Penrhys: What’s Happening?

I am indebted to whoever posted certain comments to my previous posting regarding developments at Penrhys in the Rhondda. It makes worrying, but predictable, reading. From what has been provided and from what I have already gleaned it appears that we have here another squalid example of what can emerge from the third sector’s incestuous relationship with the Labour Party. The comments are available here in PDF format for you to read for yourselves.

After reading the comments I naturally went to the Rhondda Cynon Taf Homes website. The Home page conveniently provides a link to the Penrhys project, which in turn takes us to Independent Regeneration Ltd. In the final paragraph of ‘The Regeneration of Penrhys’ IR uses the word ‘local’ no fewer than five times, but of course neglects to mention that the company itself is based in a suburban street of detached and semi-detached houses in Retford, a small town in Nottinghamshire, England.

Going back to the RCT Homes website, the Board is made up in the main of Labour politicians, trade unionists, and third sector ‘professionals’. (i.e. professional at scrounging funding for ‘problems’ that very often don’t exist or are exacerbated by the third sector to provide more work for the third sector, which then ‘justifies’ more funding . . . ) Quite odd, when you think about it . . . the Labour Party is generally opposed to privatisation but is quite happy to privatise housing and other council work as long the contracts go to Labour’s members and supporters in the third sector.

Given the Labour composition of the Board I was surprised to see the name Kel Palmer of Mountain Ash, there as a Tenant Board Member. Those of you who still read the Wasting Mule will be familiar with Palmer’s swivel-eyed unionism and royalism, displayed for all to see in his regular letters to said organ. Though I thought social housing was for those who cannot afford to buy a home. With Palmer on an RAF Group Captain’s pension – and possibly other pensions – I would have thought he could afford a place of his own, certainly in RCT.

Returning to Penrhys, we read:

“We have already started work to modernise all of the existing homes at Penrhys. In a £2.1 million deal with EDF Energy, new external wall insulation is being fitted on the properties under the UK Government’s Community Energy Saving Programme. The insulation is being covered with coloured render in a variety of pastel shades. As well as increasing energy efficiency, the improvements will give the distinctive 1960s housing a fresh, modern appearance.

Meanwhile, RCT Homes has joined forces with specialist housing regeneration company Independent Regeneration to submit an outline planning application to develop around 100 new, privately-owned houses at Penrhys. The predominantly detached and semi-detached houses would be built on eleven acres of land that has lain derelict since the 1990s.

The outline planning application was approved by Rhondda Cynon Taff Council in September 2012. Documents associated with the planning application can be found at a special section of Rhondda Cynon Taf Council’s website by clicking on the image below:”

EDF is of course a huge French company very busy with wind turbines. So, another example of a contract being given outside of Wales. But it may tie in with the ‘Energy Consultant’ to Independent Regeneration Ltd being one Bruce Pittingale, who runs the Carbon Special Reserve Wind Turbine Service, which acquires sites for wind farms. Given the involvement of EDF, Pittingale and Penrhys’ lofty elevation I think we can safely assume there will be a wind farm. But the plan stated is to get people to buy, even build their own, private housing on Penrhys.

There is, as my informant suggests, something very fishy about all this. A Welsh housing association gives a massive contract to an English company that exists in little more than name – and with an office address that keeps changing. But the man running this company is – according to my informant – a Labour Party member which, if true, probably explains how he got the contract. The RCT Homes contract was awarded to Independent Regeneration in July 2011 when ‘Penrhys’ entered the company’s name. But outline planning permission was not granted until September, 2012.

Finally, is it really a housing project or a wind farm? Both? There must be people reading this who can think of ways of getting more information about this very strange business. So I would be grateful for whatever you can dig up. Go for it; I have a feeling this could be quite a story.

Plaid Consorting With Nationalists And Republicans!

Things must be slow in the Labour camp because they’re watching YouTube again, looking for something with which to embarrass their opponents. Labour’s astute researchers have recently come up with two damning clips about Plaid Cymru. First, party leader Leanne Wood was filmed at some republican event down Cardiff docks and, more recently, party president Jill Evans MEP, has been outed as someone who mixes with ‘members’ of a defunct organisation. This is serious stuff, deserving of my attention.

If Labour is shocked by the news that Leanne Wood is a republican – the same Leanne Wood who has publicly referred to the English queen as “Mrs Windsor” – then they should keep up with the news a bit better. And if the brothers and sisters haven’t realised that the Free Wales Army went into voluntary liquidation back in the early ’70s, then they’re really out of touch. Yes, that is an FWA banner, held by people who admire the old FWA, and would pehaps like it to return, but that makes them little different to people in the Southern USA who wave the Stars and Bars – the FWA, like the Confederacy, done been and gone.

Significantly, the Labour politician chosen to make the earth-shattering announcement about Jill Evans cavorting with Unreconstructed FWA ‘members’ was Vaughan Gething, Welsh Labour’s Great Black Hope. Born in Zambia to a Welsh father and a Zambian mother Gething has described his father as “a white Welsh economic migrant”. Because by using Gething Labour hopes to suggest that the FWA is / was an extremist and, by extension, racist organisation, which means that Jill Evans is a racist. Bloody clever! No, it just means Labour is absolutely desperate to pretend to be doing something, anything. A pathetic ‘We’re still here!’ cry from the nothingness that is the Welsh Government.

