sure there is no strong government.

If I'm totally honest though, reason number one is the main reason. I know Centre Left Government in Britain would probably disenfranchise the Centre Right in the UK for up to a generation yet lead to more problems in Wales and Scotland where the left totally dominate, it might lead to the BNP getting a seat in Parliament, almost certainly UKIP. I also believe it will break the UK up, so there are certain advantages, though it's not the best way to go about it.

Is this Fair, and is this form of democracy democratic, if its put in place to stop one party gaining power? No, It's emphatically undemocratic. It's also dangerous. The potential dangers of such a system means at the very least it would make Labour politicians ineffectual and incapable of proper debate, leading to Periclean government by diktat. If you've got a Pericles, then you're fine. But if you get a Cleon, then Heaven help you.

A Moral maze, a belief in Democracy, or a never ending Labour party in power, which is why Gordon Brown is now interested in it.

I think the best answer is that the current system is functional, and appears to prevent serious abuses that would generate massive public unrest. I'm not opposed to reform of the Lords -at the minute it's half done and just a mess. But the wholesale change of the electoral system should be approached with great caution. After all, si non confectus, non reficiat.

More about → Musings on PR

No, no sympathy, no!

This is just wrong.

Times.

A rapist who dumped his victim on a rubbish tip has escaped deportation after winning a High Court battle to stay in Britain to get married.

Alphonse Semo, a refugee from the Democratic Republic of Congo, threw his victim on the tip when he “had finished with her”.

Last night he won the right to stay in Britain to marry his long-term partner, just two hours before he was due to board a plane back to Africa.

Mr Justice Collins said it was difficult to have any sympathy for Semo, who was jailed for eight years, but he must be allowed to stay.

Difficult to have any sympathy? Try impossible, he should have been kicked out.

The judge said the Home Office had agreed to let Semo, 53, from Deptford in south-east London, get married to a German national. Then the wedding was cancelled by a subsequent decision “by the same Home Office — no doubt by a different department”, he said.

The judge added that he was very reluctant to intervene but said the Home Office could not be allowed to play “hot and cold” with Semo.

“With considerable reluctance, I have to say he must be allowed to marry”, the judge said. “That means there will be a prohibition against removing him.”

Reluctant to intervene? How about kicking him out? If he's getting married to a German national how about making sure he goes there? Though I suspect the Germans don't want him either.

Mr Justice Collins said the Home Secretary Alan Johnson would have to reconsider later, after Semo has married, whether to make another attempt to deport him.

If Mr Johnson makes a fresh deportation bid, it will involve EU law as Semo’s bride, Busana Kalonji, is a refugee from the Congo who has become a German national.

Ms Kalonji is in the UK, exercising her right to work here under EU law.

After marrying, the couple are expected to claim that Semo is legally entitled to free movement within the EU, including the UK.

Semo was sentenced to eight years in prison in December 2002 for raping and assaulting a woman, aged 38, in Catford, south-east London.

Isn't EU law wonderful.

Can we just leave? Now?

More about → No, no sympathy, no!