Arden Forester

Pope Benedict to resign in unexpected announcement

noreply@blogger.com (Arden Forester) — Mon, 11 Feb 2013 11:16:00 +0000

Cardinal Francis Arinze

It is just been announced that Pope Benedict is to resign. This is very unexpected although it does not come as a total surprise as there has been speculation about his health and capacity due to age. He has been a good Pope, especially for traditional Anglican catholics. He understood the patrimony of classical Anglicanism at a time when the ravages of secularism descended on it. He is very minded of ecumenical necessity. He also is unafraid to stand up for the sacraments of the Church, the tradition of the Faith and the social witness of the Gospel.

No doubt much will be said, much will be speculated. One thing that may well happen is that the next pope will come from a country far away from Rome. I welcome this. A pope from Nigeria? Cardinal Francis Arinze is well thought of.

Bishop Mark Lawrence accused and abused - Mrs Jefferts Schori flips her mitre!

noreply@blogger.com (Arden Forester) — Fri, 08 Feb 2013 10:50:00 +0000

Bishop Mark Lawrence

Like a lot of people in the Anglican Communion I have come to realise that Katherine Jefferts Schori, the leading light currently in the Episcopal Church of the USA, is a rather unpleasant woman. Strong words, I know, but being pleasant means giving a sense of happy satisfaction or enjoyment. She does the opposite. I would not mind if she promoted her views with Christian charity and a degree of humility. But she seems incapable of doing so. Her secular agenda is the new gospel and this must at all costs supplant orthodox belief.

It is well known that she is bankrupting the church with lawsuits aimed at throwing traditional priests out of their parishes. Money is like confetti to her. Her new doctrines are not even a straight secularising of the sacraments. She has odd notions about Christ's divinity and the faith of the creeds is something for putting in a museum alongside fossils. But it is her latest outrageous comments that put her beyond the pale.

PB Jefferts Schori went to Charleston recently to inaugurate a new remnant Episcopal diocese. She had fallen out with local bishop Mark Lawrence. In her speech, she accused Bishop Lawrence (but did not mention him by name) of being a petty dictator and a wolf masquerading among the sheep. Is this the sort of language any Christian should utter? No it is not and especially from one purporting to lead.

She said, "I tell you that story because it's indicative of attitudes we've seen here and in many other places. Somebody decides he knows the law, and oversteps whatever authority he may have to dictate the fate of others who may in fact be obeying the law, and often a law for which this local tyrant is not the judge. It's not too far from that kind of attitude to citizens' militias deciding to patrol their towns or the Mexican border for unwelcome visitors. It's not terribly far from the state of mind evidenced in school shootings, or in those who want to arm school children, or the terrorism that takes oil workers hostage."

Think about that. She is saying that the godly Bishop of South Carolina Mark Lawrence is a "local tyrant" and his state of mind is like the "school shooter", Adam Lanza who walked into an elementary school and slaughtered some 23 children in Connecticut.

The Church of England cannot look across the water and say "it is nothing to do with us" because Schori has her supporters here too. They will use and abuse the system to grind down the faithfull until their secular agenda is fully stamped on the church. The "programme" is led by David Cameron, who displays flashes of arrogance when crossed or quizzed on it. Already such errant priests as Giles Fraser are plotting to defy the law. With regard to homosexual unions, he says “I certainly wouldn’t do it covertly but if someone asks me I will phone someone up who has done these services and say ‘how much can I get away with?’. There are a lot of my friends who seem to get away with quite a bit in this.” From his own lips he is known. Is "getting away with it" the kind of talk parishioners should hear?

This secularising of the church is as if a giant cuckoo has emerged in the nest of the Christian Faith. Just plucking its feathers won't do much good. The cuckoo should find a nest of its own!

Chris Huhne quits as MP after pleading guilty to penalty points swap

noreply@blogger.com (Arden Forester) — Mon, 04 Feb 2013 12:33:00 +0000

Chris Huhne faces reality at last

Chris Huhne has pleaded guilty to perverting the course of justice by asking his ex-wife to take speeding points for him. Almost simultaneously he quit politics and will stand down as Liberal Democrat MP for Eastleigh. A by-election will now take place. This is not a contest I think either the Conservatives or the Liberal Democrats will relish. This is a golden opportunity for UKIP to provide a real alternative to the schemers and the schmoozers of the political elite.

Today was the day that Huhne and his ex-wife Vicky Pryce were due to be tried by a jury. Instead of twelve of his fellow citizens hearing evidence, Huhne changed his plea and admitted the charge, which relates to a speeding fine issued in March 2003. The judge, Mr Justice Sweeney, told Huhne he should “have no illusions whatsoever” about the type of sentence he is likely to receive. The maximum penalty for the offence is life imprisonment, so now he is facing the real likelihood of a jail sentence after admitting this crime, which has for centuries been seen by the English judiciary as second only to murder.

Why or why do our politicians do such crazy things? Chris Huhne won't be the last to be reckless with his political life. That Huhne had and has considerable skills there is no doubt. However, like a lot of prominent persons he was and is arrogant and arrogance can lead to deception and wrongdoing. He kept up the pretence for several years. He is now to be known as a liar, a cheat and a man almost prepared to defy the justice system in order to protect his name.