Perhaps what really worries Labour about Plaid politicians mixing with republicans and FWA nostalgists is that these might actually believe in something. This would be sooo twentieth century! For under pressures from Bilderberg, EU, Common Purpose and other quarters modern politicians have crowded into the Centre where they have now congealed into an unappealing amorphous mass. (Dealt with here.) The thought that there might still be politicians out there unwilling to join the meld must be worrying. Though before you think I’m going soft on Plaid Cymru let me make it clear that in my opinion these women just happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time, with cameras present. For anyone out there succumbing to the idea that Plaid Cymru is a radical nationalist party, just slap yourself and think of Helen Mary Jones (“that social worker” as she was recently described to me, in Llanelli), IWJ, DET, Cynog Dafis, Rhodri Glyn Thomas, et al. Rest assured that Plaid Cymru is right there in the do-nothing, self-emasculated Centre.

But if politicians and their parties are to be judged by those with whom they associate, then let’s turn the spotlight on Labour. And let us start with the Marxists and Trotskyists in the trade union movement. It would be bad enough if these anti-democratic elements simply supped pints with unsuspecting or unwary Labour politicians at conferences and elsewhere, but it’s worse than that – for these buggers help fund the Labour Party! Then there’s the third sector, so intertwined with Labour that they may now be inseparable, and may – please, God! – go down together. Just remind yourself (I’ll help) of the Awema / Malik scandal. (Follow links.) The Malik family were all Labour Party members. Or how about Helen Boggis? All was darkness ere this woman self-sacrificingly trudged to the Cynon Valley, where she was generously funded to be project manager for the Penywaun Enterprise Partnership. Earlier this year she was elected to RCT council but, it is alleged, her campaign used the resources and staff of PEP, a charity. If true, a very serious offence, for charities cannot be used in this way.

The truth is that Labour has always had very unsavoury bed-fellows, and worse, many unscrupulous people in the party itself. Cast your mind back to the advent of New Labour, and the promise of clean and open politics. Where are the architects of New Labour now? Well, the principals, Blair and Mandelson, are making serious money for themselves through contacts they made at Bilderberg meetings and elsewhere. Or what about Welsh Labour’s very own Neil Kinnock, and Glenys, and the kids – haven’t they done well? (Many of you have asked to see the photo again.) Rhodri Morgan may have boasted of “clear red water” between the Labour Party in Wales and New Labour in London but all that boiled down to was Old Labour – viscerally anti-Welsh; keeping Wales poor in order to ‘send a message’ to those wicked Tories (whether or not they were in power); and stifling Welsh entrepreneurialism in order to achieve the desired poverty and docile electorate.

The Wales we live in is a country ruled by English civil servants and the third sector; the first consolidating English rule and the second perpetuating and extending – even making a virtue of! – Welsh poverty and deprivation. The Welsh Government merely puts a gloss on this colonialism. It implements the legislation ‘suggested’ to it by the civil servants and Common Purpose ‘graduates’ of the third sector while maintaining the pretence that it is in charge. Making the Labour Party in Wales a Quisling regime, something “lower than vermin“.

Yet this is still the party that the “social worker” and others in Plaid Cymru wish to join in coalition. So for God’s sake don’t fall for cheap Labour smear tactics and start believing that Plaid Cymru is serious about Wales. It’s not. It’s going to take something else.

I Am A ‘Backlash’!

Tweeters among you may recall that a couple of weeks ago I told that the last Ddraig Goch had been removed from Tywyn promenade and replaced with a curious thing I’d never seen before. (Shown below.) After making a few enquiries I learnt that the banner in question is the new flag of Tywyn, and the person responsible is none other than Councillor Mike Stevens, who has form. I last brought him to your attention when he was getting all worked up over Cyngor Gwynedd placing bilingual warning notices on a new rock island on Tywyn beach.

After seeing this odd flag replace our national flag I wrote a letter to the Cambrian News. When that letter didn’t appear last week I assumed they weren’t interested. What I didn’t realise – because I’ve been away – is that the CN decided to run it as a story, and wanted to talk to me. Anyway, and without any further contribution from me, they ran the story in this week’s issue, using my letter and quotes from Stevens. You will also note, from the front page start of the report, I have become a ‘backlash’! More interesting than this lapse into journalese are Stevens’ comments in defence of his actions.

click to enlarge

He talks of “the history of Tywyn’s past” (sic) to explain the raven. But the raven is the symbol of the Corbett family of Worcestershire, benefactors to Tywyn in the nineteenth century. Yet as the Wikipedia entry tells us, Tywyn can be traced back to sixth century Saint Cadfan, after whom the parish church – containing the oldest known example of written Welsh – is named. Cadfan founded the monastic settlement on Ynys Enlli. Then there are the two medieval effigies to be found in St. Cadfan’s church. But none of this matters to Mike Stevens, it’s all Welsh, you see. For him, the history of Tywyn begins with it being discovered by the English, rather in the way Columbus ‘discovered’ America.

click to enlarge

The designer of this relatively harmless piece of silliness is Jenny Stevens – Mike Stevens’ daughter, would you believe? And all done in the name of the Tywyn and District Chamber of Commerce and Tourism. I don’t know who else (if anyone) belongs to the TDCTC, but Stevens does many things in its name that lead me to conclude either that he runs it single-handedly or else he gets carried away with his own enthusiasm and acts in the name of TDCTC when he lacks the authority to do so. If I was a member of the organisation I would most certainly want to rein him in.

