Fuck It. Let Greece Burn

Greek leftism becoming a global parasite

Imagine, if you will, a close cousin or younger brother who just can't seem to live within his means.

Once a year, every year, he comes with his hand out, begging for a not-insubstantial amount of money to sustain his grandiose lifestyle.

After several years of indulging them, hoping they'll get their shit together, you finally decide enough is enough. You tell him that you'll only help him if he stops going to the pub every night, and drinking himself into a stupor while his bills go unpaid.

Stunned by the ultimatum, he instead tells you that he'll have to take a referendum of his barfly buddies before he's willing to make that kind of a commitment. Bankrolled by your generosity, he frequently buys rounds for the bar. They like that. One thing firmly in his favour is that he has a guarantor for all his bills, and that someone else will ultimately be on the hook if they go unpaid. From his point of view, his worst case scenario is that you and his other creditors go unpaid.

Substitute Greece for the bum in question and you have precisely what happened in Greece today. After the European Union worked tirelessly to come up with a bail out package and a stabilization plan for the Greek economy, Greek Prime Minister George Papandreou told the EU that he and the people of Greece will have to think about it.

The Socialist Party has already declared the deal "dead".

So it's time for the EU to take a different approach: kick Greece out of the Eurozone and the European Union, direct their bailout package toward cutting the losses of Greece's creditors while they foreclose on every debt-backed piece of property or capital in Greece.

Enough is enough. It's time to let the far-left parasites in Greece burn in the economic fire they started. Far-left socialism, as it's manifested itself in Greek politics, has become a cancer on the global economy. It's time to excise the tumour.

The Greatest Idea Whose Time Has Come

Britain must adopt Bill of Rights ASAP

Of all the facts about British politics not widely known to many outside of the UK -- and perhaps even to many within it -- is that the country lacks a comprehensive written constitution. It's the only democratic state that lacks such a document.

Britain has a constitution of sorts; in political science it's known as a British-style constitution, and they're commonplace throughout the Commonwealth. What this means is that the foundational law in Britain has written and unwritten components, formal and informal components.

It includes various statutes, privy council rulings, constitutional convention, and the rules of Parliament... among other components. But Britain's own constitution lacks what some would consider two key components: a formal bill of rights, and a formal written constitution -- which in the case of a British-style constitution basically amounts to an anchor law.

A formal bill of rights may finally be on the way. At the direction of the David Cameron-led coalition government, a commission considering the implementation of a bill of rights has been studying the subject.

As with so many things, it began amdist tensions with the European Union over the role of EU statutes within British law. In 2005, the European Union Court of Human Rights ruled that a British ban on prisoners voting was discriminatory. In February, British MPs voted to spurn that ruling.

This controversy has led to the formation of the commission, and the consideration of a bill of rights that would satisfy the European Convention on Human Rights, but would allow Britain the freedom to interpet that convention as it sees fit, rather than remain beholden to the EU court. In time, such a charter would be expected to replace the Human Rights Act.

Britain has long considered itself a leader in establishing the rights and freedoms of its citizens. The Magna Carta -- itself considered part of the anchorless British constitution -- was truly a milestone law in human civilization. That it has no formal bill of rights is a testament to the manner in which these rights and freedoms emerged in British law -- very slowly, over time -- but it's also been an egregious oversight.

The establishment of a British Bill of Rights is the greatest idea whose time came a long time ago. It's time for the UK to make it a formality by writing and passing a bill of rights as quickly as can be responsibly done.

Time For Greece To Put On Its Big Boy Pants

Britain determined to leave Greece to save itself

Even as Greek protesters continue to throw temper tantrums in the streets, objecting to the austerity program that could rescue the country from the fiscal abyss, British officials are treading very carefully in regards to any bail out to prevent Greece from defaulting on its debts and keep it within the Euro.

Britain, however, has no plans to be part of such a bail out.

Certainly, the British economy has some interest in Greece's public debt -- perhaps as much as $13 billion. But with the EU poised to extend a massive bail out package to the Greeks, the emerging consensus in Britain is to stay out of it.

