Rescuing
Democracy in the United Kingdom from our current Elected
Dictatorship
|
Come
back Gilligan, all is forgiven. Penny Young, Diss, Norfolk,
to The Guardian, February 24, 2005
Spin,
not face-to-face confrontations with the voters, is the
Government's chosen method of communication. Ordinary
people are dangerous. Ordinary people might ask a question
which throws a politician 'off message'; the Cabinet member
might reveal himself or herself to be a human being like
us, and not a programmed android. Worse still, he or she
might tell the truth. Ann Leslie - Daily
Mail, September 16, 2004
Power
cut, please
Labour's
pollsters have Tony Blair running scared, because they have
informed him that if turnout at the next election is below
50%, the result will be a hung parliament. This would be
good news for those of us who, viewing the damage inflicted
by recent governments, would like nothing better than a
Parliament powerless to do anything. Letter from Ron
Phillips, London W14 - Daily Mail, February 17, 2005
|
Tony
Blair's pledge cards made no mention of pensioners. Perhaps
they're the jokers. Letter to the Daily Mail from Brian
Green, Daventry, Northants - February 22, 2005
The
Guardian's Polly Toynbee says 'a profoundly nasty streak'
among voters worried about poverty, crime and immigration
might cause them to vote against the Government. Isn't
it time we replaced the present electorate with one more
to Polly's liking? Ephraim Hardcastle, Daily Mail,
February 24, 2005
Back
to the future
'Forward
not Back' is quite wrong: we must go back - back to clean
hospitals with more medical staff and fewer managers;
back to education with proven standards.
Back
to police on the street and solving crime; back to increased
employment in industry, back to ministers who stand up
for this country and back to democratic government. Then,
perhaps, we can move forward. Letter from S, M. Butler,
Shoreham-by-Sea, Sussex - Daily Mail, March 23, 2005
Virtues
of a secret ballot
Sir
- Concerning postal votes (report Mar 23) what is the
first principle of a democratic political vote? Answer:
THE SECRET BALLOT.
It
is obvious that a postal ballot is only as secret as the
moral strength of the voter. With the infinite propaganda
powers of today's electronic media, it is frighteningly
easy for devious politicians to promote politically correct
or "cool" or, most wickedly, "honest and
transparent" voting patterns, where someone failing
to vote "with his/her group" must "have
something to hide".
Postal
voting should, at best, be allowable only to persons who
are required to be stationed away from their constituency
on government business. A few temporary disfranchisements
may result, but nothing is perfect.
Letter from J. B. Lewis, Bognor Regis, West Sussex - The
Daily Telegraph, March 25, 2005
SIR
- Why on earth are people still insisting on voting for
the Labour Party this May 2005. It has lied and cheated
the public again and again during the Iraq war, immigration,
violent crime and hospital waiting list figures. It has
introduced stealth taxes and even been caught rigging
the postal voting system. To the Editor, Daily Telegraph,
from Philip Priestley, High Wycombe, Bucks. April 19,
2005
|
Asylum
housing bill hits £3billion in Blair's time
NO
IDEA!
Blair
flunks his 20 Questions
20 times Tony Blair was
asked how many failed asylum seekers are still in Britain. 20
times he was unwilling to say
By
David Hughes - Political Editor, Daily Mail, April 21, 2005
Tony
Blair was reduced to near-incoherence by Jeremy Paxman last night
(on BBC1 TV) as ge admitted he has no idea how many rejected asylum
seekers are in this country.
The
Premier was asked no fewer than 20 times to give a number - but
ducked and weaved as he failed to do so. Sounding increasingy
desperate, he insisted that speculating about numbers was 'pointless'.
Yet
one of this Government's own experts recently estimated the total
of illegal immigrants here as 500,000 - though his findings were
suppressed by the Home Office.
The
electrifying BBC1 exchanges dramatically illustrated the chaos
in Britain's asylum system. They carried echoes of Paxman's famous
interview with Michael Howard, then Home Secretary, who was pressed
14 times to say whether he had ordered the sacking of a prison
givernor.
In
last night's showdown, one of a set of interviews with party leaders,
the Newsnight presenter tried even more persistently to get a
straight answer from Mr Blair.
The
Premier told him: "I can't be sure of the numbers of people
who are illegals in this country, for the same reason that the
previous government couldn't."
Pressed
for a rough estimate, he said there was no point speculating.
At one stage, as the Prime Minister blustered, Paxman challenged
him: "You have no idea."
"Well,
it's not a question of having no idea," Mr Blair replied.
"Well
what is your idea Prime Minster?" Paxman snapped back.
"Well,
what you, hang on," said a flustered Mr Blair. "What
you can say is how many people are appplying for asylum, month
by month, how many people are you removing."
Paxman
countered: "You don't know."