Mike Stevens is one of those people who has moved to Wales but doesn’t want to be reminded of the fact. In the hope of achieving the state of bliss he seeks, in which Towyn and Aberdovey are English seaside resorts unable to survive without a man of vision and energy like him, all things Welsh must be derided or dismissed. Unfortunately we have too many in Wales like Mike Stevens. Which is a pity, both for us Welsh, and for those English with more respect for Welsh identity and Welsh nationhood.

UPDATE I am happy to report that after being away for a few days I was pleased to see, on the 22nd, that the Welsh flag has been returned to its rightful position on Tywyn promenade.

Political Correctness: Lies Promoted, Truths Denied

We have endured political correctness (PC) for almost 50 years. I suppose it can be traced back to the Civil Rights movement in the USA and the search for new words for negro and other terms that could have previously been used quite inoffensively. And while its use might have been justified in the context of US race relations, it soon spread to become a liberal-socialist weapon for limiting freedom of speech; done by re-defining the paradigms and limits of acceptable debate, even the very words that can and cannot be used, in a way that puts those who do not accept the liberal-socialist consensus at a disadvantage. Not so long ago it seemed that PC had won a total victory but now, thankfully, it is in retreat. This has come about due to a growing realisation that PC at its worst is about more than just words and sensitivities. At its worst it encourages denial of the truth.

click to enlarge

For example, I recall a year or two back, a programme on BBC on a Sunday night, one of those documentary series the Beeb thinks it does so well. This one was about human evolution, a subject where we have seen the influence of political correctness rampant. For the accepted, PC, theory is that we are all descended from small groups that left Africa within the past 100,000 years . . . trouble is, the facts don’t add up. Small groups leaving Africa in relatively recent times can not account for either the racial variations or the sheer numbers of humans found in the world today. Something else must be at play.

Not so long ago ‘Neanderthal’ was a synonym for a brutal, beetle-browed sub-human, little more advanced than an ape and, of course, being so distant from ‘modern humans’ (homo sapiens) as to have made inter-breeding impossible. Then the PC ‘theory’ began to unravel. The toys of Neanderthal children were discovered; it was realised that this ‘primitive’ species placed flowers on the graves of their dead; and eventually it was conceded that modern Europeans do have Neanderthal blood in their veins. How much exactly, is still being debated, but I predict the percentage will gradually rise.

Against my better judgement I watched the whole series, parts of which were quite funny. Not least when the crew reached China, because the Chinese don’t buy into the ‘Out of Africa’ scenario. They believe they are descended from a completely different line of human evolution, one that took place outside of Africa. This was difficult for the politically correct BBC. They could have gone to town on a bunch of Alabama rednecks, but non-European academics posed an altogether different problem. So, in the most polite way possible, it was suggested that the Chinese were mistaken.

Later, the series reached Australia where the presenter (can’t remember her name, can’t be bothered to check) kept saying, “our ancestors who reached Australia 40,000 years ago”! I’m quite prepared to accept that the people living in Australia before Europeans arrived may be distantly related to me (and may even have become related to me since Europeans arrived), but once it reached Australia this population was cut off from the rest of the human race, so those belonging to it cannot be “our ancestors”.

Recently I learnt that writing may have developed not in Mesopotamia, as we have always been taught – Sumerians and all that – but in the Balkans. If the theory now gaining adherents is correct, then the so-called ‘Vinca culture‘, and what is claimed as its associated script, pre-dates the earliest writing found in Mesopotamia by some 2,000 years. This remarkably advanced civilisation has apparently been known about for almost a century, so how is that I, who takes a keen interest in history, knew nothing about this early European civilisation? The answer may lie in the fact that it is European. For there is a strenuous rearguard action being fought by those that wish to maintain the reputation of the Middle East as the ‘Cradle of Civilisation’. These are not all Arab or Islamic scholars either. Many are Westerners. This I can accept if their opposition to the new thinking is based on academic grounds, but I suspect that – as with the refusal to accept Neanderthal-modern human inter-breeding – political correctness plays its part. For I guarantee that had this ancient civilisation been unearthed in the Americas, or Asia, or certainly in Africa, then the BBC would have sent Michael Wood and a regiment of its tele-‘historians’ racing to the location.

Because that’s the thing with political correctness, it’s a Western phenomenon, yet in its application it is so often anti-Western. While within the West it is often used selectively against groups that don’t conform to the prevailing political dogmas or social mores . . . such as Welsh nationalists.

My time in nationalist politics has coincided almost perfectly with the era of political correctness, and I have learnt this. The biggest threat to the progress of this nation is not the usual ogres – the Tories, the Freemasons, the Daily Mail, Daily Telegraph, etc., etc., though these will all provide opposition. (And I shall continue to poke fun at the golf club set and the rest because I just can’t resist it!) No, the biggest threat comes from the ‘soft’ Left, the ‘sensible centre’, the Guardianistas, and others who will sound ever so interested in what you have to say. That’s because as long as you’re just harmlessly airing grievances they can treat you in the patronising way they would any other exotic minority . . . but will react as if you were the aforementioned Alabama rednecks if you ever get serious about Wales and Welsh independence.