It isn't merely the European economy that's under siege in Greece's fiscal troubles: it's also the Euro itself.

Frequently-outspoken London Mayor Boris Johnson has declared that its time for Greece to either learn to stand on its own fiscal feet, or be allowed to fall. The Euro be damned.

"For years, European governments have been saying that it would be insane and inconceivable for a country to leave the Euro," Johnson remarked. "But this second option is now all but inevitable, and the sooner it happens the better."

In a strange turn of events, the Labour Party's former Foreign Affairs Minister, Jack Straw has voiced criticisms of the Cameron government's response that call on the government to move even further away from the EU.

"What the Government should do, instead of sheltering behind the complacent language, weasel words 'it's not appropriate, we shouldn't speculate', recognise that this eurozone cannot last and it's the responsibility of this British Government to be open with the British people now about the alternative prospects," Straw declared. "If this euro in its current form is going to collapse, is it better not that it happens quickly rather than a slow death?"

Johnson clearly agrees with Straw. He blames the Euro for cultivating complacency among Europe's profilgate states.

"The Euro has exacerbated the financial crisis by encouraging some countries to behave as recklessly as the banks themselves," Johnson said. "As long as there is the fear of default, as long as the uncertainty continues, confidence will not return across the whole of Europe."

It would be ironic if economic confidence were revived by the fiscal collapse of the birthplace of democracy. The protesters raging in the streets of Athens don't yet seem to understand that, no matter what, their party is over.

It's time for Greece to put on its big boy pants before the European will to bail them out goes the way of the British will to bail them out.

The (Not-So) Great Flag Debate

Coalition partners at odds over EU flag

In 1964, Canadian politicians struggled with what would turn out to be a pivotal question: should Canada adopt its own flag? And, if so, what should it be?

Then-Prime Minister Lester Pearson and the Liberal Party captured the imaginations of many Canadians -- particularly the country's youth -- by standing in favour of a uniquely Canadian flag. Then-Leader of the Opposition John Diefenbaker and the Conservative Party stood in favour of continuing to use the Red Ensign -- featuring the iconic Union Jack.

History does not look particularly fondly on Diefenbaker's position on the great flag debate. The Liberals would go on to govern uninterrupted for another 15 years. The brief Tory interegnum, led by Joe Clark, would last a mere nine months before the Liberals would govern for another four.

The debate being waged within Britain's governing coalition of the Conservative Party and the Liberal Democratic Party may not seem nearly as definitive as Canada's 1964 debate. Yet it will have political consequences nonetheless.

In Europe, May 9 is known as Europe Day. It specifically celebrates the creation of the European Union.

The European Union may be one of the most divisive issues within Britain's coalition government. The Conservatives tend to favour a stand-offish approach to the EU, while the Lib Dems prefer to embrace it.

Within the government, this division can be seen in the differing approaches to whether or not the flag of the European Union is being flown on Europe Day. Department for Business Minister Vince Cable will be flying the EU flag over his ministerial offices.

Foreign Affairs Minister William Hague will not.

The Tories haven't always been stridently opposed to the European Union. Britain's membership in the European Union was the doing of Tory Prime Minister Edward Heath, who led Britain into the European Economic Community in 1973.

It was Heath's intention that Britain would enjoy economic benefits from its membership, but few Conservatives could have predicted that the EEC would steadily grow in scope, expand the political authority it intended to exercise over member states.

During its time in office, the Cameron government has made it clear that it would not allow any laws passed by the European Parliament to take effect in Britain without strict ratification by the British Parliament.

This eye on Britain's sovereignty has characterized British public opinion on the European Union. Britons have been tremendously skeptical about the EU. That the Tony Blair government declined to replace Pounds Sterling with the Euro as the currency of the UK was largely a function of public opinion on the issue.

As William Hague and the Tories refuse to fly the flag of the European Union on Europe Day, they're likely well in line with public opinion on the matter.

