Tuesday, 1 March 2011

Hardly Anybody Gives A Monkey’s?

Despite my previous post, and currently being on holiday albeit at Heathrow, I couldn't resist this final post before I return. Mike Smithson of the mostly marvelous Political Betting site, is a Liberal Democrat, with pro-EU tendencies that often emerge in his posts, for example November last year:
Has Britain’s membership ceased to be an issue?

Last week my post on the public not really “caring a monkey’s” about the EU caused a little bit of a stir in some places. My argument was simple - we’ve been in the EU for 37 years and Britain’s membership has ceased to be an issue for all but a very small minority on voters.

I quoted the latest MORI issues index where those naming the Europe/EU as the “most important issue facing Britain” simply did not register and did not even rate a one percent figure by the pollster.

There have been times in the past when the response on EU-related matters has been very high but the long-term trend is one of decline to almost zero.

I stick with the point I made. Hardly anybody gives a monkey’s.

It's the same point that EuroGoblin repeatedly and misleading argues for. Now today Mr Smithson has changed his tune somewhat:
Why’s the ECJ being so breathtakingly stupid?

Should Britain say it will defy the court?

The story that’s made me most angry today has been the extraordinary decision by the European Court of Justice to stop insurance companies from allowing women to pay smaller car insurance premiums even though they are less likely to have accidents.

This is being stopped on ground of “gender equality”. Andy Cooke on the previous thread had this right:-

What a stupid ruling by the ECJ!

The different premiums aren’t based on sexism, but on demographic differences in propensities to have an accident! Will it be illegal to charge different premiums based on age? Illegal to charge different premiums based on where you live? On how experienced you are? Whether you’ve had accidents or traffic violations in the past?

So millions of teenaged girls will have to pay extra to subsidise teenaged boys. Women will have to subsidise men.

Soon, those of us in their thirties, forties and fifties will have to pay a bit more for the teenaged drivers (otherwise there will be significant age discrimination, surely?)

The ECJ are hardly improving their image - more like reinforcing the stereotype of stupid, out-of-touch politically correct idiots.

Could this be an opportunity for the coalition to have a battle with Europe?
Now who gives a monkey's? First they came for...


  1. If I remember correctly, it was a certain doing away with ‘red-lining’ that forced banks to lend money to people who couldn’t pay it back – all in the name of equality – that in the end caused a certain world-wide financial difficulty.

    What the hell are jumped up town clerks doing telling insurance companies how to run their businesses?

    On the point of red-lining, wouldn't it be discrimination if insurance companies charged more for insuring in less salubrious areas.

  2. You may still be at Heathrow - but you are on holiday!

    And your CEO allows a post? Tsk, Tsk!