With the traditional English Right you know where you stand, it’s us or them, and historically they usually respect nations that stand up for themselves. But the English liberal Left is never to be trusted. In whatever guise it comes, be it BBC or Guardian, Green Party or Common Purpose, CND or Fabians, it is duplicitous and English to the core. All aided by its near-religious adherence to political correctness, that way of disguising lies and denying truth that could have been taken from 1984. So beware of these smiling, ever-so-reasonable, dissemblers; the people Plaid Cymru is so embarrassingly desperate to impress.

Wales Rural Observatory

Thanks to Dewi Eirig Jones (@djones7774) for directing me to Click on Wales, the IWA site, where I found this article. Nothing breathtaking or groundbreaking in the piece itself, but what really interested me was that it was written by a Professor Paul Milbourne, who is ‘Director of the Wales Rural Observatory at Cardiff University’. I must confess that, despite the Wales Rural Observatory being in existence since September 2003, I’d never heard of it. Intrigued, and wanting to learn more, I went to the Observatory website.

The WRO is split between Cardiff and Aberystwyth. (Well, Cardiff’s not that rural, is it?) And naturally I wanted to find out what it does, so I was grateful for this on the ‘Overview’ page:
“The Wales Rural Observatory undertakes independent research and analysis on social and economic issues in rural Wales. It is funded by the Welsh Assembly Government to support evidence-based rural policy-making in Wales. The Observatory is operated by a team of specialist rural researchers based in the School for City and Regional Planning, Cardiff University and the Institute of Geography and Earth Sciences, Aberystwyth University.”
I suppose I could be pedantic and point out that it has officially been the Welsh Government (not the Welsh Assembly Government) for well over a year now. Later on the same page I came across the section below. (Readers concerned with cultural identity and related factors may be worried by their apparent omission.)
“The Observatory is focusing its activities around the following five broad themes: Rural Economy and Employment; Environment, Sustainability and Land-use Planning; Social Inclusion and Exclusion; Housing and Service Provision; Society and Community.” 
Moving on, I next came to the ‘People‘ page, where I learnt more about Prof. Milbourne and his team. For example, I learnt, of Prof. Milbourne, that “His research specialisms include rural social exclusion, housing and homelessness in rural areas, social change and conflict in the countryside, and the rural environment.” ‘Social exclusion’, ‘homelessness’ – doesn’t this sound like the bollocks we hear to justify building thousands of social housing units for English indigents? I also learnt that,“Paul has been awarded grants and contracts totalling £2 million to undertake research on a broad range of rural topics . . .” So there’s serious money in this bollocks, then.
click to enlarge
Then I looked at the others making up the team . . . and an unkind thought struck me. Apart from Dr. Nerys Owens, that the page – as if making a point – describes as “a fluent Welsh speaker”, it could be that few, if any – apart from Dr. Owens – are actually Welsh. Which would mean that this body, funded by the Welsh Government, may indeed be expert on ‘rural affairs’ in a general sense, but may know very little about Wales. The WRO will of course be working with the Welsh Government’s Department for Rural Affairs, the web page for which you can see on the right.
I suspect that with the Wales Rural Observatory we have another example of how things have gone backwards since devolution. For here we have a team funded by the Welsh Government that liaises with senior civil servants (most of whom will also be non-Welsh) and co-operates with hostile agencies such as the Planning Inspectorate and the Housing Directorate – with maybe no genuinely Welsh input at any stage in the process. These various groups will make decisions that will subsequently be delivered, pre-packaged, to our elected representatives, who will then, in turn, lie to us by presenting these policies as the products of their protracted deliberations. Hey presto! we have a new ‘Welsh’ law. This is democracy? This is the devolution so many Welsh got excited about?
All that’s changed with ‘devolution’ is that more of the English civil servants controlling life in Wales are now based in Wales. Only a fool would confuse this with ‘greater accountibility’ or true devolution.
The colonial system is more entrenched here now than ever it was in the past; increasing its hold, year on year, on what passes for ‘Welsh’ public life and ‘Welsh’ politics – and all disguised by the fig leaf of devolution. The fundamental problem with outfits like the Wales Rural Observatory and the Housing Directorate, the Planning Inspectorate and all the rest, is that they operate within a geographic unit called ‘Wales’ which for them is an appendage to, and in no way different from, England. And those arseholes in the Assembly let them get away with it, even encourage them in this outlook.
There is no hope for Wales until devolution is destroyed. Given the choice between devolution and what we had before, I would choose to go back to pre-devolution days rather than stick with this insulting charade any longer. But the choice must be between devolution and independence. So don’t get bogged down in trivia, distractions and side-shows. Make as many as you can reach focus on the choice between independence and assimilation. Because that is the choice.
P.S. I also detect a strong whiff of Common Purpose, that New Labour ‘Freemasonry for the twenty-first century’, around the ‘Observatory’.
UPDATE 28.08.12: Today’s offering from the Wales Rural Observatory appears on Click on Wales. It tells us, wait for it! – you need a car if you live in the country. Public money is being used to keep these people in work, to produce ‘findings’ that the average seven-year-old could tell us. This is no joke.

