Juncker terrfies Moscow with EU army proposal.

Always a man with a talent for the the ridiculous, the EU's Jean-Claude Juncker has proposed the creation of an EU army to show Russia that the EU is serious about defending European values.(Don't ask)

The laughter from the Kremlin is audiable here. Defending? If the EU really going to risk a nuclear or even heavy conventional attack to defend an inch of Ukraine or even the Baltic states? Most unlikely,- and Russia knows it.

Putting that small matter aside, the idea of a joint EU army raises visions of Gilbert and Sullivan. They should be alive to set it to music. What would it do? Who would lead it?  Who would follow ? Who would decide anything? In which direction would it go? The mind truly boggles. Mr Putin won't be losing any sleep but he might drop off chuckling.

Plain Speaking Award...

...today goes to Kim Sears,Andy Murray's fiancée for a few expletives directed at the competition during the semi final of the Melbourne Open.

This was an occasion of high drama, tensions and above all the wish to see her man win. She said it how it felt, f- words and all.

In the current particularly British and American world of political correctness, which becomes more restrictive and oppressive by the day and in which she should obviously have said things like " a That's not very good" or  " Goodness me" , her outburst came as a blast of fresh air. Expressing feelings as they really are or with emotion is almost taboo and taken by the ranks of the slab faced miserabalists as vastly more significant than they really are. What she said on the spur of the moment was harmless , not pre scripted but spontaneous and alive. Excellent.

Dave to miss debate?

The news that David Cameron won't engage in any pre-election televised debates between the main political party heads (We can't really use the word leaders) unless the extra terrestrial Greens are included as a counter balance to UKIP's Nigel Farage comes as no surprise.

He seems to think any excuse will do.

Why bother with excuses though?  He should just say he doesn't want to do it because he is a pretty hopeless debater. He's OK, if wooden, at delivering pre-scripted and rehearsed speeches, often still relying on notes and autocues but he isn't good at the cut and thrust of spontaneous repartee. His real fear is not the Wallace-like miserabilist Ed who includes the class warfare stuff " For the many, not the few" in set pieces peppered with "hard working families" (why not singles?) in all he says. As far as most voters are concerned Dave and Ed are inner London political elite, alias the the speaking version of a heavy sedative. Both speak Martian and neither is really comfortable with talking to or mixing with the "ordinary people" about whom they talk so much.

 Nor is he or anyone worried about having to say "I agree with Nick" this time around.

The real problem for Dave, and to an extent Ed, is Nigel Farage. Here is a man with an armory of pre -prepared thrusts which he can deliver at will as occasion demands. He can think on his feet, repel and ridicule any assault and come over as the man in the bar with a pint in one hand and a politically incorrect fag in the other. Being savaged by Nigel and then kicked in the other Eds by opportunistic fratricidal Ed and hand wringing Nick when he's on the floor is not something Dave fancies,- especially on three occasions and multiple times within each.

If Dave wants to move on to Nigel turf, he  needs to reject the idea of televised debates by getting honest and say " I'm not crazy. Everyone knows I'm lousy at debates and don't enjoy them for a minute.They are just a piece of theatre like the weekly PMQs. I'm happy though to be grilled by Andrew Marr or anyone else in places where I feel more comfortable and can give more useful answers."

Unfortunately the chances of  our man having the courage to say just that are almost zero. That's why Farage is such a threat. He won't necessarily get enough votes to win many seats but he could split the right's votes in enough Tory seats to let Ed slip through the railings and into Number 10 as leader of the largest single party even though the majority don't want him or it. Just as in the Labour leadership election in fact. We could be facing the most undemocratic result ever of a General Election. Ed himself is said to believe that 35% of the vote will do it for him.

Back to the debates though. Our prediction is that one way or the other reluctant Dave will be forced to join Ed, Nick and Nige on a stage or two. He'd better start thinking now about how he will appear delighted to be there before Nige wipes the floor with him followed in short order by Ed and Nick too in acts of collateral verbal violence before they get too chirpy about it.

Footnote: The Oxford Union is not the best place to learn the arts of undergraduate debating. For that he should have gone to Glasgow University whose parliamentary debates have long been in a league of their own. But he wouldn't have known there was a Glasgow University,- or maybe even a Glasgow.

