Allowed HTML - you can use: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <s> <strike> <strong>

344 thoughts on “We’re Not Dead Yet”

1 2 3 4 5 6 … 12
  • Flaming June

    Perhaps it is not known by some here that Ms Smith was the successful candidate in a by election in which Craig also stood. We like to keep up with news about her such as her disastrous showing on a Newsnight programme and her previous employers Deloittes. The latter receive large amounts of remuneration from the ConDems. They are also Tory donors.

    eg
    City firm Deloitte picks up Government contracts worth nearly £7m after bankrolling the Tories

    http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/uk-news/city-firm-deloitte-picks-up-89118

    and that was two years ago. Probably a lot more is now going into their coffers with the NHS privatisation etc.

  • Habbabkuk (La vita è bella!)

    @ Flaming June re. Chloe Smith :

    “We like to keep up with news about her such as her disastrous showing on a Newsnight programme and her previous employers Deloittes.”
    ______________

    Perhaps so, but your squib about her getting married is just tittle-tattle, isn’t it, and of no conceivable relevance to her as a politician.

    It’s the sort of “comment” which – multiplied by the dozen – cheapens this blog and is likely to have the normal reader scratching his or her head.

  • Kempe

    “Fred, old son….granted the nationalists would like Cornwall to be independent, and given they’re under a feudal regime at the moment, they’ve got a case ”

    It pleases the Cornish nationalists to pretend that the County of Cornwall and the Duchy are one and the same and that this should grant Cornwall some special status but in the meantime places them under the well polished jackboot of the Heir to the Throne.

    The truth is that the Duchy actually owns very little of Cornwall and most of it’s properties are outside the county.

    http://www.duchyofcornwall.org/aroundtheduchy.htm

  • Komodo

    The case of Michael Bruton -v- Information Commissioner and the Duchy of Cornwall and the Attorney General to HRH the Prince of Wales is also relevant to the Duchy’s claim to be providing a social benefit (see earlier posts).

    Bruton sought information under the Environmental Information Regulations,2004, regarding his concerns for a marine conservation area: “First, to ascertain whether
    consents or permissions had been given to the Fishery in the SAC. Second, to ascertain whether an environmental assessment had taken place before consents or permissions were given so as to ensure that there would be no detrimental environmental effects on the SAC. Mr Bruton feared that the Fishery was cultivating and harvesting predominantly non-native Pacific oysters of both the fertile diploid and triploid variety and he was concerned that it might have already introduced stocks to the SAC. Mr Bruton also believes that the oyster fishery involves dredging activities which may harm the site’s nature conservation objectives.”

    The oyster farm was operated by a tenant of Charles’s. The request (to the Duchy of Cornwall) was refused. On spurious grounds, as it turns out. Even HRH’s own personal Attorney-General, Jonathan Crow QC couldn’t make the Duchy’s case stand up.

    Crow – legal heavyweight -:
    http://www.4stonebuildings.com/barristers/jonathan-crow-qc.asp

    The tribunal’s judgement:

    http://www.informationtribunal.gov.uk/DBFiles/Decision/i600/20111206%20Decision%20&%20Ruling%20EA20100182.pdf

  • Habbabkuk (La vita è bella!)

    I should place these recent posts about the Duchy of Cornwall under the rubric of the anti-Monarchy tendency which I think it’s fair to say is one of the articles of faith for most of the people who comment on this blog.

    I would however assume that most of those commenters would agreed on the need for some Head of State or other. If this is so, I’d be interested to hear their thoughts on how the Head of State should be chosen in the UK : should it be by direct universal suffrage (case of, eg, Vth republic France, USA) or should it be by Parliament (case of IIIrd and IVth republic France,Greece, Italy, etc)?

  • Flaming June

    Gross hypocrisy there about ‘cheapening this blog’ @ 2.39pm. Pots and kettles
    spring to mind.

    ~~~

    Here pots of money spring to mind. While many of the British citizenry are in dire straits and even penury, Goldman Sachs made profits of £1.86nbn in just three months and they are not alone.

