Recent Bonfires - 89

It's high time we had another bonfire round-up:

Wrong kind of railway management costs us £50m+ "Civil servant failures over the West Coast rail contract will cost taxpayers “at least £50 million”, a report by MPs said today. There was a lack of leadership at the Department for Transport (DfT) and a failure to "get basic processes right" over the West Coast fiasco, the report from the House of Commons Public Accounts Committee said. The department failed to learn from mistakes made in previous projects and senior managers failed to apply common sense during the West Coast bidding process... Bob Crow, leader of the RMT transport union, said: "The stench from the fall-out of the West Coast franchise continues to hang over Britain's transport industry as it becomes clearer with every examination that the ministers responsible for this shambles could not be trusted to run a whelk stall let alone multi-billion Government contracts." (Independent 26-2-13)

Wrong kind of cop shop costs us £21m "A state-of-the-art police station is to cost taxpayers a total of £21 million over the next 30 years, even though it is closed to the public. The front desk at the station, which opened 11 years ago in a 30-year private finance deal, is shut to save costs, and has been replaced by a mobile police van in the car park for eight-hours-a-week. But police are still committed to handing over £700,000-a-year for the station at Ammanford, Carmarthenshire, South Wales. The total cost will be £21m - almost 10 times the cost of building the station. Acting Chief Constable Jackie Roberts admitted the station is 'too costly' and 'does not provide the public with value for money'. (D Mail 27-2-13)

Wrong kind of military kit costs us £6.6bn "The Ministry of Defence is squandering billions of pounds on kit and supplies it does not need while trying to save money by getting rid of troops... MPs on the Commons’ Public Accounts Committee found at least £6.6 billion of stock was either unused or over-ordered... [There are] enough spare parts for the Nimrod MR2 maritime patrol aircraft to last 54 years: the spy plane was scrapped in 2009." (D Mail 28-2-13)

Wrong kind of EU rules cost us £850k "Taxpayers in Britain are paying hundreds of thousands of pounds a year for Polish pregnant women to return to their home country and give birth, new figures reveal. Under EU law anyone living and working in Britain is entitled to free treatment in any other member state. Around 500 Poles returned to the Eastern European nation to have their babies in 2012, with the NHS footing the bill. Each birth costs the NHS £1,631, meaning the births of babies to Polish mothers cost Britain around £850,000 last year. The regulations were originally set up to ensure emergency healthcare was available between member states across the EU." (D Telegraph 25-2-13)

Wrong kind of taxman costs us £33m "The cost of hanging on the phone to the tax office was a collective £33m last year, with many frustrated callers paying more than £1 a call. Figures released by the National Audit Office (NAO) showed that nearly a quarter of calls to the Revenue went unanswered while 6.5m people in the first six months of this financial year were left waiting for more than 10 minutes for someone to help them. Customers who call HMRC from their mobile phone face the steepest charges, paying up to 41p a minute to phone an 0845 number or 40p a minute for an 0345 number. Even those calling from their landlines will pay up to 10.5p a minute, depending on the time of day." (D Telegraph 18-12-12)


This week's bonfire total: £6,704,850,000

Gudang grosir baju anak murah - harga pabrik !!
www.gudanggrosiran.com Categories: Bonfires, eu, hmrc, mod, police

Going Batty

Anyone got one of these?

Tyler is thinking of having some building work done. You know, support the construction industry in these difficult times etc.

But it turns out there could be a problem - a serious problem. With bats.

Bats? Yep. These days, if you're going to do any building that involves disturbing a possible bat roost - like your loft, or the Major's head - you're going to need permission. And that's going to cost.

To start with, you'll need a bat survey from a qualified bat surveyor. At a cost of up to £2 grand, the surveyor comes round to your house in the early hours of the morning, crouches down behind the bins, and looks for bats. Well, not so much looks as detects. Using a bat detector. No, really.

You then get a written report which you have to append to your planning application. Increasingly, planners won't even consider the app without a survey.

And if bats have been found - as they almost certainly will have been - you are going to have to pay some more.

You'll have to apply to quango Natural England for a licence to proceed, spelling out in detail how you propose to mitigate the damage caused to the bats. The application will need to be written by a bat expert at goodness what further cost.