Our politicians are supposed to be honourable. Being honourable does not mean being holier than thou, but it does mean setting an example. The two are not the same. The public cannot stand being deceived. This country is relatively tolerant and accepts quite a lot, but cheating in high office is just not on.

The best Chris Huhne can now do is to say sorry. First to his family, then to his constituents and then to his former cabinet colleagues. Saying sorry does not right the crime but it will be his first step towards being a better person.

Three new European routes for Birmingham Airport

noreply@blogger.com (Arden Forester) — Mon, 28 Jan 2013 14:36:00 +0000

On the day that the government announces where HS2 is going or not going, Birmingham Airport unveils three new routes to European cities. Airline bmi regional will be flying to - Gothenburg, Lyon and Toulouse. Now HS2 could be going to the two French cities but it peters out in London in order for the trudge and the trek to begin.

If I wanted to go to Lyon from Birmingham I'd be tempted to go with bmi regional instead of having two high speed train train journeys and a low speed London sightseeing session in between!

HS2 northern rail route announced

noreply@blogger.com (Arden Forester) — Mon, 28 Jan 2013 13:06:00 +0000

HS2 going north or south or somewhere

The government has announced where the northern rail route of the HS2 high speed railway will go. The £32bn rail project will have running northwards from Birmingham five stops. These are Manchester, Manchester Airport, Toton near Nottingham, Sheffield and Leeds. The Sheffield one will apparently be happily sitting next to the Meadowhall Shopping Centre. If Manchester Airport gets a stop whats the point of Heathrow getting bigger? George Osborne sees this HS2 extension as the "engine for growth in the north and the midlands" but that depends on who is going to use it. And that is where the consultations seem to lead us nowhere. The government talks about creating jobs as if there is some kind of permanence to these jobs. I get the impression that government policy (regardless of party) is always a case of the tail wagging the dog with these grandiose schemes. The tail here is the construction industry keen to do something new. So HS2 is a fantastic bankroller for them. But is just building things for the sake of it a good enough reason? Simon Burns, the transport minister, waxes on today about jobs and the need for this and that and joining up the cities, etc, etc. But is this going to be just a drain on the North for those wanting to get to the South more quickly? I don't know because I can't get to find those "facts". It just appears to be some nebulous concept for "jobs" and "growth" so the country's economy can be given a boost. That's not a good enough reason for carving into the countryside.

Ryanair will still compete for customers

I don't hear of joining this HS2 up with the Eurostar anytime soon. In fact, according to the STOP HS2 site, it's on a back burner with the gas gone out. Now if this high speed train DID link up with the continent I would probably say it was all worthwhile. But a fast ride to London and then a trek and a trudge to the Eurostar trains is totally hopeless as a supporting argument. Ryanair would soon have adverts showing people in the rain. I and my family could be in one because we've suffered the wind and rain getting down to Eurostar, only to meet the Schengen Checkers (for a eurosceptic, this must be the worst opt-out we've ever signed up to!). So, I'm not against high speed rail as such, just this mistaken project which high speeds people between London and the North without any vision of a connection in London. Will Manchester ever link up with Munich? Will Birmingham meet up with Berlin? If we are not careful it will end up like the wretched M6 Toll Road which vehicles try desperately to avoid. This means Midland Expressway, the company running the road, loses millions each year. And it has not done much to ease congestion. In fact, Thomas Fanning, the CEO of Midland Expressway said in July 2011 “The fall in daily traffic on the M6 Toll also reflects improved travel conditions on the competing M6 following completion of an additional section of hard shoulder running between junction eight and 10 in March of this year." So if the West Coast Line is brought up to scratch it will be a similar case of competition. Plus there will still be competition from the low cost airlines. Why go on a journey with two high speed bits and a tedious low speed bit in London when a cheeky Irishman can get you there quicker and cheaper even if he gets you riled in the meantime? My hunch is that if we get this HS2 people will avoid the high prices and go on the "ordinary" trains. So HS2 will struggle to be profitable and the debate will drag on well into the next century. And eventually the trains will get old and internally tatty, like the Eurostar trains.

False hopes, false dawns in David Cameron's EU paradise

noreply@blogger.com (Arden Forester) — Wed, 23 Jan 2013 10:37:00 +0000

"A referendum not today, not tomorrow, but in 2018, but...."

David Cameron is promising some jam today, a bit more in a few years time and a sticky dose of the stuff by 2018 in a referendum to decide whether Britain stays in or out of the European Union. Again, this is Humpty Dumpty stuff. Alice is getting annoyed with Dave as he keeps telling her things he wants to say in a way he wants to say them. Every time Alice thinks she understands Dave has shifted down the wall a bit and tells her she misunderstood him completely.

So the gist of all this is that the Coalition government (with carping LibDems) will beaver away at getting enabling legislation passed so that, if the Conservatives are elected on a landslide, Dave can have his referendum laws in place in order to press the voting button and we all decide. On the basis, of course, that we have a renegotiated deal with a new treaty that gives us a new relationship with or without other partners in the existing European Union. Phew! Can't wait.

It does not make much sense to me. Unless he knows something we don't, the EU bosses are going to tell him to take a jump. They do not want to renegotiate. They cannot stand the idea that their political union is errant in any way. So what is he going to get changed? Surely we need to know his shopping list? Can't vote for Dave in 2015 without knowing that. Also do we believe him in this sort of high wire talk he is doing. He gives the impression he is blackmailing the EU by saying we want to stay in but with changes. So if they don't do the changes, he then suggests we negotiate our way out. Or that is what I think he is saying.