Vince Cable flying the EU flag is hardly on outrage, but it seems to demonstrate a disconnect from British public opinion on this issue; one that could further trouble his already-troubled party.

It was a similiar disconnect from public sentiment that likely finalized John Diefenbaker's departure from the Prime Minister's office, and that allowed the Liberal Party to eventually transition to Pierre Trudeau's leadership without initially breaking a sweat (although there would be some tense moments in 1972).

The Liberal Democrats could hardly be accused of repeating Diefenbaker's mistake in its fullest scope. But they may come to regret their repudiation of public sentiment on the European Union. Gordon Brown arguably did.

Welcome to Europe: The Land of the Peer-Reviewed Budget

Peer reviewed budgets a threat to fiscal sovereignty

As British Chancellor of the Exchequer George Osborne prepares to deliver his first budget, a pecular process has gotten underway.

Osborne is preparing to send his budget to Brussels, Belgium, to be peer-reviewed by the European Commission and other European Union Finance Ministers.

The purported goal is to ensure that EU countries are fiscally responsible. The current cause celibre for this process is to pressure EU countries to cut government expenditures and eliminate deficits. The raison d'etre for this is at least partially the economic crisis engulfing Greece, and threatening to spread to other EU countries like Spain, Italy, Ireland and Portugal.

The peer review process is controversial in Britain, and rightfully so.

While the current puprose underlying this peer review process should be pleasing to fiscal conservatives, there is an underlying danger in this process that no conservative government -- the one in which George Osborne currently serves as Chancellor included -- should tolerate.

Today, the mission is to fight deficits and enforce conservative fiscal responsibility across Europe. This is much easier with conservative governments in power in Britain, France and Germany.

However, a shift in this state of affairs -- should left-wing governance return to France and Germany -- would change this process drastically. Rather than pressuring governments to follow a course of fiscal conservatism, the admonitions issued by EU Finance Ministers could instead become fodder for left-wing forces within any government that pursued such a course.

Today, the budget peer review process favours conservatism. But it could quite easily be used to coerce governments into the spendthrift policies so often imagined by the far left.

It's as much a threat to individual sovereignty as is crushing levels of public debt, and should not be acquiesced to.

Definitely Not the Endorsement He Must Have Wanted

Tony Blair endorsed by Taliban-bribing Berlusconi

Tony Blair's campaign for the soon-to-be-created office of the President of the European Union received a significant boost today, as Italian Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi endorsed him for the job.

"Tony Blair has all the right credentials for becoming the first president of the European Council in the terms enshrined in the Lisbon Treaty, and to be appointed to that post as soon as it is legally and politically possible to give the go-ahead to the implementation of the clause renewing the union's governance," Berlusconi wrote in a letter to Il Foglio.

But this is one endorsement that Blair may want to distance himself from.

As it turns out, Berlusconi's government has been bribing the Taliban to keep their operations quiet in areas where Italian troops are operating.

When the Italians handed responsibility for Sarobi in 2008, the tranquil conditions in the province led the incoming French command to sorely misjudge the security situation in the region. 10 French soldiers were quickly killed in a single ambush when the Taliban, no longer receiving tens of thousands of dollars in bribes, retook the field of battle.

The French are understandably disappointed in their erstwhile allies. As Benedict Brogan notes, they'll likely get even with the Italians in their own time.

But considering the judgement of Berlusconi's government on how to discharge its duties to NATO -- an organization that Italy honestly ought to be expelled from over this episode -- Silvio Berlusconi's endorsement is one that Tony Blair should actually reject.

After all, Blair committed British troops to Afghanistan. It very well could have been British troops that came to harm over Italian duplicity.

Accepting Berlusconi's endorsement ought to be utterly toxic to Blair's Presidential campaign.

Tony Blair: The Non-Destined President

Blair Presidency not inevitable after all

As Michael Cockerell notes in Tony Blair: The Inside Story, Tony Blair ascended to the Prime Ministership of Britain riding a wave of enthusiasm that had marked him as a "figure of destiny".

