Toque

Good news for Scotland:

The bank has told staff that up to 12 offices could close in England, with some jobs added in Greenock and Edinburgh.

The centres set for closure or downsizing in 2011 are Leeds, Bolton, Enfield and Harrogate.

The following year, Norwich, Bradford, Telford, Plymouth, Milton Keynes, Liverpool, Bristol and Borehamwood have been earmarked.

The Leicester, Southampton and Nottingham centres are under review.

The English taxpayer owns the majority stake in Royal Bank of Scotland.

Over at Harry's Place Edmund Standing has collated some quotes from EDL members that shed some light on what motivates the EDL.

I recommend that you read that piece in conjunction with BritologyWatch's excellent ‘Racist’ English nationalism: an alibi for Britain’s anglophobia and Islamophobia.

It's all too easy for the commentariat to describe the EDL as 'English nationalists', and looking at the English Defence League, with their profusion of English flags, they could possibly be forgiven for using that label. But it's an incorrect label. It is labelling to compartmentalise and isolate. It's a label, as BritologyWatch argues, that is conveniently used to distance the views held by the EDL from those of mainstream British society. In this way English nationalism can be objectified as 'the other' in a simillar way to how the EDL objectify Islam as 'the other'. But the English Defence League are not really English nationalists (they're not advocates of popular sovereignty, and they're not demonstrating for an English parliament or English independence). No, they're actually very pro-British with a strong sense of Britishness. It will be an inconvenient truth for some but the EDL are as much a British disease as they are an English disease.

"The EDP places considerable distance between itself and the EFP, emphasising that it has links with the SNP and none with the EFP or BNP." - Dr Colin Copus, English national parties in post-devolution UK, British Politics (2009) 4, 363–385. doi:10.1057/bp.2009.12

Quite. And my old man's a dustman, he wears a dustman's hat, he wears cor-blimey trousers and he lives in a council flat.

The EFP's Les Andrews and Mark Cotterill at the EDP launch party.

The EFP's Peter Rushton addresses the EDP

You can read through the Wikipedia edits of Steve Uncles here. I particularly enjoyed this one (Steve's contribution in red):

But this effort to type "We win by the way" must surely take the prize.

The same IP address was also responsible for a malicious posting against an opposing English nationalist party, in which Richard Aitkins is accused of being a white nationalist (the irony being that Steve Uncles himself cooperated with Mark Cotterill's England First Party, whose Wikipedia entry he has kindly edited to remove the words racist and fascist).

The same IP address was also responsible for foul comments posted to Steve Shark's blog.

And for this defamatory comment about me on the Socialist Unity blog (the slur about my marriage repeated here recently by Steve Uncles).

Good work English Democrats. Are you proud of yourselves?

Crumpet, my apology of a dog, has reached the grand old age of two today. For her birthday treat we took her to the Half Way House in Lewes and then to the Rose and Crown in Fletching, where she enjoyed a small sup of Harveys Best from an ashtray.

Inside the Rose and Crown there is a display case containing some wattle-and-daub dating from the reign of King Stephen, the last Norman King of England. It was pulled from the 800 year-old walls during renovations in 1939. A great thing about the Rose and Crown is that you're offered a choice between having your beer served in a straight glass or a Ravenhead-type jug, I personally prefer the latter but rarely get to enjoy my beer out of a jug these days.

The amusing forum thread I referred to yesterday was a primer for the following press release from the English Democrats (quite why the press release could not be released without the preceding buffoonery remains unclear).

HSBC Bank taken to Court under the Race Relations Act
Cambridge County Court
Thursday 26 August 2010
Friday 27 August 2010 10:00am Start

Address: 197 East Road, Cambridge, Cambridgeshire, England, CB1 1BA

Case Summary
HSBC - the world's local bank - but NOT in England
(original event took place in November 2008 at the HSBC Sidcup Branch)

The English Democrats Party is the equivalent for England of the Scottish National Party for Scotland or Plaid Cymru for Wales.

The Claimants are Officers of the English Democrats Party and are therefore leading asserters of English National origin/nationality.

The English Democrats had approximately 50 bank accounts with the HSBC around England at the time. (November 2008)

English Democrats Kent Chairman (the First Claimant), attended a pre-arranged appointment at the Defendant's Bank in Sidcup, Kent, to open an account for the local branch of the English Democrats.

This application was peremptorily refused by the Bank, acting through its clerk, Ms Patel , in consultation with her Manager, Mr Watkinson. Both Ms Patel and Mr Watkinson refused to check the English Democrats Party's Manifesto and therefore it is submitted that this can only have proceeded purely on the grounds of their prejudices.

It is contended that the Defendants' prejudice was unlikely to have been against the word "Democrats" in the party's name. It is contended their prejudice against "English" is contrary to the Race Relations Act as Amended being an assertion of English National origin/nationality as defined under the Act.

The Bank's refusal to open the account was compounded by the Manager's offensive comments to the Party's South East Area Chairman (2nd Claimant), and by the withdrawal of the Bank's apology to the Kent Chairman. It should also be noted that within one week of the refusal of the HSBC to open a Bank Account for the English Democrats in Sidcup, Kent, an English Democrats activist in the West Midlands successfully opened a Bank account in the name of the Scottish National Party at an HSBC Branch in the West Midlands.

The Defendant's actions, comments and attitude caused the Claimants considerable emotional hurt which is submitted as claimable as damages in these proceedings.

Then HSBC Bank then followed these incidents up with the closure of all the English Democrats HSBC accounts in the middle of the 2009 EU Elections campaign, a move calculated to cause the maximum disruption to the Party and its officers, including the Claimants.

The Bank has accepted vicarious liability if the Court finds against any of the Defendants.