Boris Johnson has jumped up to say, "David Cameron is bang on. What most sensible people want is to belong to the single market but to lop off the irritating excrescences of the European Union. We now have a chance to get a great new deal for Britain - that will put the UK at the heart of European trade but that will also allow us to think globally." What sort of chance, Boris? Not one coming from Herman van Rumpuy. He doesn't do chances. And he's very frustrated (Dave's own word today) with Britain.

So the thing is we are going to have five years of haggling and harassing. Cameron believes a referendum today is a false choice. I believe he is offering us a false dawn and possibly a false sunset.

Gay marriage in church after all - Cameron U-turns!

noreply@blogger.com (Arden Forester) — Fri, 07 Dec 2012 13:30:00 +0000

David Cameron is to go back on his word and try to foist the idea of homosexual unions onto the Christian Church. No doubt this is all part of his programme, which appears to be a heady mixture of secular themes and religious liberalism. Nothing much to do with sacramental belief.

Now we are to be engaged in a second front, whereby the outside world, hostile to Christian doctrine, sees this issue as a means to get even with those they disagree with. David Cameron lives in a fantasy world if he thinks that "gay marriage" in church will somehow be an edifying prospect before God. A Christian marriage cherishes the union of a man and a woman. Is Cameron thinking that two people of the same sex can say "With my body I thee worship, etc, etc" and make it appear sacramentally sound. The theology is warped. The thinking unsound.

George Carey, when Archbishop of Canterbury, suggested that there were two integrities in the Church of England, after the ordination of women was started. Now he and the pro-female ordination side, spurred on by Cameron, wish to see the traditional integrity disappear. Is this the second front of attack? He probably has thought it through like all the other things he has thought through. The devil will definitely be in the detail of this proposal.

On Church and State and all that

noreply@blogger.com (Arden Forester) — Mon, 03 Dec 2012 12:53:00 +0000

Jeremy Paxman in his book The English : A Portrait of a People sums up the attitude of the English to the church as "they were not in any meaningful sense religious, the Church of England being a political invention which had elevated being 'a good chap' to something akin to canonization. On the occasions when bureaucracy demanded they admit an allegiance, they could write 'C of E' in the box and know they wouldn't be bothered by demands that they attend church or give all they had to the poor". Paxman once spoke to a Bishop of Oxford and asked about what one needed to believe to be a member of the church and he replied, with a slight look of bafflement on his face, that it was an intriguing question, as if it had not occurred to him before. Ralf Dahredorf said of religion in his adoptive country that 'a falling out with the Pope is not the same as a true Reformation'.

All this allows the modern English to have a say in church matters without having much regard to doctrine. It also allows the modern cleric to adapt according to the fancies of local folk without taking things too seriously. Faith in many churches has turned into a form of entertainment-cum-self-help-cum-social-services. Vast screens portray easy to read power point presentations with the notion that God can help the individual present. Not much mention of what the individual can do for God.

So it is little wonder confusion reigned supreme in the days after the synod vote. David Cameron got his ten pence worth in, followed by Tony Baldry leading the charge of vituperation against those that were once promised an "honoured place". Ann Widdecombe has an excellent piece in the Daily Express (which I have just noticed on account of not normally going in that newspaper's direction!). It reads -

THE vote on women bishops was sufficiently narrow to have gone either way and the hierarchy who are now bemoaning the outcome have only themselves to blame, having utterly failed to reassure dissenters that there would still be room for them in the Anglican Church. Oh, there were plenty of warm words, vague promises and sketchy arrangements but no detailed code of practice. That was quite enough to have made the difference precisely because some of those who opposed the 1992 decision to ordain women find they have been marginalised.

I received a letter last week from an ordinary C of E worshipper, who is theologically opposed to women priests but who has stayed loyal to his rural church despite the presence of a woman vicar. He hasn’t stomped off to another church but instead asked if from time to time communion could be given by one of the male retired assistant clergy.

And has anyone taken that seriously?

Nope. The bishop says go to another church, regardless of what that costs and the difficulty of travel. The rural dean does not reply. The Archbishop of Canterbury’s office says go to the rural dean. So though their mitres bob up and down with indignation can they really wonder that waverers did not feel like taking the risk at the synod vote and relying on empty words?

It is instructive that the Prime Minister saw fit to rebuke the church for the decision of its synod. That should provide a clear warning of how seriously we may regard government promises on gay marriage.

Ministers insist that the churches will be protected but the PM regularly states what he thinks the churches should do so why will he go out of his way to protect them when they disagree with him?

Furthermore Mr Cameron voted for regulations that have obliged Roman Catholic adoption agencies to close, despite their looking after some of the hardest-to-place children, in the full knowledge that this would happen.

So if he is happy with no exemption for the church on homosexual adoption why would he preserve one on homosexual marriage?

It is actions not words that count.

That is why some members of the synod did not trust the assurances of the bishops and why we should not trust ministers on gay marriage.

I find I concur with every word. Plus it was hard not to think that the Archbishop of Canterbury had been rather more zealous in his promotion of the Enough Waiting campaign and not enough in honouring the promises made to traditional believers. The Bishop of Ebbsfleet has a very good, measured response to the Measure!

