|The Ten Candidates for President of France|
Fortunately being able to read French I am not dependent on the BBC for my understanding of the race as we have a very much sanitised version of the debate that is taking place presented to us.
Just as the BBC have yet to cover Ron Paul, the most influential candidate of all, in their coverage of the US elections the BBC have chosen to concentrate on the main parties.
Now I understand that the euphemistically termed 'other-hopefuls' are unlikely to win, they do not have the party machinery behind them to achieve such a success and the media of course is pushing the propoganda that it will be either of the two parties in a self-fulfilling prophecy that we in Jersey are all too aware of. But equally the official candidates of the two main parties are of no use to man, nor beast.
But it is they that conversely dictate the nature and direction of the campaigns of the main parties not least because they have a better handle on exactly what the concerns of the people are.
The leading 'other-hopeful' is Marine Le Pen of the Front Nationale, they have battled hard to remove the previous media mis-labelling of the party as a xenophobic group and correct this pointing out that they are protectionist of French interests and oppose membership of the EU.
Another significant player is Jean-Luc Melechon of a coalition of 'Far Left' groups does not think immigration is a problem but also wants to see a change in the relationship and role of the EU on and in France.
It is from these two candidates that it is possible to infer the key issues which are:
- The role of the EU
Taxation is of course the fundamental issue in any election, anywhere in the world. From taxation discussions extend to 'the role of government', 'the level of entitlement', etc. And it is these debates which are the underlying issue with regard to immigration and the EU.
The driver for immigration is the level of 'entitlement' that is freely given in a state. If people were not able to qualify for 'free stuff' such as healthcare, education, high minimum wages etc. then the driver of immigration would disappear along with the vast majority of future free-loaders.
I do not mean that the majority of Jersey's immigrants would leave if income support etc. were to suddenly be repealed, they after all are the harder workers and more dependable staff, they have far less need for such stipends.
It would be the Jersey born people who would be forced to either adjust their thinking to the economic realities of life or move somewhere else and resume their 'Jersey Way' of indolence and supplication.
I fully agree with David Warr and the Chamber of Commerce that it is Jersey people's attitude to employment which is the problem, somehow they have not connected the idea of 'work' with the idea of 'wages' and when employed seem to see wages as an 'entitlement' and work as 'optional' for maybe two hours a day out of the seven they are paid to complete.
I'm going to contradict myself here and mention that I only work with (as I never employ) Jersey people, but you have to filter through a lot of chaff to get to the wheat, not that I would not work with (as I never employ) some of the Polish people that I know, at least those that have not become infected with 'Jerseyness' yet, and I am afraid that there are many who have, but the good workers are valued by their companies and don't need to look for work.
I believe the basis of this to be our own civil servants whose work-shy, indolent ways have propagated to their children and into our own employment laws and is now actively encouraged by a States that wishes to be in absolute control of people, which is why I would never have a contract of employment with anyone.
This attitude is like most of our recent legislation adopted from EU law and therein lies the problem with the EU and comes at a very high cost in terms of the level of taxation required to fund it.
I want to vote for half of the Front Nationale's campaign and half of the Far Left coalitions plans, but the other half prevents this.