Having spent the past week visiting friends in Scotland, I realise it is not just here in the south where the countryside is being covered by new developments of housing, solar panels and wind turbines. Having worked in Aberdeenshire in the late 1970s, it is shocking to see new towns and housing developments have sprung up, where previously there were farms and woodland.
The Highlands are spectacular, even at this time year. But, some of the roads crossing the mountain passes are hairy, particularly at night, in the pitch dark.
What is for sure is that there are still an awful lot of sheep in Scotland. The lowland hills and fields are full of them. Cattle too but clearly not quite so many. Who doesn’t love to see Highland cattle peering over a wall or from behind a bush. They certainly are very appealing.
Back in Sussex the weather seems similar. The drive down the west coast was relentlessly wet and windy. I wonder how the local reservoirs are doing; surely, they must be filling up by now.
The fiasco of the Budget has become something of a saga. I wonder if Rachel Reeves will eventually be hung out to dry by the PM as, surely, she should. There are plenty of politicians and commentators who will not let her ill-judged decision to lie to the house of Commons, and the British public go by unpunished.
She chose to shore up a nest egg for future use by over taxing the hard working while handing out these ill-gotten gains to ‘welfare’: those who have chosen not to work and have more children than they can afford. And, no doubt pay off public sector workers in her bid to placate the unions.
While all that was going on in the Chamber, the police were arresting innocent farmers. They regularly facilitate pro-Palestine marchers; the people supporting Hamas who murder, rape and behead babies, killing innocent young people, mothers and grandparents. Why do the police decide it is appropriate to arrest hard working farmers, who keep the country fed?
Talk about two-tier policing, you really couldn’t make this stuff up. The farmers are protesting against Labour’s policies which are threatening their very livelihoods, their properties and families. Much like the criminals who are currently running wild throughout the countryside, thieving, threatening and damaging livestock and property. All whilst the rural police stand by apparently unable or unwilling to intervene.
Rachel Reeves is just as dangerous as these thugs who are breaking into farms and businesses stealing valuable equipment, smashing buildings, and attacking anyone who tries to defend themselves and their property.
You can’t blame people for asking: What exactly is going on?
The Met insist their decisions are based on risk assessments, intelligence, and operational independence. But the public increasingly sees something else: politics dressed up as policing. Certain causes - progressive, internationalist, are treated with kid gloves. Others - traditional, rural, working, and unfashionable - are met with the full force of the state.
Farmers driving tractors to Parliament Square represents, to some officers and politicians, the “wrong” kind of dissent. Too self-reliant. Too unaligned with metropolitan opinion. Too willing to expose the failures of the political class. Meanwhile, mass-mobilised identity politics on London’s streets, no matter how disruptive, seems to enjoy a bizarre, protected status.
If the right to protest means anything, it must apply to everyone equally. Not because farmers are saints, and the marchers are sinners, but because the law cannot pick favourites.
If the police want to restore trust, here’s a good place to start: One rule. One standard. One law. For everyone.
At last, the government has recognised what a mistake it was for the Conservative and Liberal Democrat coalition, elected in 2010, to introduce Police and Crime Commissioners. They replaced the police authorities believing elected PCCs would make the police more accountable. It clearly has not, so the sooner they are abolished, the better.
Sussex got Katy Bourne which has not been a great success. Whatever the statistics say, the public will tell you that crime in the county has gone through the roof. Rural crime and petty crime including shop lifting, is out of control. Those carrying out these attacks are vicious and have no respect for other people’s property or businesses.
Sadly, the local police cannot cope, nor do they seem keen to do so. I recently questioned the Chief Constable about rural crime. She had given a talk claiming how successful Sussex police are at combating crime. Unfortunately, she was totally unmoved when I gave her details of recent rural and farm break ins on her patch. She dismissed my concerns and ignored my suggestions on how to support farmers in protecting their property and livelihoods.
How typical of the BBC to enable David Dimbleby to criticise The King and Royal family while presenting the new documentary series called What’s The Monarchy For? Mr Dimbleby, a well-known Republican who despises the monarchy, has been lauded as a distinguished figure within the corporation mainly because of his father, Richard Dimbleby.
Richard Dimbleby who died in December 1965 became the BBC’s first war correspondent. He was a famous figure known for his poetic commentary on major events like the late Queen’s coronation and Winston Churchill’s funeral.
David and his brother Jonathan followed their father into broadcasting, leaning heavily upon their father’s reputation and dulcet tones. Both capable, but not a patch on him.
Surely, David Dimbleby is hardly the most appropriate person to present this series. As has already been noted, he does not offer an unbiased view. I would say this is yet another example of the BBC getting it horribly wrong. Will it now devote similar airtime to broadcast an opposing view, in keeping with some idea of impartiality? I will not hold my breath. The BBC is today packed full to the rafters with left wing, woke individuals who are most probably of the same mindset as Dimbleby. The BBC has lost its voice which the public expect and used to trust.