Middlesbrough by-election returns Labour as usual

noreply@blogger.com (Arden Forester) — Fri, 30 Nov 2012 11:06:00 +0000

The Middlesbrough vote came as no surprise. Labour was bound to win. However, as Yorkshire people had two by-elections to consider, it is interesting that the industrial north is not the same as the industrial south in voting habits. In fact, no seat in Yorkshire appears similar to any other. Whilst Rotherham provided the makings of a rush away from the main parties, Middlesbrough stuck by them more.

The only force it would appear that is capable of unifying the county is Yorkshire County Cricket Club, as the politicians have done their best to fragment it rather like a badly formed set of computer files. Come the general election it will be very interesting to see how the minor parties (now getting a bit more major) fare in Yorkshire. As the saying goes "there's nowt so queer as folk!" and this might prove very apt on election night 2015.

Middlesbrough result

Andrew McDonald (Labour)                    10,201   60.48%
Richard Elvin (UKIP)                1,990    11.80%
George Selmer (Lib Dem)           1,672      9.91%
Ben Houchen (Conservative) 1,063       6.30%
Imdad Hussain (Peace Party) 1,060       6.28%
Peter Foreman (BNP)                    328        1.94%
Malcolm Paul (Trade Unionist
   and Socialist Coalition)                  277         1.64%
Mark Heslehurst (Ind)                   275         1.63%

Labour Majority 8,211

The electorate was 65,095 and 16,924 ballot papers were issued resulting in a turnout of 26.00%

The Conservative candidate could have come fifth behind the Peace Party candidate. Pecking order is vital for face-saving. The number voting yesterday for one of the three main parties was 12,936 and for other parties it was 3,930, which is 23.30% of the total vote.

UKIP bothers main parties in Rotherham by-election result

noreply@blogger.com (Arden Forester) — Fri, 30 Nov 2012 10:24:00 +0000

I've been following by-elections since the Leyton by-election when Patrick Gordon Walker got his comeuppance for thinking he could plonk himself there after being beaten at Smethwick in the 1964 general election. By-elections from then have been something of an interesting aspect, more for the sub-text than the headlines.

Rotherham is no exception. Labour think they've done well but in essence they haven't. Ms Champion may have a name to suit a winner but she has really lost. That is because the core Labour vote has shrunk. Most are stay-at-home types now, settling comfortable into armchair theorising. Now I know it was November, a rather cold night and near to Christmas, but the trend is there.

Sarah Champion leads the smiles of easily pleased supporters

The local council has shown itself up to be a typical authoritarian old school Labourite outfit. Unless attitudes change, such as the sourpuss sentiments of Joyce Thacker, more people will desert. Labour has no cause for comfort in Rotherham.

Neither have the Conservatives or Liberal Democrats. There was a time when a seat like Rotherham would be a straight fight, as they used to be called. That last happened in 1970. The Conservatives have won Rotherham before, in 1931, but that was by a slim majority. That is never going to happen again.

When it was either Labour or Conservative, with the possible "intervention" of a Liberal, most people voted tribally and the main parties got their votes in. Any communist, nationalist or independent who contemplated a go was lucky to garner a handful of votes. That all changed in the 1970's when politicians suffered two setbacks. First, they were scrutinised on TV and radio with determined questioning. Second, the public began to question their own loyalty to party in light of disastrous events. In Rotherham yesterday 11,574 people voted for one of the three main parties and 9,876 voted for what used to be called "others". It's when those others get the whip hand that the likes of Cameron, Clegg and Miliband will have to consider their places.

Rotherham Result

Sarah Champion (Labour)           9,966     46.46%
Jane Collins (UKIP)            4,648     21.67%
Marlene Guest (BNP)       1,804        8.41%
Yvonne Ridley (Respect)    1,778        8.29%
Simon Wilson (Conservative) 1,157        5.39%
David Wildgoose
              (English Democrats)    703         3.28%
Simon Copley (Ind)                 582         2.71%
Michael Beckett (Lib Dem)    451          2.10%
Ralph Dyson (Trade Unionists
and Socialists Against Cuts)        281          1.31%
Paul Dickson (Ind)                        51          0.24%
Clint Bristow (Ind)              29          0.14%

Labour Majority 5,318

The electorate was 63,420 and 21,496 ballot papers were issued resulting in a turnout of 33.89%

Tony Blair is the real superbug of the EU virus

noreply@blogger.com (Arden Forester) — Thu, 29 Nov 2012 10:36:00 +0000

Tony Blair hoping to take the European crown

Tony Blair is hovering around Europe giving his bot mots to anyone who will listen. Most of his life he has either spent ingratiating himself with someone or other, or he has taken his well-yeah-but style of argument to his opponents. Those opponents have been from across the political spectrum. Now he is trying to propose that the European Union has positive things to offer. If it does, they will be crippled or crushed by the negative things currently going on.

Blair is a tunnel-vision crusader. He's like a dog on the scent of something or with a bone to chew. So for him it is the European Union as is or lump it. Well, most of us don't take to his waffle. Firstly, the European Commission prefers to have unaudited accounts - 18 years on the trot - for whatever reason. No doubt to hide fiddling. Secondly, Barroso and the elite are fixated on saving the Euro regardless of the consequences for the citizens of Europe. Thirdly, nation states are getting strangled by the bureaucracy and diktats from Brussels, all done in the name of solidarity. Fourthly, national referendums are ignored and abused so that the will of the Commission prevails. There are loads of other things that could be added to the list.