Suggestions To BBC For Summer 2014

Dear ————-,

As you must be aware, 2014 marks the centenary of the start of the First World War. This centenary will coincide with the independence referendum in Scotland. These are of course two entirely separate events, and it would be cynical in the extreme to use the one in crude attempts to influence the outcome of the other.

That said, the PM has suggested it will prove difficult to keep them apart, if only because of the glorious role played by Scottish soldiers in World War One, that saw the peoples of Britain pull together so magnificently. So what we would like you to do is start off with programmes on the WW1 centenary commemorations and gradually work in the Scottish angle. And if a few other interesting points can be made along the way, why not?

Nothing too obvious, otherwise some malcontents will accuse us of exploiting WWI for political gain, or similar nonsense. Just make it clear what this great UNITED country of ours has achieved in its long and glorious history. Which is why it would be insane for anyone to consider sundering this great family of ours.

That’s the gist of it. Here are some specific centenary dates with ideas you might wish to mull over. We shall soon send over some ‘advisers’, to help you in your mulling.

JUNE 28  It would be nice to have a series of programmes on the brutal assassination of the Archduke Franz Ferdinand in Sarajevo by a gang of bloodthirsty Serb nationalists. It was this act, killing the heir to the Hapsburg throne, that started World War One. (Make it clear that it was these same Serbs who were solely responsible for all the trouble in the Balkans not so long back.)

Why not get Top Gear to do a show from Sarajevo in a model of the same car. The little one can play the assassin, Gavrilo Princip; the big one can play the Hammond PrincipArchduke, and the other one can play Mrs Archduke.

JULY 28 Marks the centenary of Austria-Hungary declaring war on the Serbs. Serbia’s ally, Russia, mobilises in support. Show Russian troop trains in snowstorms. (Maybe not, could reflect badly on our rail services?) Films of Moscow, St. Petersburg, Siberia. Have we got an interview with Dostoevsky, or Tolstoy, preferably in English?

How about Huw Edwards reading the News from Red Square? Weather forecast from outside the Winter Palace . . . ‘And finally, the weather here in 1914 was . . .’ You know, that sort of thing.

AUG 1 Is when Germany declared war on Russia. Play up ‘gallant Ivans’ angle, stress links between Russian royals and ours. Paint Germans as cruel militarists intent on ruling Europe. No fault of the Kaiser, of course (Queen Victoria’s grandson); decent cove, poor bugger hostage of his bloodthirsty generals. Have we got any footage of Kaiser Bill playing cricket?

AUG 3 Germany declares war on France. Keep up ‘nasty Germans’ angle, but also ‘Frogs asking for it’, etc. Maybe Gardeners’ World from the gardens at Versailles, stresCricketersing effeminate, decadent French?

This day also saw formation of World Alliance for Promoting International Friendship Through Churches. Excellent opportunity to show bunch of hand-wringing beardies; make clear how out of touch church leaders are. (Unless, of course, they agree with us.) The PM is very keen on this, not being too well disposed towards ecclesiasticals at the moment.

AUG 4 Britain declares war on Germany. Now comes the time to crank it up. Stress British unity, ‘all in it together’. There must surely be some film of the king and queen attending a Rangers v Celtic match? Or the Prince of Wales shooting something in the Highlands? See what you can do.

Good idea to have Question Time from Auchtermuchty or some such place with a panel of the ‘right’ people telling the Jocks what a frightful mistake it would be to vote Yes.

AUG 5  Argentina declares neutrality. Wonderful opportunity to put the boot into the Argies. Bring up the Falklands, particularly with footage of Scottish regiments.

You must also have recent film of people (preferably children) starving in the streets of Lithuania or Slovenia, so run it regularly so as to warn people – anyone, really – of the dangers inherent in independence. Show also scenes of poverty in Switzerland and Norway, proving how cruel the world can be to small countries.

The First World War was famous for its poets so the centenary provides an excellent opportunity to have a few ‘arty’ programmes on the less cynical, more patriotic, of them. Sturdy fellows in itchy uniforms striking heroic poses for the camera. Off the top of my head . . . Rupert Brooke, Rudyard Kipling, W. B Yeats, Dylan Thomas. I’m sure you can think of a few more.

We appreciate that the British army wasn’t involved in this early fighting. Even so, with modern technology we feel sure you could splice in footage of British soldiers, particularly Scottish regiments. You know, kilts swirling, bagpipes wailing. Try to make it look like it was the brave and LOYAL Scots Wot Won It!

This covers the first month or so. We will be in touch again very soon with the next raft of suggestions. For our part we have arranged with Royal Mail to deliver Union Jacks, FREE! to every house – and croft! – in the land (Hebrides and Northern Isles included.) Number 11 wavered on this one but the PM was adamant!

So, rather than have these splendid banners of our unityAntichrist lying around, being used as tea towels, or chewed by the dog, we feel it would surely make sense if you could periodically flash up the subliminal message, ‘Wave your flag NOW!’. And having mentioned subliminal messaging – about which of course we know very little – perhaps you could periodically put out, ‘Vote NO, you Jock bastards’.