    Goldman Sachs doubles profits to $1.86 billion – beating Wall Street estimates
    Goldman’s net income rose from $927 million to $1.86 billion, year-on-year

    ‘Goldman’s results echoed similar trends in the investment banking units of JPMorgan Chase & Co and Citigroup Inc, whose fixed-income trading businesses also benefited from increased client activity early in the quarter.’

    http://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/news/goldman-sachs-doubles-profits-to-186-billion–beating-wall-street-estimates-8711189.html

  • Flaming June

    That was 1.86 billion dollar bills not 1.86 billion £1 coins. Can you picture the stacks?

  • Komodo

    The PoW owns Cornwall in the same sense as HM owns most of the rest, Kempe.

    …the whole of Cornwall is a territorial possession not of the Queen in right of her Crown, [the government of the UK], but of the Duke in right of his Duchy [the desperately denied and hidden de jure instrument of Cornish governance]. The legal process is called bona vacantia [vacant goods] and it ensures that land reverts back to its presumptive, ultimate and absolute sovereign owner. The legal mechanisms are enshrined in the Administration of Estates Act 1925 [as amended] and the Companies Act 1985 [as amended]. Two Acts of Parliament that, we are told, are operated by the UK Government through its Treasury Solicitors legal department. However, regards bona vacantia, UK Treasury Solicitors has no jurisdiction in Cornwall.

    http://www.duchyofcornwall.eu/latest/?page_id=130

    (commentary)

    Both the Duchy of Cornwall and the Duchy of Lancaster—since 1399 held by the monarch in a personal capacity—have special legal rights not available to other landed estates: for example, the rules on bona vacantia, the right to ownerless property, operate in favour of the holders of the duchies rather than the Crown, such that the property of anyone who dies in the county of Cornwall without a will or identifiable heirs, and assets belonging to dissolved companies whose registered office was in Cornwall, pass to the duchy.[14][15] In 2007, £130,000 was realised from the right of bona vacantia. The duke owns freehold about three-fifths of the Cornish foreshore and the ‘fundus’, or bed, of navigable rivers and has right of wreck on all ships wrecked on Cornish shores, including those afloat offshore, and also to “Royal fish”, i.e. whales, porpoises, and sturgeon.[16] The Duchy of Cornwall is the Harbour Authority for St Mary’s Harbour.
    {Wiki}

    I’m not arguing for the Free Kernow lot. I’m arguing for constitutional consistency. And the argument goes well beyond Cornwall.

    Writing in the Guardian, lawyer David Gollancz commented that: “The duchy exercises a unique range of legal powers, which elsewhere are reserved for the crown…. It seems anomalous, and worrying, that such a huge estate, created and conferred by law and exercising significant legal powers, should be able to escape public scrutiny by calling itself a private estate.”[21] The requirement for the Prince of Wales to give consent to draft bills that could affect the interests of the Duchy of Cornwall is not a new power granted to Prince Charles, but a centuries-old parliamentary practice that involved the same requirement for consent being conferred on previous Dukes of Cornwall
    (Wiki)

    That’s not just parts of Cornwall, please note. Half of the Duchy’s 209 sq. miles of investment land is in Devon, and there’s more elsewhere. He pays bugger-all corporation tax on it, while paying personal tax, admittedly at the highest rate, on whatever he chooses to declare, in the strictest possible secrecy, to a trustworthy ear at HMRC. Bear in mind that his living expenses are tax-deductible against his job, which is being the Prince of Wales. For instance.

    He was in Bude for three hours yesterday. Hope you didn’t forget the Union Jack.

  • A Node

    Glad you’re feeling better, Craig. Here’s Chumbawanba to join me in welcoming you back:

    “We’ll be singing
    When we’re winning
    We’ll be singing

    I get knocked down
    But I get up again
    You’re never going to keep me down

    Pissing the night away
    Pissing the night away

    He drinks a whiskey drink
    He drinks a vodka drink
    He drinks a lager drink
    He drinks a cider drink”

  • A Node

    Herbie 16 Jul, 2013 – 3:38 pm

    “Should we choose our head of state by birth, as Habby prefers, or by vote?”

    Neither. By lottery. Seriously.

  • Habbabkuk (La vita è bella!)

    “direct universal suffrage” (USA) – not quite accurate on reflection because there is the Electoral College. But a good enough example of a system other than election by a Parliament (Congress for the USA)

  • Flaming June

    Hague and cohort fielding questions from the Foreign Affairs Committee.