I am not in favour of pretectionism or glorious insular isolation for Britain. Far from it. We are a European country and we will remain so. But that does NOT mean being shackled within an increasingly undemocratic and autocratic union. As Nigel Farage says, most Europeans now want a Europe of nation states, co-operating and trading and exchanging cultural, business and leisure activities. No to a drawbridge mentality as well as no to a centralising undemocratic bureaucracy.

Tony Blair, in his talk at Chatham House, likened euroscepticism to a virus. He is entitled to his opinions. However, when it comes to democracy Blair has often acted like a superbug trying to get his own way.

The underemployed feel they under achieve as part-time workers

noreply@blogger.com (Arden Forester) — Wed, 28 Nov 2012 11:40:00 +0000

Making sure the plank fits

Britain now has a sizeable proportion of the workforce not working as they would like. It probably works out at about 20% , and not 10.5% as suggested, of those who find their earnings not completely satisfactory. First there is the section that are unemployed and looking for work, then the officially recognised underemployed, followed by the low paid minimum wage earners and then the contract workers with gaps in their work schedules.

The government, or more accurately the Office of National Statistics, is to be praised for highlighting this feeling of being underemployed by conducting a study which shows 3,050,000 workers want to work more hours each week, out of a total workforce of 29.41 million. However, there is more honesty required in the whole attitude to work and jobs. Governments talk about jobs being created by companies, but in reality a great many new jobs are just filled by people switching. There is still a swathe of the workforce struggling to earn a decent salary or make enough profit to maintain a business or just find a job in the first place.

I think the days are gone whereby governments can get along by massaging unemployment figures and spinning the facts about job creation. A disgruntled workforce is not an efficient workforce. If David Cameron wants to succeed in this aspect he might consider that the labourer is worthy of his/her hire. All too often this is not the case. And it is exacerbated by the crazed greed of people like George Entwistle who appear incapable of putting anyone or anything before their desire to extract the very maximum for, almost I fear, the very minimum when they feel hurt and betrayed. Exorbitant bonuses and inflated payoffs just make a nonsense of employment rights.

We need a situation whereby everyone pays there fair share and everyone earns according to skill and ability and responsibility. If we are all in "this" together, let it so. Currently some are well out of it either by subterfuge or by situation.

Diana Carney to level with George Osborne

noreply@blogger.com (Arden Forester) — Tue, 27 Nov 2012 10:42:00 +0000

Mark and Diana Carney come as a package

I see that the wife of the new governor of the Bank of England, Mark Carney, is something of a left-wing firebrand. She doesn't take kindly to bankers who mess up, she promotes vegan ways and she is a supporter-cum-promoter of the Occupy movement. Just the sort of woman to make George Osborne wince when he goes into paradoxical statements about the economy.

It seems that public appointments now come with the appointed person's spouse and/or family members being given the once over to place them in a suitable position so that the media can speculate for ever in order to boost ratings and sales. Diana Carney is a godsend to them. My guess is though that had she not been so accommodating with her past glories, they may have been tempted to exaggerate a few of their own.

Justin Welby is going to be Archbishop of Canterbury with the media enthralled to know his father was a bootlegger and sometime confidante of John F Kennedy (in a non presidential way). Barack Obama has his aged Kenyan grandmother popping up with pearls of wisdom. Plus an array of relatives Obama didn't know he had.

However, I suppose it never has been any different. Billy Carter featured in Jimmy's life. Ronald Reagan had a few problems like that. John Major had his vaudeville dad, Tony Blair had a father-in-law with a colourful past and Margaret Thatcher had Denis, God bless him. Maybe having a spouse with opinions or a relative with a racy background is a help rather than a hindrance.

Diana Carney certainly appears to have views which may make George Osborne consider whether she is the best spouse in the world to be supporting the governor. She seems to have enough savvy to level with him in discussions about global financial institutions being “rotten or inadequate”. However, if his tenure as chancellor ends in ignominy, she might just be tempted simply to level him on our behalf.

Mark Carney named new Bank of England governor

noreply@blogger.com (Arden Forester) — Mon, 26 Nov 2012 16:42:00 +0000

Mark Carney looks forward to 2019

Mark Carney, governor of Canada's central bank, has been named as the new governor of the Bank of England by George Osborne. Some think it a surprise choice but these choices are never really surprises. He takes up his new post in May.

With a think tank advising that economic life will be gloomy for Britain until 2018 at least, Mr Carney has his work cut out seeing that the UK economy is guided back into shape. Whilst he may not have total power to rectify previous mistakes, it would be nice to see that he speaks up about all the shadowy systems that have evolved and that transparency in the financial markets is to be welcomed. Dealing with dodgy bankers and fickle tax fiddlers is a must.

He is a Canadian who has agreed to take on British citizenship. I hope he passes the test.