Damages of up to £25,000 are expected by Steve Uncles (2nd Claimant) to compensate for the 'emotional hurt' caused by the HSBC's alleged discrimination. Interestingly the first claimant, Laurence Williams, English Democrats Kent Chairman, is Welsh (according to Steve Uncles).

If the English Democrats have indeed been discriminated against I hope that they are successful with this case; and I hope too that if any compensation is paid it will be sufficient to settle financial matters between Steve Uncles and the English Democrats Party, allowing him to part company with the EDP on amicable terms.

Crumpet and I are the targets of a coordinated (and somewhat bizarre) attack from two of the English Democrats greatest intellects.

Steve Uncles has some information on my marriage:

At least Cassie still has a marriage, unlike Gareth Young the "Saviour of Snails".

And Alan England (Cassie) has an opinion on my dog, Crumpet:

Thank you for sharing that with us Gareth. Now you've rid yourself of more bile, you can go back to your cocoa and walking that apology of a dog of yours!

They appear to think that a certain 'Mr Rob' who runs circles around them on their forum, as they attempt to 'out' him and reveal his identity, is me. Well I'm flattered chaps, but it's not me.

The same two individuals are apparently the masterminds behind a plan to bring down the 'racist' HSBC bank (I kid you not). That made me laugh, how can someone so obviously stupid be the English Democrats Party strategist? And why are these sickos still banging on about Chris Lightfoot?

Please can you point us in the direction as to why you feel that Chris Lighfoot was "such a great man" - The default view, is that he was a sick man, Sick about his nationality, and Sick about his own mental health - that's why he took his own life. - I am afraind the truth hurts - get over it !!!!!!

Is the sort of person who makes comments such as these (not to mention jokes like this) really the sort of person that English Democrat members want representing their party?

I'll leave that question hanging for the benefit of any EDP members who might be reading, and we'll move onto the poll.

Who is the most pathetic: Steve Uncles, Alan England or Crumpet?
(You may select one or two individuals from the list)

Over at Our Kingdom Guy Aitchison highlights an interesting passage from Patrick Dunleavy who suggests that hung parliaments are becoming the norm.

For the first time in history, the Australian outcome means that every key ‘Westminster model’ country in the world now has a hung Parliament. These are the former British empire countries that according to decades of political science orthodoxy are supposed to produce strong, single party government. Following Duverger’s Law their allegedly ‘majoritarian’ electoral systems (first past the post and AV) will typically produce reinforced majorities for one of the top two parties.

But now the table below shows that four of the five key countries have coalition governments in balanced parliaments where no party has a majority. The one exception is Canada, where the Parliament has been hung since 2004, across three general elections.

Assuming that the Scots continue to shun the Tory Party - and it appears that they will - then an age in which 'weak' or coalition government becomes the norm makes the West Lothian Question a very important Westminster issue. The WLQ can be mitigated by Cameron and Clegg, or so they believe, so that it does not impinge too much upon the Tories' control of England. But the small matter of Scottish MPs' voting privileges when it comes to England-only legislation is not the be-all-and-end-all of Scottish MPs.

Scottish MPs also help choose the colour of the UK government, and therefore the colour of the government that has power over England. Given fair electoral boundaries in 2005, England would have elected a blue government. But in 2005 what England got was red Labour. In 2010 (despite unfair boundaries) England emphatically elected a blue government, but what we got, thanks to Scottish and Welsh MPs, was a blue-yellow coalition government. Scottish MPs prevent England from having the government that it voted for, and if Patrick Dunleavy is to be believed this Scottish interference could well become the norm.

To opponents of the ConDem coalition government, the 2010 general election could be regarded as the fifth time that a government was imposed upon England against its wishes. Gerald Warner has details of the four previous.

In 1950 England voted Tory, but Scotland’s contribution of 37 Labour MPs gave Labour its six-seat majority which enabled it to cling to power for another year. In 1964 the Scottish contingent of 43 Labour members supplied Harold Wilson with a majority of four to rule over Tory-voting England. In February 1974 England voted in a Conservative majority, but 40 Scottish Labour MPs again gave Wilson a majority of four, with the collaboration of the Liberals. In October of the same year his overall majority of three was supplied by 41 Scottish Labour members.

In all four of those general elections – 1950, 1964, February 1974 and October 1974 – England, which had voted Conservative, acquiesced in the imposition upon it of a Labour government as a result of Scottish votes, without crying foul or trying to move the goal posts. Those results produced a total of nine years of Labour rule in England which English voters had not endorsed. But when things began to go in the opposite direction from 1979 the Scots yelled blue murder and “Democratic Deficit!”

Whether or not England will be so willing to acquiesce now that Scotland has its own parliament may be the question on which the future of the Union rests.

Ruth Deech speaking on Radio 4's Any Questions.

"If Scotland wants to be independent, OK be my guest, go ahead do what you want and please take back with you all the Scottish politicians, there are so many of them you know, starting with Blair, Brown and Campbell (sic). Take them all back and off you go and go off on your own because actually we are all subsidising them, I think, by way of benefits and all sorts of reasons and if they want to show how independent they are, then OK thank you and goodbye."

Via Wikipedia.

UPDATE

Ruth Deech explains her worries on Lords of the Blog:

This obsessing (especially about my origins – somewhat sinister) is misplaced. The issue is whether devolution is workable or whether independence would be better. Most of the rest of the world attributed the decision to release Al Megrahi to the UK, not to Scotland. There are other issues such as Scots discrimination against English students in relation to tuition fees, and the W. Lothian question, which are beginning to persuade me that full independence is inevitable. If that comes about, everyone will have to decide which citizenship they hold, and who is eligible to sit as an MP in the UK Parliament. Those whose citizenship is Scots may not be able to. That is the logical outcome and that is what I was referring to in the very few seconds allowed.