Finally, we now have irrefutable proof that Alex Salmond is the Antichrist. We therefore expect the BBC, and all other broadcasters, to run a three-hour documentary the night before the Scottish referendum exposing this creature and saving the Scots from making a terrible mistake. Otherwise they will all be ‘Doomed! doomed!’, as Private Frazer used to say. (Subliminal messaging will be unnecessary during this broadcast.)



Lionel Jellybaby (Col.)

Bureau of Media Advice and Guidance

World Unity And Wales (Or Without Wales)

My previous post – After Thirteen Years Of Devolution . . . – generated such interest and debate that it encouraged me to expand on what I’d written there with this follow-up. What I hope to do here is pull together a number of threads that have been running through my mind for a long time, and in doing this explain that devolution is a sham because democracy in the wider sense has been seriously undermined. I say this because in the time I’ve been writing this blog I have learnt quite a bit about how Wales is run in the era of devolution. The more I’ve learnt the more I’ve realised how undemocratic Wales is.
I suppose the full picture began to take shape when I started making enquiries into the way housing associations operate in Wales. Specifically, why do they house so many people with no connections to Wales, and why are so many of these not the sort of people most of us would want as neighbours? These enquiries brought to my attention the Housing Directorate, a body I’d never heard of before, which controls social housing in Wales. But before dealing with Welsh specifics, let us consider the wider picture; in fact, the global picture.
Throughout history there have been people, from tyrannical conquerors to fluffy idealists, who have dreamt of a unified world. Somewhere between the two come organisations such as the Bilderberg Group (BG) and the Trilateral Commission (TC).
One doesn’t need to be a conspiracy theorist to have questions about the BG and the TC. They organise invitation-only conferences from which media and public are banned. Attending these, ‘Wouldn’t the world be a better place if . . .’ affairs are top politicians, royalty, billionaires and the like. (Jac still awaits his invitation.) Some years ago the TC brought out a publication arguing there was ‘too much democracy’, which gives a clue as to the thinking of some involved.
If they made public announcements then the BG and the TC would argue that wars could have been averted, and much other human misery avoided, if the top people in the world knew each other better, and spoke with each other on a regular basis. Better still, perhaps, would be to leave the governing of the world to these elevated altruists.
As might be expected, this self-appointed elite sees the Nation-State as an anachronism, and an obstacle to a global structure that might still recognise Europe, China, Latin America or ‘the Arab World’ but has little time for Basques or Tibetans. For if we are doing away with the Nation-State then those seeking to create new ones are pulling in the opposite direction, and must be discouraged or defeated. The only exceptions being when there is advantage to the Programme in fragmentation; e.g. the collapse of the Soviet empire, or when the process is unstoppable, e.g. the break-up of Jugoslavia.
Smooth out international misunderstandings and national differences, on the premise that this leads to greater harmony, better international understanding and, consequently, improved trade and commerce resulting in greater prosperity for all. But there is little point in promoting greater understanding between existing States if some of these are threatened by internal minority identities, so these must also be ‘smoothed out’.
The problem for the Bilderberg Group and the Trilateral Commission is that they are secretive and elitist. Correctly suspected by those on the Right of wanting to do away with the national institutions and identities they cherish; and equally correctly suspected by those on the Left of wishing to impose a largely unfettered global capitalism. So something else was needed; something to make the BG and the TC more palatable. The fig leaf came in the form of environmentalism.
Seeing as we are talking about promoting world government it was inevitable that the United Nations should be a player. Its main contribution comes in the form of Agenda 21 – inspired by the Rio ‘Earth Summit’ of 1992 – which wants to make the world a happier place for us all by safeguarding the environment. (Interestingly for Wales, Agenda 21 “can be executed at local, national and global levels”. )
Environmentalism has come a long way since Silent Spring, written fifty years ago this month. For in addition to providing the excuse for governments to feed grant-guzzlers and subsidy-suckers it also provides the Trojan horse for those planning world government. Because if we can work together to avert global warming or climate change then what’s stopping us extending that co-operation to other areas? Rachel Carson could have had no idea that her heartfelt plea would be cynically seized on by Left and Right to promote their ideological agendas.
Superficially things continue as before. Populations across the globe vote believing they can make a difference through their national elections. But it’s becoming impossible to avoid the conclusion that the choice is narrowing: in the UK Labour and Conservative are just like Vauxhall and Opel – few differences apart from the branding. The same applies in Wales with Plaid Cymru thrown into the mix. This explains the ‘congested centre’ in Western politics. Which of course also results in anyone rejecting this externally enforced ‘consensus’ being labelled an ‘extremist’. All because so many political leaders and others have signed up to the Bilderberg / Trilateral / Agenda 21 Programme.
At a Welsh level, this process of smoothing out global (or, more especially, regional) differences is done by a number of organisations, principal among them Common Purpose (CP), represented at all senior levels of Assembly bureaucracy, local government and elsewhere. Being English, or Unionist, in outlook, bodies infiltrated or controlled by CP are at the cutting edge of attempts to eradicate the potential for disharmony posed by Welsh national identity. Common Purpose can be viewed as providing the UK foot-soldiers for the Bilderberg Group / Trilateral Commission / Agenda 21 Programme. (Here’s a link to a good site exposing Common Purpose.)
In earlier generations this role might have been fulfilled by the Freemasons, but this organisation is now tainted: too conservative, narrowly British, exclusively male, and too discredited by its members’ venality and corruption to act as the vanguard for the New World Order. Common Purpose even seems to be replacing Freemasonry within the police service, that one-time bastion of Freemasonry. An informant has named a very senior Gogplod officer who, “graduated from the matrix in 1998 whilst with the Met”. (Not quite sure what this means.)
Returning to the Housing Directorate, this CP agency is, according to the Assembly employee who answered my query, part of the “Sustainable Futures Directorate which incorporates Environment, Sustainability and Housing, Rural Affairs and Heritage”. We can add another CP-controlled agency exerting great power in Wales and inflicting untold damage, the Planning Inspectorate. This is the body that forces on our councils the insane ‘housing strategies’ that insist on building tens of thousands of houses for which there is no Welsh demand. Aided by the fact that most senior officers in Welsh local government have also been ‘refocused’ by Common Purpose.
Put together, The Housing Directorate and the Planning Inspectorate work to introduce a large English population into Wales knowing this group will reject calls for further devolution, and independence, thereby serving the Common Purpose agenda and, by so doing, aiding at a local level the more grandiose aims of the Programme.
Other ways in which CP operates in Wales came to light recently with the Wales Rural Observatory (WRO). Rural Affairs, you will remember, is linked with Environment, Sustainability, Housing and Heritage under the Welsh Government’s Sustainable Futures Directorate. (Heritage!) Basically, the Welsh Government pays the English academics of the WRO to come up with strategies for rural Wales. The politicians then present these pre-packaged strategies as their own handiwork to an unsuspecting public and an unquestioning media. The WRO is the quintessential Common Purpose organisation.
All of which tells us that devolution in Wales is a nonsense. Because it doesn’t matter which politicians you elect, and no matter which party is, theoretically, ‘in government’ Wales will still be run either directly from London or else through secretive groups and agencies you’ve probably never heard of. These linked by a new kind of ‘right-on’ freemasonry believing it serves the highest ideals when, here in Wales, it is serving agendas that work against the Welsh national interest, but agendas to which both major UK parties subscribe.
There is nothing to be surprised at in what I’m saying. Remember that devolution was not brought in to serve Wales or Scotland; it was introduced by Tony Blair (Bilderberg Group and Trilateral Commission) and New Labour, of which Common Purpose may be viewed as an offshoot, to, as George Robertson put it in 1995, “kill nationalism stone dead”. That plan may have gone awry in Scotland, but it seems to be succeeding in Wales.
It may be difficult to believe that there could be a connection between presidents and billionaires seeking world government and the allocation of social housing in Cwmscwt. But, believe me, there is; and it’s time you woke up to it. Time you realised that our nation is defenceless against enemies who have persuaded themselves they are serving a greater good by destroying Welsh identity. That most senior Common Purpose disciples in Wales are English obviously helps, but that does not explain why Plaid Cymru refuses to oppose them and their work.
Time is running out. To do nothing is to acquiesce in the destruction of Wales.P.S. It goes without saying that the third sector, so dominant in Wales, is controlled by Common Purpose ‘graduates’.