Nigel Farage says UKIP "at war" with Cameron

noreply@blogger.com (Arden Forester) — Mon, 26 Nov 2012 14:02:00 +0000

So now it's a real tooth and claw debate. David Cameron seems to have lost all his Celtic genes because he isn't a canny politician. What has happened over the Fabricant kite flying exercise is that we now know where both sides sit. Plus we know that, as UKIP rises in the public conscience as a serious player and Cameron continues with his arrogant assumptions, a good UKIP showing will scupper Cameron as leader. As another famous Celt said, on many occasions, to a man who had a reputation for knowing it all - "We're all doomed. DOOMED I say!". Some Conservative MPs already concur.

UKIP prefers the highway to David Cameron's way

noreply@blogger.com (Arden Forester) — Mon, 26 Nov 2012 10:16:00 +0000

David Cameron and UKIP in satnav negotiations

Michael Fabricant has decided a discussion needs to take place about an EU referendum and the electoral arrangements at the next general election of the Conservative Party and the UK Independence Party. He has started this because many Conservative MPs are now rather anxious about their future prospects and think that taking on UKIP in their constituencies might result in them either losing to Labour or a LibDem or holding on and having to stomach another coalition. So Michael has popped up to generate a discussion about forming an electoral pact in return for a concrete proposal for a referendum.

I think he's whistling in the wind, something he should be very careful about doing. This is not just about a referendum. This is far more now. This is about higher matters as to how our democracy should be run. The Coalition leaders were rather unkindly described as Tweedledee and Tweedledum when they came together to form the government. However, at this moment it may appear that there is something of reality to it as far as David Cameron is concerned. Many Conservative MPs are frustrated that he appears quite happy with a lot of LibDem thinking and relaxed about being in government with them. However, a part of him strongly resents them being there because it is a reminder he failed to lead the Conservative Party into majority government. Now it looks like he never will.

This is more than talk of referendums. This is about responding to a prime minister who thinks it is OK to denigrate his detractors and dissemble if it suits him. Democracy is demeaned if those who win arguments or just say something different are dismissed with cheap threats and sarcastic responses. All too often recently David Cameron has done this. He then wonders why people are supporting and joining UKIP.

By calling UKIP members fruitcakes and racists, even if he now tries to suggest it was only a few he was identifying, he antagonises people by his arrogance. His clumsy strategy in "detoxifying" the Conservative Party suggests that there were some toxins that needed removing. Such, I suppose, as supporting traditional marriage. He is pandering to an element of society that he now favours, rather than giving room for all types of conservative thought. Now he finds that UKIP is doing well in the polls. Not just because he reneged on the referendum promise but because he is giving no home for traditional values and views.

So it is no surprise that Nigel Farage does not want to deal with Cameron and his vice-chairman Fabricant. Because a deal would always be front-ended in favour of Cameron. And we all know where promises like that lead us. What would be fair is if every constituency had a choice between the two parties. After all that is what democracy is all about.

Rotherham foster carers banned for UKIP membership

noreply@blogger.com (Arden Forester) — Sat, 24 Nov 2012 12:01:00 +0000

Joyce Thacker, one of the new army of self-righteous zealots

The zealotry of the politically (in)correct classes, which now permeate our society in its administrative structures, seems to know no bounds. Today we hear of Rotherham Borough Council's actions of Stasi-like proportions in taking children away from a couple because they had membership of the UK Independence Party. The children in question were siblings of what is described by the council as being of a non-White British background. However they appear to be from within Europe somewhere. This clinical, sterile approach to life is highly alarming.

Rather like a recipient of the methods used by the Stasi of East Germany, the couple, by all accounts a caring one with seven years fostering behind them were "reported" to the Social Services Department of Rotherham Council. Then they received a visit from two social workers who accused the couple, by innuendo and invective, of being racists and zenophobes. The zealots branded UKIP as a party that wished to get rid of Europeans from Britain. The wife told the Daily Telegraph, "I was dumbfounded. Then my question to both of them was, 'What has UKIP got to do with having the children removed?' One of them said, 'Well, UKIP have got racist policies.' The implication was that we were racist. The social worker said UKIP does not like European people and wants them all out of the country to be returned to their own countries".

This is not going to be the last of it. Those of us not signed up to THE PROGRAMME or wanting to, will need to be able to fight back. It is outrageous that such people as Joyce Thacker, the head of social services, can act in such a way. And she still holds to what her staff did and said and says she does not regret any of it. Well, lots of us do and we intend to say so. I hope Nigel Farage gives her today a real re-education when he meets Rotherham Council officials.

Britain is fast going back to the same old troubles of the Civil War. In fact, I doubt if anything much has changed over the intervening centuries. David Cameron is a sort of posh Cromwell without the puritan streak. But all the warning signs are there. It was he who labelled UKIP racists and fruitcakes. Any wonder that social workers with a limited grasp of the facts can allow their inner prejudices to take root? Their knowledge of UKIP policies is as poor and depressing as the knowledge MPs have of the women bishops issue. A little knowledge is a dangerous thing indeed.

But Joyce Thacker exposes her own political agenda by describing UKIP's policy on immigration as a "mantra". Does she say that of the three main parties, whose mantra sometimes is despicably dishonest and downright racially selective? No chance. And the thing that really gets me is that she rather spitefully added "the children were not considered to be in any harm". Nice!

We can expect more attacks by zealots of this kind. Those of us with a traditional, caring view on life will have to gird our loins!