You'll have to lay on alternative bat accommodation, initially at a temporary bat residence (such as the Holiday Bat Inn), and longer-term in your new loft space. Yes, if you're say converting your existing loft, the remodelling will have to incorporate new bat access and a centrally heated roost - right alongside your new bedroom.

What's that? Bats carry rabies?

Well, yes they do. And your point? Under EU habitats directives, bats are protected. You are not.

And it isn't just bats. Great crested newts, TB badgers, and the famous Dartford Warbler are all protected. As is Mrs T's personal favourite the Great Raft Spider.

And trees. Don't even think of assaulting a tree during your building work. Not only can you not fell it, you must also ensure its quality of life isn't harmed. Yes, its quality of life:

"...special conditions may be applied regarding the design of the foundations, or the method of construction. Such conditions should ensure that the tree continues to have a quality of life comparable to that experienced prior to the development." (Swindon Council Tree Protection guidelines).

A tree experiences life? It will be grass next. Grass has been downtrodden for far too long. How can it possibly be acceptable that grass is denied the right to vote?

Now of course, EU rules and planning licences are one thing, the Real World quite another. Out in the Real World what seems to happen is that people planning to apply for planning permission now take scorched earth measures before ever contacting the local council.

Take the discussion on the UK Farming Forum, where one farmer has just been told by local council planners he can't build any new barns today without first getting a £2 grand rare species survey. A fellow farmer advises:

"If you want anything these days then you have to beat them at their silly game. The only way to get it is to first kill off all the vegetation to do away with any rare orchids etc. Then concentrate on the wildlife by finding up some old can of lethal stuff you have hidden away in the garage knowing you might need it one day. Reason you didnt keep it locked in the spray shed was if its found when the b..g.rs come round to inspect then you end up doing time."

Other farmers agree. Whereas they'd once have left those rare orchids in place, these days they're a real liability. Best practice these days is to eradicate them so they can never cause a problem. Same with anything else on an EU list (which may be why the EU now pays billions of OUR FRIGGIN' MONEY to farmers not to farm at all).

On the home front, best advice is to fell all trees within 100 feet of any planned building work before approaching the planners (or clear your entire garden if smaller). And hunt down and destroy any badgers, newts, or warblers within warbling distance.

As for bats, they seem to be a bit trickier. Ultrasonic bat scares don't seem to work. Ditto mothballs. Really bright lights left on 24/7 may work, but then again they may not (plus they can set fire to your loft, which is somewhat less than ideal).

Owls. They may work. They're reportedly the bat's biggest natural predators. But then again, Amazon don't seem to list Owls. And neither do they list racoons or possums.

Which only leaves something promisingly called the Bat Hawk (see pic).

Or snakes. Snakes in the loft. Maybe that's it.

Mrs T thinks I'm going batty. She thinks this has finally tipped me over the edge.

She may be right.

Why do we need EU directives again?

PS Yes, I know - bats are endangered and Tyler should be more responsible. Yes, yes. But in reality not all bats are endangered. The bats most likely to be found in our Surrey loft are pipistrelles, which are very common, with a population that seems to have increased by around two-thirds just in the last decade (see the annual bat survey from the Bat Conservation Trust). The tax-funded Euro-bat industry has got totally out of control, and is now in the process of destroying many of our fine old country churches - see here. Sorry, but in the worng place, bats are a pest.

Gudang grosir baju anak murah - harga pabrik !!
www.gudanggrosiran.com Categories: batty, eu

Still Paying For The EU

Following Mr Cam's, ahem, "triumph" in holding the EU budget increase to a mere 2.9% next year, we thought we'd remind ourselves just how much we've paid in since we joined in 1973.

Because the numbers can get very confusing. All kinds of different definitions of gross and net - pre and post-rebate - get chucked around, often in a deliberate attempt to confuse us.

So let's remember the key points.

Our gross contribution to the EU budget comprises a number of different elements, including revenue from tariffs imposed on goods imported from outside the EU, and a share of VAT receipts. The most important element by far is a pro rata charge based on our share of EU gross "national" income. Currently the overall total is running in the range £12-14bn pa.

Fortunately, up until now we have not had to pay the full amount implied by those rules. And that's because of the rebate negotiated for us by the blessed St Mags back in the 80s.

So what we need to look at is our gross contribution net of those rebates, and that's what's shown in the chart above (the data sources are here and here).