Regional Parties

Regular readers of this blog will know that on my visits home to Swansea I often stay in the Premier Inn on the SA1 development. So I was shocked to read today that the new marina, centrepiece of the SA1 project, may not go ahead due to the money set aside for it having been spent on other ‘priorities’. Which would be devastating, because there is some great stuff going on over there, all premised on the new hotels, office blocks and apartments looking out over a marina, rather than the existing, and abandoned, Prince of Wales dock.SA1

Reading the BBC article I was struck by the curious attitude displayed towards the SA1 project by the South Wales Chamber of Commerce (SWCC). For example, Graham Morgan, director of the SWCC, was quoted as saying: “When you step back from it, for a marina to work you have to be convinced that someone will buy a boat and moor it there. That’s the biggest thing at the moment – boats are luxury items. So it’s perfectly feasible that right now that isn’t the right development”.

This man represents the business interests of Swansea! As for being convinced that people “will buy and moor a boat there” – has he checked the waiting lists? Does he know how busy the existing marinas are? Does he realise how much ‘passing trade’ there is, boats not registered in Swansea docking for a night, or a week? Does he appreciate this is not your standard hole filled with water surrounded by apartments locals can’t afford that we see in small towns around the coast. This is a major development in Swansea that could result in a few thousand local jobs. Not pushing on with the marina sends out the signal that official backing has been withdrawn, which will see potential investors pull back and jeopardise what has already been achieved. I suggest you visit the SA1 website, see what companies have already located there, on the promise of a marina. See what a great project this is.

I can’t help wondering if there are any projects in Cardiff which Morgan feels don’t justify public funding at this time? I ask because – and I’m hoping some of you can help me out – my recollection is that the Cardiff Chamber of Commerce went bankrupt a few years ago and then resurrected itself as the, Cardiff based, South Wales Chamber of Commerce. Thereby following the trend of the devolution era in concentrating power and influence in Cardiff. Another interesting feature of the BBC piece was the impression given that the ‘Welsh’ Government has been talking with the South Wales Chamber of Commerce about this development in Swansea but has not been involving anyone in Swansea in these discussions. Unless, of course, the new Labour administration in Swansea was kept in the loop, but was reluctant to make the decision publicly known. Which would make sense in the context of where I’m taking this post.