What is race exactly? Who determines it all? Don't let the judges decide!

noreply@blogger.com (Arden Forester) — Fri, 23 Nov 2012 11:50:00 +0000

Get the dog warden - It's canine abuse

I thought we were over a few things in this world but apparently not. Racial abuse and racial denigration are wrong. Definitely not on the help list for "Love Thy Neighbour as Thyself". However, in this mad world of politically correct thinking and absurd legal actions, the concept of racial abuse and understanding its causes are severely damaged if nonsensical stuff comes out, like these two cases.

Recently there was a case in Macclesfield that makes my point, I think. A woman who was Czech-born has been found guilty of racially abusing her New Zealand-born neighbour by calling her a "stupid, fat Australian". The judge took exception to the word "Australian" and ruled that it was racial. How, exactly? Neither of the two women involved in the fracas was actually a native Australian, so both were from somewhere else. Even if they were born in Australia, how come two white women from Macclesfield can be identified with being racially "Australian"? What if the Czech or New Zealand aspects had been used? Any further contemplation might lead to madness because it is nonsense to start with. It belittles real racial abuse. How far does this racial distinction go?

Maybe as far as Wales. Another ridiculous case was of a drunk Welsh wedding guest who insulted the English whilst he was on a coach going home from a smart country wedding in Wales. He started singing anti-English songs to wind people up. He has been convicted of racism too.

These judgements make a total mockery not only of the way we deal with racial abuse but of the judiciary and the CPS. How far does their nonsense take them? If aggressive rude people are trouble charge them with that but for crying out loud do not bring race into it when race has nothing to do with it.

I've seen Brummies having a ding-dong with folk from Dudley. Any judge care to split the difference between the two?

If you want bile look here. It's in spadefuls.

noreply@blogger.com (Arden Forester) — Thu, 22 Nov 2012 18:19:00 +0000

Suzie Leafe has gone into the lions' den and written what she believes. This is how it happened for her as a member of the House of Laity who voted No to the legislation (measure) before the Synod.

For her troubles, Independent readers let loose and have come up with some nasty stuff. Why do so many non-believers get so upset?

Why I voted no to women bishops in the Independent

Tony Baldry denigrates the Church with "sect" slur!

noreply@blogger.com (Arden Forester) — Thu, 22 Nov 2012 13:13:00 +0000

Tony Baldry uncharitably slurs the Church

The salvos are coming thick and fast. Now Tony Baldry, the Second Church Estates Commissioner, has told MPs that he was frustrated by the actions of a blocking minority in the synod. And so the House erupted in a self-serving attack on the Church. This group of secular/liberal/semi-religious zealots are quite prepared to trample over the consciences of those they at best disagree with and at worst despise. What Mr.Baldry fails to mention is that this "blocking minority" is only seeking PROPER PROVISION for its integrity. Time and again we have been assured of RESPECT. Well, Mr Baldry shows little or no respect. Sorry, but it is true.

Like the prime minister he is acting like a churlish bully. He needs to grasp a bit of Christian charity. Epithets and childishly saying the church is like a sect are harmful and hurtful. Basically, he is like a big secular cuckoo in the nest. Forcing people to go against conscience is highly un-Christian. He is known by his own remarks.

We will not "get with the programme" because that programme is unjust. We seem to be in for a torrid time with these zealots determined to crush traditional belief and adherence to the Gospel.

New BBC Director General is Tony Hall

noreply@blogger.com (Arden Forester) — Thu, 22 Nov 2012 12:22:00 +0000

Two lords do not a crisis make

The chief executive of the Royal Opera House and the BBC's former director of news, Tony Hall, has been appointed the corporation's new director general. BBC Trust chairman Lord Patten said Mr Hall was "the right person to lead the BBC out of its current crisis".

Well, let's hope so. And seeing as Lord Patten is a Catholic perhaps he could get Tony Hall to rein in the biased reporting and chippy comments of his presenters. We could do without the sneering remarks (Bill Turnbull on Breakfast!) when it comes to matters of belief and conscience.

Happy Thanksgiving Day!

noreply@blogger.com (Arden Forester) — Thu, 22 Nov 2012 10:20:00 +0000

Thanksgiving Day

Today is Thanksgiving Day in the United States. This is probably the only day of the year when Americans can feel like real Americans. It is uniquely American in it's understanding of fusing the soil with the soul. Not even the Harvest Festivals of English parishes quite measure up to the senses of family gathering and public celebration that Thanksgiving Day provides. Oddly enough, although the day has religious overtones, it is not an overtly religious day. Yes, it was the puritans who gave thanks for those crops in their first years of toil and tribulation as they battled the elements to secure a foothold on the new continent. But they never seemed to take ownership of the festival. So Americans of all types and classes, religious or secular, rich or poor, can enjoy the day for what it is.

Conversely, the English Harvest Festival is far more religiously overt. "We plough the fields and scatter...." and the parish thanks God for the bounty. Good as it is, it is only that. In urban parishes we are reduced to supplying cans of food. This year we were advised to provide only cans with ring pull tops. Why? Because the needy don't carry can openers around with them. Seemples!

Whilst our harvest festivals praise the Lord for His generosity and remind us of our good fortune, we appear less keen on having a good family get together. I've never heard anyone in Britain say, "Oh, I must get home for Harvest Festival". Whereas, such a sentiment regarding Thanksgiving Day is commonplace. In fact, large swathes of the TV movie business are given over to celebrating it. I've had several Thanksgiving Days in America. Not all the same, I do remember. One was a large gathering with real roast turkey and all the "fixings". The other was with turkey roll and a can of cranberry sauce. Well, it was a solid piece alright. The rings from the can remained around it as if the can had be a modelling mould. One sliced this congealed concoction to add with the roll. Still, it was Thanksgiving Day and we enjoyed it! Friends and family, family and friends.