As we can see, in the latest completed year, 2009, we handed over £7.8bn, around £300 for every British family. In real inflation adjusted terms, that compares to a cost of £1.6bn in our first year of membership. So in real terms the costs have increased almost fivefold since we first joined.

And over the entire period of our membership, we have paid total membership fees of £170bn, which is £257bn at 2009 prices. And that is a little over £10 grand per family.

Now it is true that some of this cash comes back again in the form of EU spending in the UK. For example, around £4bn goes on subsidising our old friends the farmers (or "the preservation and management of natural resources" as the EU now prefers to call it - see here). But in terms of the burden on UK taxpayers, that is immaterial - we are paying taxes to fund programmes of the EU's choosing, not ours (farming subsidies would not be high on Tyler's list of worthy spending projects).

Moreover, the cost of our EU budget contributions is only one element of the overall cost of EU membership. In particular, we also need to add in the £5bn+ pa it costs us through paying food prices much higher than the world market. And here's Jamie Oliveoil to remind us just how that works (and see this blog):



Like Jamie says, enjoy.

Gudang grosir baju anak murah - harga pabrik !!
www.gudanggrosiran.com Categories: eu

Your £25bn Gift To The PIGS

Heading South

As you will have heard, Darling's last act as Chancellor has been to give £15bn of your hard-earned cash to prop up the PIGS.

Well, according to him, it's only £8bn, and he hasn't "given" it per se. He's simply provided an open-ended loan - the kind of "loan" the Bank of Mummy and Daddy might make to keep their card-maxxing offspring out of jail. Either way, the £8bn is in addition to our existing £7bn commitment, and we can kiss all of it goodbye.

Worse, it sounds like he had no choice. Under the terms of the Lisbon Treaty, the Reich Chancellery the European Commission was able to invoke the "exceptional occurrences" clause that stripped Britain of its veto. So we're stuffed.

And don't overlook the fact that the IMF is providing another £191bn, 5% of which is effectively down to us via our membership share. Call it £10bn, taking our total contribution to £25bn.

(Yes, I know, IMF loans have always come with tough conditions and repayment is sort of expected. But right now the IMF is headed by a French Euro-socialist, so don't hold your breath.)

At least we're not as stuffed as those seething German taxpayers. They've been forced to sign a blank cheque of unknown final magnitude. And they don't like it.

Which is why yesterday they punched Angela Merkel on the nose. Her party's defeat in regional elections means her coalition loses its majority in Germany's upper house, and makes it much harder for her to keep the show on the road.

You see, because she runs a coalition government it's very hard to hold things together when times are tough. Unpopular measures are not something any politico likes, especially when they are minority members in a coalition government. Poor Wolfgang Schaüble, the German Finance Minister, got so stressed he had to be rushed to a Brussels hospital before yesterday's EU meeting.

Oh, I've just remembered something. Haven't the BBC/Grun been telling us that coalition governments are good? Don't they reckon Germany's system is far better than our own first-past-the-post system?

It will be fascinating to hear how they explain the political mayhem that is about to explode over there.

Gudang grosir baju anak murah - harga pabrik !!
www.gudanggrosiran.com Categories: debt, electoral reform, eu

Ignoring The People

Magnifique!

The EU is one of those issues where the ruling elite systematically ignores the wishes of the British people. As the Major is forever reminding me, our rulers have led us into the clutches of an anti-democratic superstate on the false pretence that it was going to make us richer.

The truth - as we've blogged many times - is that right now, today, we'd be just as well off economically if we withdrew. Indeed, there is considerable evidence that we'd be better off, because we'd escape all the membership costs.

Now the TPA has produced a brilliant cinema ad (above) highlighting the largest of those costs. They include:

• £10.3 bn pa on the Common Agricultural Policy (higher prices, state aid, and additional bureaucracy)
• £2.8 bn pa on the Common Fisheries Policy
• £80bn pa from EU-wide VAT fraud
• £1.8m pa for each MEP
• £500bn pa from the extra admin burden placed on EU companies

Overall, the annual costs to the UK are put at £2000 pa for each and every one of us.

You don't believe it?

The figures are all documented in a new book by the very excellent Dr Lee Rotherham - Ten Years On: Britain without the EU (normally it will cost you £5.99, but if you're very quick you can get one free - yes, FREE - from those nice people at the TPA. And a jaw-dropping read it is too.

Now, the economic costs are bad enough, but there is also the cost in terms of our freedom. The EU has never been driven by democracy and never will be. It is rule by an unelected commissariat.