As
the grilling continued, Mr Blair sought refuge in what happened
under the last gogernment, nearly a decade ago. Je sais: "For
the reason the previous government gave, yo cannot determine specifically
how many people are here illegally."
He
denied that Labour had lost control of the country's borders.
The estimate of half a million immigrants living illegally in
Britain - with an estimated 100,000 dependents - came from Professor
John Salt, an authority on immigration. He wscommissioned by the
Government to find ways of counting those living here illegally,
most of whom are failed asylum seekers.
But
all figurees were left out of his report when the Home Office
published it last year.
The
Premier's fumbling performance pout asylum and immigration firmly
back on the political agenda. Anger at the situation had intensified
last week after it emerged that Kamel Bourgass, the Al Qaeda terrorist
who murdered Detectige Constable Stephen Oake during a police
raid, was a failed asylum seeker who had not been deported.
Shadow
Home Secretary David Davis said last night: "It is little
wonder that immigration is such a shambles under Labour if Mr
Blair thinks trying to work out the scale of illegal imjigration
is pointless. Mr Boair should come clean with the british people
and admit it, instead of continuing to deny there is a problem.
Paxman
also put the Premier on the defensive over Iraq, with Mr Blair
insisting he had nothing to apologise for. Challenged directly
on whether he acepted any responsibility for the death of weapons
scientist David Kelly, he made clear he did not.
"It
wa a terrible, terible thing to have happened," the Prime
Minister said. "I don't believe we had any option, however,
but to disclose his name."
Mr
Blair was also carefujl to leave open the possibility of tax increases
if Labour wins on May 5. Asked: "You are going to have to
raise taxes after the election, aren't you?", he replied:
"NO, you can't say that on the basis of the spending plans
we have. The spending proposals are adequatey catered for by the
tax plans we have got."
Bit
those spending plans run only to the mid-point of the new Parliament
2008, leaving open the threat of rises if Labour wants to continue
its lavish spending on pubois services.
Mr
Blair appeared more certain, however, that he will not introduce
any kind of local income tax to supplement council tax. He said:
"For me, local income tax has always been a problem."
Despite
the roating at Paxman's hands, the Premier denied wanting to be
'shot' of his job. He said: "There's masses for me to do
and that's what gets me up in the morning. I've set a limit for
my time and then it's for somebody else to take on the baton and
run with it."
The
half-hour interview was recorded 'live', and there was no editing
before it was transmitted some two hours later. Mr Blair would
have been braced for a tough encounter. On Monday night Paxman
gave Liberal Democrat leader Charles kennedy a comprehensive mauling
in the same slot. Tomorrow it will be Michael Howard's turn to
face the newsnight inquisitor.
|
Tactical
Voting
As
UKIP member for several years, I believe the greatest
threat facing the British is the potential loss of our
independence to govern ourselves. Once Brussels gains
complete control, everything else we are voting for in
the coming election is academic. The real decisions will
be made in Brussels by people we can't vote out.
Much
as I support UKIP's aims, I now believe the single most
important goal for British voters is to remove Blair and
his rotten Government before they complete the process
of removing our sovereignty. Only a vote for Michael Howard
will do this - Letter to the Daily Mail from Tony Beverley,
London SW10 - April 7, 2005
Perhaps
Ann Widdecombe was right about Michael Howard, but it
should have been KNIGHT with a K, and he could have saved
us from the monsters Blair and Campbell - Letter to
the Dail Mayil from Les Fletcher, Rhos-on-Sea, Colwyn
Bay, Wales - February 18, 2005
After
a clear vote against them, we still got eight non-elected
Regional Assemblies. When we vote against the EU Constitution,
we'll get them anyway. Letter from P.Cove, Aylesbury,
BUCKS.- Daily Mail, January 31, 2005
THE
TIMES slavish support for the Government worries some
members of the paper's staff, not to mention any perspicacious
readers who are left. Political editor Philip Webster
was questioned about this when he addressed colleagues
as part of an in-house 'masterclass' exercise. Small wonder.
One of his Blair-worshipping subordinates wrote a news
story yesterday poo-pooing the row over Labours anti-semitic
poster mocking Michael Howard, saying it was merely £5million
worth of 'free publicity' for the party. Ephraim Hardcastle
- Daily Mail, Febrauary 2, 2005
Hold
the front page
Further
to BBC bias (Mail), very often on BBC Breakfast and Breakfast
With Frost, coverage of the morning papers is censored.
If the front page of the Daily Mail is critical of Tony
Blair and his Soviet-style Government, it is not shown,
although the front pages of all the other newspapers are
shown. A supposedly independent broadcasting body is acting
as censor for this Government - an absolute disgrace.