Britons Overwhelmed,-Things go Wrong.

Britons really have taken a hammering at home and abroad these last few weeks. There's been an air traffic control computer failure, snow in the Alps (wasn't that predictable), disruption on some railways due to over running engineering work (ditto). It's amazing that we've pulled  through to January 4th.

As we know there are set givens in our world of entitlements and rights. These include:

- The state is our Father, Mother and Nursemaid.

- When things don't go quite as expected someone (else) is always to blame.

-It is wrong that anything should go wrong. (Other people's) Heads must roll.

-There is no such thing as an accident. Any adverse event  must be actionable.

- "Not for profit" is how the world should be. It is immoral that however much anyone has risked or endured to create new products, services and jobs that they should in any way gain from their efforts.

-We have a right to cheap rail fares subsidised by the taxpayer. (Who?- That's not us, not really).

-The only acceptable way to make money is by winning or taking part in a TV reality show,playing football or scooping the lottery or being an imagined national treasure. These people should not be challenged.  All other forms of self advancement are exploitative and downright wrong.

-The railways should be renationalised. Memories of how things were before privatisation and the enormous post privatisation investments and improvements are very short.

- Also a candidate for nationalisation according to the RMT union should be a failed courier/parcels delivery company so that 2,700 jobs are not lost. Again the taxpayer can fund it .Why the nation should want to add to its debts the costs of keeping a non viable business in an overcrowded market is not explained. Maybe it's an extension of the educationalists view that nothing and nobody should be allowed to fail?  No chance of RMT's money following its mouth and buying it themselves.

-"Britons stranded in Alps" went the newspaper headlines. Well, yes, a few but so were Germans Scandinavians, French and many others. "We don't know where we are" wailed one lady at Chambery Airport into which she had just flown. Maybe this was a moment when a New York cop needed to be on hand with the crisp unsmiling reply "Buy a map". "Nobody's telling us what to do " is another frequent wail."Engage brain"would be the best, terribly un-British, retort. Think of the mental scarring that would leave. There must be compensation. Somebody must be sued.

Britain's NHS,- And they say it doesn't need reform.

Two real life encounters experienced  with the NHS in different parts of the country by members of one family last week:

1) GP to patient: "Normally we would run a few tests on this but as it's Friday afternoon we can't."

2) Helpline 111 responding to request for an appointment with the local out of hours GP service.(This little publicised facility is usually hidden away in hospitals, separate from but close to A and E departments). "It's 6pm now and as there are a couple of GP surgeries open on the other side of the county until 6.30pm we can't offer this service until they close so please ring back after that time."

Enough said.

Understatement of the Month,- Theresa May on Immigration.

It is "unlikely" that David Cameron's unwise and almost certainly unresearched 2010 General Election promise that immigration would be brought down to 10,000 a year will be met. So said the new Iron Lady, the formidable Theresa May.

It was never remotely possible, EU or no EU. Mouth engaged before brain when Dave said it,- and not for the only time.

Now the man himself has followed up with an immigration speech designed to UKIP-proof his Party. He'd probably do better to leave the issue alone and concentrate on more positive things.

One nonsense in the immigration figures is the Conservative Party's absurd insistance that students are included in the total. They are not immigrants.They are coming here to spend a lot of money buying a British education.They will also buy accomodation, food, entertainment, transport and a host of other things while they are here as will any friends and family who come to visit them. With luck, unless they are made to feel unwelcome and received with hostility, they will become lifelong friends of Britain and continue to spend money here and on British goods throughout their lives. Most will then go away again. Those who rise to positions of power or influence in their home counties may also be able to influence all kinds of decisons in Britain's favour or at least give the UK a headstart. Those who do eventually stay on and apply for residence would mainly also be assets to Britain's talent base as well as contributors to its exchequer. OK, there are some who try to abuse the system by signing up for, shall we say less reputable schools or "colleges", but there is no reason why those should not be robustly dealt with and escorted to the airport for their flight home regardless of protests on their behalf by sundry activists.