It is supremely ironic that the 20th anniversary of the Berlin Wall coming down has been marked by huge celebrations on the BBC, St Bonio himself presiding over festivities in Berlin. Yet as Pravda points out, rule by EU is chillingly similar to Soviet rule:

"As recently as 2006, a most eloquent and insightful warning was given by former Soviet dissident Vladimir Bukovsky. Traumatized by the experience of living in the Soviet Union, Bukovsky noted the deeply disturbing similarities between the old Soviet Union and the blueprints for the EU super state. The European Commission, he noted, was the exact equivalent of the old Soviet Politbureau, in terms of the secretive way power was exercised, the recruitment and personalities of its members and the scope and reach of its decisions. The “European Parliament” today (and under the terms of the Lisbon Treaty) is a mere rubber stamp institution, just like the “Supreme Soviet” of the old USSR.

As a matter of fact, there are so many similarities between the old Soviet Union and the EU that mere coincidence is unlikely. Bukovsky argues the EU was designed to be like the old USSR. The architects of the EU? Mostly social democrats, whom Stalin quite aptly called “Social Fascists.”

And on Not Born Yesterday, John Ward makes a similar point:

"The people of East Germany (and those of other former Soviet satellites who have joined the EU) are, I do not doubt, happier than they were under the USSR. But looked at objectively, their change of sides will, I fear, be seen in time as exchanging one rigid oligarchy for another."

Is it surprising that so many of us want to stop this right now? Even after nearly four decades in the EU, two-thirds of us favour either a looser relationship based on trade, or complete withdrawal.

But how do we get our ruling elite to listen?

How do we force them to act?

A referendum is the obvious step. But with Mr Cam now having ruled it out, how do we get one?

There are alas, no easy answers. It will be a long hard slog to persude our politicos it would be in their own best interests to listen to the people.

But in the short term we should at least all contact our MPs and make sure they are under no illusions as to where we stand.

And on that front, a new campaign has just started - The Albion Alliance - that is campaigning for a referendum. We suggest you pop over and join, as we've just done.

There are no easy answers, but every little bit will help.

PS Talking of issues where the ruling elite completely ignore our views, over the weekend there was an interesting poll in the Times. Despite all the expensive propaganda from the BBC and the government, 60% of us still do not believe man is primarily responsible for climate change. And yet the Copenhagen circus continues on its pointless way, and all the chief climate commissar could say was: “The overwhelming body of scientific information is stacked up against the deniers and shows us that climate change is man-made and is happening now. We know that we still have a way to go in informing people about climate change and that is why we make no apologies about pushing forward with our new Act on CO2 campaign.” So it doesn't matter that their published "evidence" is wafer thin, mainly comprising the output of various dodgy forecasting models. Somehow we're just meant to take the word of big government politicos and their terminally conflicted climate change bureaucrats.WTF would we do that?

Gudang grosir baju anak murah - harga pabrik !!
www.gudanggrosiran.com Categories: eu, global warming

Pathetic Autistic Castrates

I will wipe you off le radar

The Major was round at 8.30 this morning, steam blowing from all orifices.

"Have you seen this?! Another slimey little Frog threatening us with national extinction!" His Daily Telegraph was crumpled and torn - it looked like he'd already used it to strike out at someone.

"Just listen to this." With some difficulty he uncrumpled the page and began reading. 'Pathetic and autistic... castrated... Britain will disappear from the radar'... Disappear from the radar!" He looked up, his face flushed an alarming shade of purple. "I tell you, it's just as well we've still got our nukes!"

Before I could respond, he was off again. "It's this bit that really gets my goat. This little Napoleon says we should obey his orders because otherwise we'll be powerless in the world. Listen - 'It is a time of tumultuous waters all around us. Wars, terrorism, proliferation, Afghanistan, energy with Russia, massive immigration, economic crisis. It is time when the destiny of Europe is being defined – whether or not we will exist as a third of the world's GDP capable of fighting it out on climate, on trade, on every Goddamn issue on the surface of the Earth."