The Highlands are spectacular, even at this time year. But, some of the roads crossing the mountain passes are hairy, particularly at night, in the pitch dark.
What is for sure is that there are still an awful lot of sheep in Scotland. The lowland hills and fields are full of them. Cattle too but clearly not quite so many. Who doesn’t love to see Highland cattle peering over a wall or from behind a bush. They certainly are very appealing.
Back in Sussex the weather seems similar. The drive down the west coast was relentlessly wet and windy. I wonder how the local reservoirs are doing; surely, they must be filling up by now.
The fiasco of the Budget has become something of a saga. I wonder if Rachel Reeves will eventually be hung out to dry by the PM as, surely, she should. There are plenty of politicians and commentators who will not let her ill-judged decision to lie to the house of Commons, and the British public go by unpunished.
She chose to shore up a nest egg for future use by over taxing the hard working while handing out these ill-gotten gains to ‘welfare’: those who have chosen not to work and have more children than they can afford. And, no doubt pay off public sector workers in her bid to placate the unions.
While all that was going on in the Chamber, the police were arresting innocent farmers. They regularly facilitate pro-Palestine marchers; the people supporting Hamas who murder, rape and behead babies, killing innocent young people, mothers and grandparents. Why do the police decide it is appropriate to arrest hard working farmers, who keep the country fed?
Talk about two-tier policing, you really couldn’t make this stuff up. The farmers are protesting against Labour’s policies which are threatening their very livelihoods, their properties and families. Much like the criminals who are currently running wild throughout the countryside, thieving, threatening and damaging livestock and property. All whilst the rural police stand by apparently unable or unwilling to intervene.
Rachel Reeves is just as dangerous as these thugs who are breaking into farms and businesses stealing valuable equipment, smashing buildings, and attacking anyone who tries to defend themselves and their property.
You can’t blame people for asking: What exactly is going on?
The Met insist their decisions are based on risk assessments, intelligence, and operational independence. But the public increasingly sees something else: politics dressed up as policing. Certain causes - progressive, internationalist, are treated with kid gloves. Others - traditional, rural, working, and unfashionable - are met with the full force of the state.
Farmers driving tractors to Parliament Square represents, to some officers and politicians, the “wrong” kind of dissent. Too self-reliant. Too unaligned with metropolitan opinion. Too willing to expose the failures of the political class. Meanwhile, mass-mobilised identity politics on London’s streets, no matter how disruptive, seems to enjoy a bizarre, protected status.
If the right to protest means anything, it must apply to everyone equally. Not because farmers are saints, and the marchers are sinners, but because the law cannot pick favourites.
If the police want to restore trust, here’s a good place to start: One rule. One standard. One law. For everyone.
At last, the government has recognised what a mistake it was for the Conservative and Liberal Democrat coalition, elected in 2010, to introduce Police and Crime Commissioners. They replaced the police authorities believing elected PCCs would make the police more accountable. It clearly has not, so the sooner they are abolished, the better.
Sussex got Katy Bourne which has not been a great success. Whatever the statistics say, the public will tell you that crime in the county has gone through the roof. Rural crime and petty crime including shop lifting, is out of control. Those carrying out these attacks are vicious and have no respect for other people’s property or businesses.
Sadly, the local police cannot cope, nor do they seem keen to do so. I recently questioned the Chief Constable about rural crime. She had given a talk claiming how successful Sussex police are at combating crime. Unfortunately, she was totally unmoved when I gave her details of recent rural and farm break ins on her patch. She dismissed my concerns and ignored my suggestions on how to support farmers in protecting their property and livelihoods.
How typical of the BBC to enable David Dimbleby to criticise The King and Royal family while presenting the new documentary series called What’s The Monarchy For? Mr Dimbleby, a well-known Republican who despises the monarchy, has been lauded as a distinguished figure within the corporation mainly because of his father, Richard Dimbleby.
Richard Dimbleby who died in December 1965 became the BBC’s first war correspondent. He was a famous figure known for his poetic commentary on major events like the late Queen’s coronation and Winston Churchill’s funeral.
David and his brother Jonathan followed their father into broadcasting, leaning heavily upon their father’s reputation and dulcet tones. Both capable, but not a patch on him.
Surely, David Dimbleby is hardly the most appropriate person to present this series. As has already been noted, he does not offer an unbiased view. I would say this is yet another example of the BBC getting it horribly wrong. Will it now devote similar airtime to broadcast an opposing view, in keeping with some idea of impartiality? I will not hold my breath. The BBC is today packed full to the rafters with left wing, woke individuals who are most probably of the same mindset as Dimbleby. The BBC has lost its voice which the public expect and used to trust.
RSS Feed