When he finally left the Prime Minister's Office, it was a tide of discontent that hastened his departure -- and now threatens to wash his Labour party away.

Recent speculation suggested that Blair may ride a similar wave of enthusiasm into the soon-to-be-established Presidency of the European Union. That enthusiasm is said to have deeply taken root in the European leaders who will ultimately elect the EU President.

But, as it turns out, there seems to be some opposition to a Blair Presidency crystalizing. Some may feign surprise that much of this opposition is emerging from left-wing elements in European politics, although it really isn't all that surprising.

French Socialist MEP Pervenche Berès phrases the cause for the objections rather succinctly.

"A lot of Socialists have not forgotten Blair for his wholehearted support for the US-led war in Iraq," Berès said. "He does not represent the views of real Socialists and there is no way he should be considered.”

Berès' sentiments were echoed by Daniel Cohn-Bendit, the joint leader of the European Green Party. "There is no way Blair should get this job," Colin-Bendit insisted. "He did nothing to defend European interests when he was Prime Minister and has done even less as a Middle East envoy."

One would expect that at least the British Labour party cacus in the European Parliament would be in favour of a Blair Presidency. But Richard Howitt, a Labour Member of European Parliament, doesn't buy into the notion of the inevitable Blair Presidency.

“Some say Blair is the only credible candidate but I don't see it that way at all," Howitt said. "I am sure he wants the job but there are other outstanding candidates who should be considered."

Even with some high-profile endorsements -- such as French President Nicolas Sarkozy -- there may well be enough residual bad will toward Blair lingering from the days of his close association with George W Bush to torpedo his bid for the European Presidency.

At the very least, reports that Blair has it all locked up are clearly greatly exaggerated.

Tony Blair: Is There Life After Death?

Former British PM's EU Presidency campaign has real momentum

As Michael Cockerell seems to infer in Tony Blair: The Inside Story, former British Prime Minister Tony Blair rode to his premiership at the head of nearly unprecedented enthusiasm and hope.

Blair arrived in office with sky high expectations, but managed to squander his surplus of political capital amidst infighting with his Chancellor of the Exchequer and questionable foreign policy decisions (namely, the Iraq war).

But if there's life after death in politics -- or at least new beginnings after "the end", as Blair himself described his departure from No 5 Downing Street -- Blair seems to have found it.

Speculation seems to hold that Tony Blair will win the Presidency of the European Union.

Much of this may, however, simply be wishful thinking on the part of Blair's supporters. Blair's close association with former US President George W Bush solidified a place for him as the world's second most unpopular politician -- at least for a time.

While Blair's personal unpolularity seems to have subsided -- Bush continues to be able to draw a good protest almost anywhere he goes -- memories of the invasion of Iraq, the various debacles that ensued, and the United States and Britain thumbing their nose at the United Nations can't be that far removed from the minds of many European leaders.

Then again, Europe has changed significantly since French President Jacques Chirac and German Chancellor Gerhard Schröder fumed over the affair.

Chirac's successor, Nicolas Sarkozy, has voiced his support for Blair, although Schröder's successor, Dr Angela Merkel, is reserving judgement.

Blair must be waiting on baited breath to hear the results of a referendum on the Lisbon Treaty in Ireland. But he isn't alone.

British Conservative Party leader David Cameron has suggested that his party may hold a referendum on withdrawing from the treaty. If Ireland -- who, for the record, have previously rejected the treaty -- ratifies the treaty and Tony Blair is elected EU President by the time the 2010 election rolls around, Cameron will have an undeniable dilemma on his hands.

It would be considerably more difficult to withdraw from the treaty after ratification -- and with a Brit (a former Prime Minister, no less) holding the Presidency, such an act could be politically troublesome.

It takes a special brand of leader to be able to cast a spell like the one that led Blair to victory in the 1997 British election. It takes a leader of yet greater calibre to be able to do it again after as rocky a tenure in that office as Blair had.

Whether or not Tony Blair is that special a leader is something that only time -- and Ireland's decision on the Lisbon Treaty -- will tell.