He looked up again. "Well, what do you think of that?! How dare he! I mean, forgive me if I'm wrong, but the EU has done absolutely bugger all of any use in any of those areas. When it comes to wars and terrorism, it's us and the yanks - always is - our so-called European partners are pretty well nowhere to be seen. The EU are incapable of gripping any of the real problems in the outside world - like Iran's nukes. Instead they employ thousands of bureaucrats with the sole aim of making our lives here an utter misery - like with all their sausage regulations and the dustbin police. And don't get me started on immigration! Go on! Just tell me - what have they ever done for us?"

I pondered for a moment. "Well, Major, in all fairness, there's loads of stuff. Like, for example... well... umm... there's the EU passport - much handier than our old fashioned big passports." The Major choked. "Well, OK... ahh... ummm... there has to be something... the Eurovision Song Contest?"

*****

The old ones are always the best, and Monsieur Lellouche's (great name) extraordinary outburst on British shortcomings is in the mainstream tradition of Louis XIV, Napoleon, and Le General. But he made one point we really can't let pass without correction.

As well as his highly offensive references to autism and castration, he told the Grun:

"If we get a [British] government that is ferociously anti European that will vote down this kind of legislation then I think the relationship is going to be very difficult. As we enter the next phase one of the issues we have to discuss midterm is of course finances. France is a net contributor to the tune of €5bn a year, of which €1.5bn is the same as British rebate. That should tell you quite a bit huh?"

We presume he's threatening us with the loss of Mrs T's rebate. Except - as BOM readers will vividly recall - we already lost most of that back in 2005, when Tone gave away the shop during his previous stint as EU President.

The facts are that even before the loss of the rebate, were were already the second largest net contributor to the EU budget after Germany. France - which has always had an outstandingly good deal - was fourth after the Dutch. Here are the figures for 2007 (in Euros):

And our contributions are now set to increase substantially. According to HMT's latest forecast, our net contribution next year will be £6.5bn - call it 7bn in Euros.

As we've noted before, budgetwise, UK withdrawal would hurt them a lot more than it would hurt us.

M. Louche might want to reflect on that as he nibbles his Camembert.

Gudang grosir baju anak murah - harga pabrik !!
www.gudanggrosiran.com Categories: eu

Cam's Euro Crisis

No need for national flags any more

Archbishop Snow and the BBC are scarcely able to contain their chortling delight. Now that the superstate constitution is in place, the Tories will be ripped apart. Happy Days are here again. Hurrah!

Except of course, the Tories won't be ripped apart. Out here, we all understand that the overwhelming priority is winning next May. Everything else is for another day.

The EU is one of those issues like crime and immigration where the political elite believe they have a high moral duty to ignore the ignorant peasantry. With a few honourable exceptions, the elite have continued to propel us towards ever-closer union, even though virtually every poll shows we don't actually want it.

Even the European Commission's own poll this year shows only around one-third of Brits have a positive view of the EU. The poll is here, and the key results are:

So after four decades, only 37% of us are enthusiasts. Moreover, when we're offered the polling option of a looser relationship with the EU restricted to free trade rather than political intregation, around two-thirds of us choose either the looser relationship or complete withdrawal (see here).

So how can the political elite justify not listening to us?

One key factor was blurted out by Mr Flip-Flop Portillo on BBC R4 Today this morning. He said that as long as our EU "partners" see Britain as ringleader in the EU awkward squad, British politicos are unable to "enjoy" their meetings with EU counterparts. Poor dears.

More fundamentally, the elite really have convinced themselves that in general we peasants are too ignorant to have a useful opinion.

We can see this quite clearly in another European Commission opinion survey carried out in 2001. It comprised a series of focus groups carried out with groups of ignorant peasants from each EU member state (I'm sorry, but that really is the kind of thing Prog Con Nazis might have been doing in the mid-60s, a couple of decades after establishing the superstate). Here's a sample of what it says about the British peasantrys' attitudes to the EU:

"On the whole, the British have a very negative - and often caricatural - image of the European Union about which they know very little...

There is near-total ignorance concerning the origins of the European Union... The respondents believe that the objective behind the founding of the European Union was to develop trade among the Member States. Very few respondents are aware of the idea of creating a sort of “United States of Europe” that would join forces to create a political and commercial power that would be stronger than the sum of its parts and could rival the superpowers...

The respondents’ knowledge of the institutional functioning of the Union is just as mediocre."

Do they mean us? We clearly need an intensive programme of re-education.