    On now http://www.parliamentlive.tv/Main/Player.aspx?meetingId=13628

    Developments in UK foreign policy
    Witnesses
    i. Rt Hon William Hague MP, First Secretary of State and Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, Sir Simon Fraser KCMG, Permanent Under-Secretary, and David Quarrey, Director, Middle East and North Africa, Foreign and Commonwealth Office

  • Komodo

    Monarchy generally- I’ll bite, for a change. It’s a valid question and relevant. No objection, provided it’s constitutionally ringwalled from having any influence whatever on
    a democratic government (we need one of those too). Provided also that it doesn’t need vast estates and money beyond anyone else’s wildest dreams to perform its perfectly useful function. Provided it isn’t Tony Blair, and provided it isn’t the topic of incessant front page coverage when one of its relatives is in pup….it can be hereditary if it likes, and good luck to it. Otherwise make it a Lottery prize or choose it annually from the Mail Online’s sidebar of lovely ladies.

  • Flaming June

    Not many members of the committee there. Have they already jetted off for the hols?

    Membership Foreign Affairs Committee

    Richard Ottaway MP (Chair) Conservative
    Mr John Baron MP Conservative
    Rt Hon Sir Menzies Campbell QC MP Liberal Democrats
    Rt Hon Ann Clwyd MP Labour
    Mike Gapes MP Labour
    Mark Hendrick MP Labour
    Sandra Osborne Labour
    Andrew Rosindell MP Conservative
    Mr Frank Roy MP Labour
    Rt Hon Sir John Stanley MP Conservative
    Rory Stewart MP Conservative

  • Habbabkuk (La vita è bella!)

    @ Herbie

    So what would your preference be?

    Or perhaps you could envisage yet another method (eg A_Node’s lottery idea)?

    I ask because I’m sure you’ve carried your thought a little further than the simple “get rid of the Monarchy”. Haven’t you?

    ________________

  • Habbabkuk (La vita è bella!)

    @ Herbie

    “Anyway, whilst Habby exeunts backwards,….”

    ___________

    I think you’ll find that “exeunt” is a third person plural, whereas “Habbabkuk” is third person singular.

    But please don’t let me “distract” you from giving us your thoughts on how a President of the UK should be elected. Off you go!

  • Habbabkuk (La vita è bella!)

    @ Flaming June

    I’ve noticed that you frequently post about the Royal Family (a couple of times just today, for example) and usually in a not too friendly way, so I assume that you would be for a republic to replace the monarchy.

    Would you therefore not wish to contribute to the debate and to the question “how should a President be elected or chosen”?

    It would seem to be a reasoable and relevant question for a republican to think about, would it not?

  • Herbie

    You’re plural, Habby.

    Anyway.

    Best to have system closer to that of the US, with funding for political parties and no private lobbying, bribing nor any of the rest of the nonsense currently in vogue.

    I’d aim too for the head of state to be chosen from outside the ranks of the political parties.

  • Habbabkuk (La vita è bella!)

    @ Flaming June:

    “Gross hypocrisy there about ‘cheapening this blog’ @ 2.39pm. Pots and kettles spring to mind”
    ___________

    Must call you out on that, I’m afraid – right of reply and all that.

    YOU have frequently posted on tittle-tattle like people’s husbands or wives. An egregious recent example was your comment about what Voctoria Beckham was wearing at Wimbledon (“some sort of lingerie” or something similar was your insight, if I remember correctly).

    I challenge YOU to find ONE single post from ME containing similar irrelevant tittle-tattle.

    If you can find one, you can talk about pots and kettles.

  • Kempe

    Komodo, you’re quoting from exactly the kind of nationalist website I was talking about.

    Cornwall is not a feudal state, it’s an English county with the same sort of local democracy as any other English county and which is represented by six MPs at Westminster.

    Incidentally Cornish nationalist contested all six seats at the last election and all six lost their deposits. Three came last, that is pulled fewer votes than the Monster Raving Loony Party and all the other joke candidates. There is little real support for Cornish independence because most people there realise that unlike Scotland Cornwall simply doesn’t have any resources to support it.

  • Kempe

    Oh by the way, I do agree that the Duchy should be paying it’s fair share of taxes.

1 2 3 4 5 6 … 12

Comments are closed.