You must have noticed that car insurance companies, telephone and internet providers, and a host of other businesses, offer great deals to attract new customers. Existing customers often pay for these enticing offers with poor service and rising costs. The thinking underpinning this approach is that most existing customers will renew their subscription or whatever unless the service becomes intolerably poor or they see an SA1 2irresistible offer from a rival company. (Avoiding the ‘hassle’ of changing also comes into the thinking.) The same applies in politics. The worst thing any area can do is become a ‘safe’ seat. For that guarantees being taken for granted. (Though this applies less to Conservative seats; as these will invariably be wealthy and will know how to defend their interests.)

Here in Wales we see this at work in the Valleys, where a century of voting Labour has reduced some parts of that region to levels of poverty unknown elsewhere in Europe today. In Plaid’s few safe seats we see economic decline and English colonisation. Which means that, in slightly different ways, both Labour and Plaid voters are being betrayed. So why vote for these parties? Especially at Assembly level. I’ve thought about this off and on since we’ve had devolution, and it makes more sense now than ever. We have such a dog’s dinner of devolution, controlled by a party that has no intention of annoying its English bosses by doing anything positive for Wales, that party politics, or voting along ideological lines, is a waste of time until we’re at the point now enjoyed by Catalonia, or Scotland, or Québec.

Or to put it another way; the Assembly, or the ‘Welsh’ Government, has no wish to rule Wales in anything more than a managerial capacity. Which means that the primary purpose of devolution as we know it is to channel funding from the UK government and EU sources. That being so, the only way to ensure that that funding does not all end up being spent on grandiose ‘national’ projects in Cardiff is for Wales to have a number of regional parties fighting to ensure that their area gets a fair slice of the cake.

Regional partiesSo just imagine if there was a Heads of the Valleys Party (HVP), refusing to accept that development must be centred on Cardiff, with Tredegar, Ebbw Vale, Merthyr and many other towns being reduced to commuter communities. Even if the HVP didn’t win a single seat, it could lose Labour seats, and that would be enough for Carwyn and his gang to start paying more attention to the Heads of the Valleys than they ever did when it was ‘safe’ Labour territory. And it doesn’t have to end there. Why not a Swansea Bay Party? A Plaid Gwynedd, covering all the north west? Think about it! The only purpose of devolution is to distribute funding, thereby making party politics and ideology redundant. The only sensible reason for voting then becomes guaranteeing that your area gets its fair share.

At this point I can imagine hands being thrown up in horror and heads being scratched; for isn’t what I suggest divisive? Mightn’t it fragment Wales further? Look at it from the opposite direction – is anyone saying that the Cardiff-centric economic and other policies being followed now are not divisive! Just imagine how Wales might be run if the balance of power was held by Plaid Clwyd and the Swansea Bay Party acting together, a Swansea-Wrecsam axis.

Devolution is delivering virtually nothing outside of Cardiff except crumbs in the form of placatory ‘projects’. Our Assembly Members refuse to defend the national interests. We suffer colonialism and colonisation. Consequently, why should anyone outside of Cardiff vote for these people any longer? Something new is needed; either to shake them out of their complacency, or to replace them altogether. What do we have to lose?

UPDATE 04.09.12: The BBC 10:25pm News bulletin last night ran an interview with Peter Midmore, an English academic in Aberystwyth, and another who belongs to the incestuous network emerging between politics and academe that sees him (and others) do “advisory and consultancy work” for the ‘Welsh’ Government, aka the Labour and Unionist Party.
Midmore defended the decision to steal the funding from the SA1 marina on the grounds that other marinas . . . somewhere . . . were having trouble filling their berths. Which is a ludicrous argument, and he knew it; his voice and body language made it clear he knew he was talking bollocks. For what really matters is whether the SA1 marina is commercially viable. It is being suggested by those who should know that there is a strong demand for a new marina in Swansea, and that it will be a success.
This is obviously how the network works: academics like Midmore, those at the Wales Rural Observatory and countless others are subsidised, funded, and in return must speak up when told to do so in support of ‘Welsh’ Government decisions. Makes me worry for democracy. And for higher education. Doesn’t say a lot for our media either.

UPDATE 2 04.09.12: Here is a link to the BBC Wales story which contains a video, some of which was shown on the BBC News bulletin referred to above. Thus far we have yet to hear a Labour politician defend the decision. Though over on the Labour-supporting Inside Out the finger of blame is being pointed at Ieuan Wyn Jones, and another comment referred to it as a “non-story”!
The situation is that £19m of funding for a marina in the SA1 development was secretly withdrawn in 2008 or 2009. This means that the project has been progressing for three or four years with apartment buyers, business-owners and others being encouraged to invest under false pretences. This almost certainly leaves the ‘Welsh’ Government open to legal action for some form of deception.
This probably explains why we have heard no one representing the ‘Welsh’ Government speak in defence of the decision to withdraw the funding. Preferring instead to hide behind proxies such the chairman of the South Wales (i.e. Cardiff) Chamber of Commerce and a tame academic heavily dependent on contracts from the ‘Welsh’ Government.
Someone representing the ‘Welsh’ Government needs to come clean on this story. And Plaid Cymru needs to explain its position. Otherwise I might start thinking politicians are lying, devious bastards!