The reality - as BOM readers will know only too well - is that we joined the EU on the basis that we were joining a large free trade area. Yes, we should have read the original Treaty of Rome and all those other EU superstate documents, but we were ignorant peasants so we didn't. We trusted our Tory government and concluded that if Red Robbo and Commissar Benn were opposed to the EU, it must be a good thing.

And when it came to the vote in '75, virtually the entire economics establishment told us we'd be mad to leave - couldn't we understand the vital importance of our companies having access to a large "domestic market"? Tyler was a government economist at the time, and having grown up in an era of seemingly unmitigated economic decline and the Austin Allegro, he was fully signed up to that argument.

But things look very different now.

Not only have we found out about the sinister and unwanted superstate project, but the economics have changed. One of BOM's very first posts highlighted the fact that we now derive no net economic benefit from EU membership.

Every serious analysis (eg the classic IEA paper by Brian Hindley and Martin Howe) shows the economic costs and benefits are now pretty well a wash. And while we might suffer some disadvantage from being outside the EU tariff wall, world tariffs are much lower than when we joined.

Moreover, as Global Vision argues, we'd almost certainly be able to negotiate withdrawal from the EU's political union while retaining the free trade arrangement (eg see this blog). We’d thereby escape the budget contributions, the CAP with all those inflated food prices, the social chapter/human rights/eco wibble costs, and of course the Euro.

It isn't Cam who has a crisis: it's our political elite. The people whose mediocre knowledge of contemporary economic realities, and whose wilful disregard of our wishes is forcing us to become a province of Greater Europe. Without even a shot being fired.

PS Just listening to PMQs. It seems Labour have decided that Cam's Euro Crisis is their killer argument. Brown himself - the man who lied so despicably and obviously over giving us a referendum on the superstate constitution - tells us he keeps his promises whereas Cam breaks his. He should get out more to meet some real people - may we suggest a stroll round Bracknell town centre.

Gudang grosir baju anak murah - harga pabrik !!
www.gudanggrosiran.com Categories: eu

Just Going Round In Circles

On BBC R4 Today, Evan Davis chaired a debate between Miliband and Hague on Europe. Well, it wasn't quite a debate, as such, but they were both on at the same time, and they were both given an opportunity to have their say.

As you'd expect, Miliband said Europe is good because it means we get to tackle those famous "global issues".

And Hague said Europe could be good, but not the way Labour have been surrendering all our freedoms and cash to it.

And Miliband said that Hague was being ridiculous conjuring up the Superstate bogeyman, and anyway, the Tories mainly wanted to get into bed with a load of East European homophobes.

And Hague said Labour had lied to the British people about the EU constitution referendum, and that Labour's much vaunted "influence over our partners" doesn't exist.

Anyway, at one point, an exasperated Davis pointed out that exactly the same discussion could have taken place at any time over the last 40 years: why have we not progressed?

Interesting. Because out here, we know precisely why (and in fairness, Hague did sort of suggest he knows too).

The reason is that it's the Commissariat who have driven the entire European project, not the people. Right from the moment Ted took us in, the Commissariat have consistently moved us much further along the integrationist road than most of us want. Their entire approach has been to push us forward, generally under cover of darkness.

Since that one referendum in 1975 (which we thought was about a free trade area) we have been given no effective say in the matter. Our wishes have been ignored - or at least, sidelined as an unhelpful obstacle to be got round by fair means or foul.

And it only takes a moment to think of many other issues where the majority view has been entirely ignored by the Commissariat, such as:

• Criminal justice - most people want far tougher sentences for serious crime than the lib Commissars are prepared to countenance, including - still - the restoration of capital punishment for the worst murders (abolished in the sixties against the clear view of the majority)
• Immigration - over the last decade, immigration has escalated wildly, with an extraordinary two and-a-half million non-British migrants coming in (net - eg see this blog); and contrary to commissariat assertions, it has not made us richer, although it has put huge pressure on public services, and made life more difficult for the immigrants already here
• Global warming - so far, the commissariat programme to cut carbon emissions has been presented as being big benefit and small cost, so no wonder it seems popular; but as the true burden of green tax and regulation becomes apparent, and as we enjoy those long promised warm summers, we will discover this is yet another area where the commissars have entirely failed to convince the people

What's that?

This is the Daily Mail talking, and therefore to be ignored?

You know, that's exactly what the Commissars say.

Gudang grosir baju anak murah - harga pabrik !!
www.gudanggrosiran.com Categories: eu, politicos