Letter from Peter Fish, Chippenham, Wilts. .- Daily Mail,
February 17, 2005
SIR
- Why on earth are people still insisting on voting for
the Labour Party this May 2005. It has lied and cheated
the public again and again during the Iraq war, immigration,
violent crime and hospital waiting list figures. It has
introduced stealth taxes and even been caught rigging
the postal voting system. To the Editor, Daily Telegraph,
from Philip Priestley, High Wycombe, Bucks. April 19,
2005
|
The
REAL NASTY PARTY- How
Labour is the true home of spite, bigotry and contempt for the
public
For
the health of our democracy, we, the people of the United Kingdom,
must find a way to force Mr Blair to resign
Such
defiance of the democratic process and the will of the majority
of we people of the UK, must be exposed by voters as a matter
or urgency, and not just in the two by-elections we have had this
July and the European elections in June 2004. But how can this
be done?
The
most effective way of getting our deceitful PM to resign would
be to mobilise the army of Labour MPs currently in the House of
Commons and get them to demand it, the loss of their seat to be
a penalty if they did not. All voters in Labour-held constituencies
need to write a letter along these lines to their local Labour
MPs:
|
Dear
Despite
his absolute and unequivocal assurances over the past year
of the serious risk to our security of Saddam Hussein's
'weapons of mass destruction', Prime Minister Blair
has admitted, that the threat was non-existent. For that
critical error of judgement and for his gross incompetence
in handling this very important issue, I ask you to take
immediate steps to ensure that Tony Blair does the honourable
thing and resign without delay..
I
would therefore be much obliged if you would propose and
help mobilise a Parliamentary vote of 'No Confidence' in
Mr Blair which, despite Labour's huge majority, would leave
the PM with no option but to resign.
If
I get no reply to this letter, I shall assume you will continue
to support Mr Blair as our Prime Minister. In such circumstances
I shall not vote for you in the forthcoming General Election.
Signed:
|
Simple,
non-violent, protest letters along these lines on a variety of
issues could be the basis for re-vitalising our democracy and
increasing voters' interest and participation in politics. Download
a printable copy of the above letter here.
There
is another way for the voice of the silent majority to be heard,
a voice that made sure broken promises would not only be revealed,
but punished in subsequent elections.
In
the year available before the General Election expected in 2005,
many topics are available as ammunition, each one asking questions.
A weapon for our purpose will be the results of Opinion Polls
in individual constituencies using ICM, NOP, Gallop, Mori
or YouGov.
Questions
suggested for this purpose are listed here.
CAST
YOUR VOTE ON A VARIETY OF OTHER IMPORTANT ISSUES HERE.
Current
and prospective Parliamentary candidates of all Parties running
for election could share a platform at public forums in every
constituency. They would be presented with the results of
polls on this issue expressed by the majority of voters in that
constituency.
The candidates could be asked if their own views and that of their
Party manifesto corresponded with the polls, and if not, how they
intended to represent the will of the majority of local voters.
Local and National Press, Radio and TV coverage would be arranged
and the results published on this web site.
Here
is another powerful strategy for using your vote effectively in
the forthcoming General Election. Send your sitting and prospective
MPs a letter defining your requirements if they want your vote.
This example deals with the proposed
EU Constitutional Treaty.
Your
letters would end: "If you do not answer
this letter, I shall take it that you intend to follow the Government
line. I shall act accordingly in the forthcoming General Election.
Or
why not create a questionnaire that you send to all the candidates
in your constituency, getting them to give yes/no answers to questions
of your choice, and ending it with the same paragraph(above).
Download
a printable example of the questionnaire.
It
is high time for the people of this United Kingdom to stop allowing
themselves to be manipulated by politicians. We need our representatives
in Parliament to genuinely reflect the view of the majority in
their own constituency, even if this means going against their
personal and/or their party's policy. While they may argue their
case, hoping to change the minds of the majority in their constituency,
they should ultimately be obliged to reflect the majority view
of those who elect them.
It
will be argued by politicians of all parties that most voters
don't have the knowledge necessary to express an opinion on important
subjects at issue, and that our vote is a form of delegated democracy.
We should argue that it is their duty to ensure that we voters
do have ready access to such information as is necessary to form
an intelligent opinion. That, after all, is one main purpose of
Opposition Parties in our Parliamentary Democracy.
Most
important of all, such proceedings would rekindle in voters their
latent interest and obligation to cast their vote, knowing that
the candidate of their choice would be more likely to act in accordance
with their wishes. A much higher turnout in elections would be
the result.
Contact
your local Party Chairman. Gain his support for setting up public
forums in your constituency on these, as well as any other relevant
topics, well before the next General Election expected in 2005.
You should then, depending on the integrity of the candidate of
your choice, feel fairly certain that your view on any subject
being debated in Parliament will more accurately be reflected
by your representative in that assembly.