Another problem Britain has with immigration is that it has no idea who has left the country. John Major abolished the outward bound passport check as an economy measure . Since then the UK, probably uniquely in the world, has no idea who has outstayed their visa unless they pop up on the radar for some other reason. Even then they know that their chances of deportation are minimal. The 1997-2010 Labour government encouraged mass immigration because it knew that the bulk of recent immigrants tend to vote Labour and the current Tory/LibDem coalition hasn't got to grips with it, partly because EU-wise it can't and non-EU wise the multiple appeals system makes rapid removal of those who should not be in the country almost impossible.

It's a mess and no political party, least of all UKIP, seems to be able to think straight about it. 

An American Twiga's view of the Mid Terms.

Our American Twiga (giraffe) has been in an excellent position to look down upon the Mid Term elections. He would shake his head if he could but that's not so easy at the top end of a long neck. Rolling the eyes will have to do instead.

Firstly though let's just consider the strange world of the American democratic process. The President is elected for a four year term and, all going less than disastrously,- can expect two terms. That's a total of eight years. After that it's game over.  He or she may not stand again. So far so good .The British experience is that towards the end of two terms, ten years here, the incumbent really should take a long holiday anyway. More than that is dangerous from almost everybody's point of view. Exhaustion or hubris have taken their toll and there is no gratitude from the waving crowds who cheered victory on Day 1. They've gone, moved on.

In the USA, even if the new President steps into the White house with a majority in both Houses, he or she has got just two years ,- that's eighteen months max before campaigning begins once more,- to make a favourable impact and get the important stuff done. After that come the mid terms at two years from "Go". Once those are over there is the risk of the President losing their majority in both Houses twice more before the end of the 8 years. Life is tough if one of them goes to the opposition and potentially dreadful if both do. That's what happened last week. President Obama, not looking as youthful as he did six years ago, has lost both Houses. Inevitably the label "Lame duck President" is stuck on him at every opportunity by a hostile and frequently gloating media. He can't feel wonderful about that.

So how does American Twiga see it? He says.

Ludicrous is the word for what is happening. Unfortunately the order of priority for pretty well all American politicians is first and foremost to get re-elected 2-4 years down the track. Way behind that comes supporting the base of the party and almost out of sight behind that there comes the idea of doing something for the country.

(That's not only true across the Atlantic is it?)

Some say we shouldn't blame the politicians. Blame the Voters. There's some truth in that. The USA has become more polarised than ever .Election strategies are no longer about persuading voters to switch allegiances but more about getting your own supporters to come out and vote and those of the other party to stay at home. That looks like the rationale behind the new laws requiring a photo-ID in some states. The poorer people don't have driving licences so need to go and get an official one. That costs $75 and they may have to travel 30 miles to get it, so they don't bother. These laws have been pushed forward in spite of the fact that there have only been a handful of cases of proven voter fraud in the past 50 years. No surprise that voter turnout was only 37% and down to 13% for the under 30s. Obama was on a hiding to nothing and yet these same people who hung him and his party out to dry by not turning out to vote are the ones who complain that the Republicans have prevented him from implimenting policies which would have helped them. Politics is a hard game that usually ends in tears. There is no gratitude to Obama for having at last brought in health care for millions of the previously excluded and having extricated most American troops and military expenditure from the disaster of Afghanistan. He promised those things and they were very much part of the wave of enthusiasm that swept him into the White House six years ago. He's gone almost white haired in delivering them and how is he rewarded ? The loss of both Houses for the final two years of his Presidency. One could forgive him for saying " ---- this for a game of soldiers,- I'm off". But he can't. Not audiably or visibly anyway.

It's hard to say what will happen now. Democrats in the Senate can still stop anything from passing by using filibusters, just as the Republicans have been doing very effectively. Or Obama can just veto anything he considers too drastic. Among those will be the sorts of things the Tea Party might push. The repeal of Obamacare would be the highest profile and designed to deprive him of any kind of legacy so he's not likely to sign that one. Unless therefore the Republicans decide to adopt a statesmanlike cooperative approach in the interests of showing the electorate that they are positive people who can get things done, expect more gridlock,and name calling inside Congress. Outside just rising disgust with Washington and politicians of all hues. The outcome of the 2016 elections may depend on which side makes the least errors of judgment. Again, some similarities with the eastern side of the Atlantic.