Godfrey Bloom

Good old Co-op. Power to the people! Well, maybe not. The Co-op has just circulated a new pamphlet "Say YES to clean energy. Join our new campaign to support a clean energy revolution". As you may have guessed already, the revolutions happen at the top of a windmill - when the wind is blowing, that is.

The Co-op has joined up with Greenpeace to call on the UK Government to meet its renewable energy goals (e.g. build more wind farms); it has even given customers a handy leaflet to be returned Freepost to the Manchester office so that their names can be added to a petition headed by the Co-op Campaigns team. Wow, they are keen to be green.

Interestingly, the Co-op farms over 50,000 acres of land in the UK, claiming to be the UK's biggest farmer. Farmland is as good as anywhere to put up a wind turbine taller than Nelson's Column, and to collect the funds generated by each turbine. You can see half a dozen of them on their farm near Wisbech:

http://www.co-operative.coop/farms/where-we-farm/map/coldham/

One of their farms is on the Normanby estate near Scunthorpe, where the windmills are going up already. Normanby is Samantha Cameron's ancestral home before her marriage.

As a rough guide each windmill produces £150,000 worth of electricity a year, and receives a subsidy paid for by adding a bit to everybody's electricity bill totalling £250,000 a year. That is index-linked for the next 25 years. Am I surprised that the Co-op is agitating in favour of renewables?

My constituency is graced by two other Co-op farms, one at Swinefleet near Goole, and the other at Wykeham, near Scarborough, both pretty flat areas not unlike Normanby. No doubt the word is 'watch this space', because if there's space to put one, these farmers may soon be growing windmills. Screw the people.

The other day I came across a book called 'The Cold War on British Muslims". I wondered what to expect. No surprises, however. It is a little demonstration of frustrated left-wing activists bitter about the support that the individuals and groups they see as their opponents are receiving.

The long title practically says it all. The second part of the front page title reads thus:-

"'An examination of 'Policy Exchange' and 'The Centre for Social Cohesion'".

These are two respected 'think-tanks' respected whether you agree with their various thoughts or not.

Two of the authors of the book are freelance writers, Scots, with a connection to the University of Strathclyde, while the third author is a professor of Sociology.

The University of Strathclyde was formed in 1964 out of the combination of Glasgow Tech, and the Scottish College of Commerce. Later in 1993 it added Jordanhill College of Education to its campus.

There is virtually no argument worth tuppence in the book. It is focused on the two charities above and their funding. The authors have gone to considerable lengths to find out who supports them financially, and by how much. As several of the lead donors are Jews, there is also a strong anti-Jewish bias. (I don't like to use 'anti-semitic' as Arabs are also Semites).

That is about it. They report some occasions when the two think-tanks have said something about British Muslims.

There is no reference to the fact that all Muslims are not the same. There is no reference to the bitter divisions between Sunni, Shia, Ahmadi, and others leading to the members of some 'denominations' being more open or less open to becoming terrorists.

They disparage the major donors to the think-tanks. It is a bit like "we know where you live...."

We are used to a bit of terrorism in this country. For a few decades it was disaffected people from Ireland, now it is disaffected people whose link is not another country but their understanding of a religion. This book is not a lot of help in this respect.