Something that is unique can't really be copied. But it would be nice if Britain could have a similar sort of day so people could say, "Yes, I must get home that day!".

A measured response to the Women Bishops Measure

noreply@blogger.com (Arden Forester) — Wed, 21 Nov 2012 18:47:00 +0000

David Cameron gives ABC a sharp prod to "get with the programme"

David Cameron is on his own mission to prod and poke and generally create a climate of revulsion against orthodox Christianity. This is a shame. A more measured response would have been appropriate. Perhaps he might like to dwell on the words of Fr Kit Dunkley SSC, who has given a very good response, in my humble opinion, of course.

The Society of the Holy Cross welcomes the vote in General Synod on 20th November not to accept the draft legislation for the ordination of women to the episcopate. At the same time, we are aware that there are many in the church who hoped and prayed that the decision would go the other way and are feeling disappointed and dejected at this time. The debate in General Synod showed our national church at its best, with calm and rational debate on all sides and an opportunity for people of widely differing opinions to have their say. In the same way, we have to respond to the aftermath of the vote by continuing to display genuine Christian charity and concern for those who disagree with us but who nevertheless with us proclaim Jesus as Lord of the Church. Most of us work at local level both with ordained women and those who are their supporters and we continue to refuse to allow our differences to stand in the way of the Church’s task to proclaim the Christian Gospel anew in each generation and to strive together to live the Christian life.

Our prayers are particularly with the out-going Archbishop of Canterbury and with Bishop Justin Welby his successor as they work under intense pressure to keep together a diverse church and to deal with the many other pressing issues which face us at this time.

I don't think the Prime Minister needs to poke and prod so much. How about a bit of dialogue instead of a sharp prod in the vestry?

A point of view concerning "getting with the programme"

noreply@blogger.com (Arden Forester) — Wed, 21 Nov 2012 16:09:00 +0000

I spied upon this piece from "Let Nothing You Dismay". I cannot really disagree. David Cameron has decided to stir things up a bit. This is the piece -

Most previous Prime Ministers, of all parties, not as obsessed with the 'equality agenda' as the present occupant of 10, Downing Street (and probably having enough political nous, and an awareness of their own lack of expertise in this area, to know when to keep quiet) would have preserved the constitutional niceties and conventions and refused to be drawn at the dispatch box into a row over the internal decisions of the Church of England. It is a truly disturbing development that this Prime Minister (and other politicians who probably last darkened the doors of a church at their baptism - if then) should not feel so constrained. These are strange times, and those who hold to Christian orthodoxy from all traditions and communions should begin to be very worried indeed about the future.

Christian orthodoxy is in the firing line. Well, he has warned us. Those who don't "get with the programme" are likely to be in for a hard time.

Stephen Dorrell in £70,000 flat deal row

noreply@blogger.com (Arden Forester) — Wed, 21 Nov 2012 14:41:00 +0000

Stephen Dorrell at the Leveson Inquiry

One would have thought that MPs would have got the message. That fiddling expenses is not right. Legitimate expenses OK. Huge mega cash deals are not quite on. Only recently Denis MacShane left the House of Commons, his political career in tatters after he claimed expenses that were both untrue and deceitfully concocted. And the former Luton South MP Margaret Moran was convincingly shown to be a fraudster. Why do they continue to do it?

Stephen Dorrell is not a stupid man. In fact, I've always thought him quite reasoned in his political thinking. Now he is caught up in a potential scandal about selling a flat of his for £70,000 and renting it back, using taxpayers' money. Did it ever occur to him, over cornflakes at breakfast, that this might, ever so slightly, be seen as iffy? He may not have done wrong, but it is perception every time in politics. The Daily Telegraph is on to it, a bit like a trained bloodhound. That paper has definitely got a smell for trouble. It reports "....but the disclosure that a senior Conservative has been caught up in the controversy over expenses will raise further concerns that 51 MPs have been allowed to keep their rental details secret". More secrecy? More potential trouble I fear.

We have not seen or heard the last of these things. Even with the Independent Parliamentary Standards Authority, a quango swallowing taxpayers money, we still have not struck at the heart of the culture that sees expenses as additional income. Stephen Dorrell says he has nothing to hide and will explain all. Fair do's, but his political antennae have let him down here.

There does not seem to be any idea of considering if an expense is genuinely an expense. It's all a matter of correcting things after the event. One of the reasons I find David Cameron's position so hard to accept is that he let that bill for clearing wisteria from his house go through. It was no accident. He knew at the time that withering wisteria was his problem alone. It was nothing to do with the taxpayers and certainly had nothing to do with his constituency business. But when found out he shrugged it off. Arrogantly, too, I thought. And others in a similar situation, who he obviously thought were "not with the programme" got rough justice and were shown the door. Their seats filled with willing programme supporters.

Until the matter of expenses is finally sorted out, it will continue to anger the public if abused and continue to be a source of political blackmail by rivals and opponents in political life. I do hope Stephen Dorrell knocks this on the head very soon.