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
|
Mr
Howard stepped up the pressure as he spoke of the threat
to greenfield land from the 150,000 people settling in
Britain every year. He said:
"Of
all the housing the Government says we need for our growing
population, a third is what they expect from immigration".
The
CBI yesterday threw its weight behind 'managed migration',
saying a points system could prove a 'flexible and effective
way of managing the flow of economic migrants'.
David
Hughes, Political Editor, Daily Mail, April 23, 2005
|
Asylum
housing bill hits £3billion in Blair's time
by
David Hughes, Political Editor, Daily Mail, April 22, 2005
The
cost of housing asylum seekers has reached an astonishing £3billion
since Tony Blair came to power, Conservatives said last night.
They said that was the amount spent by council taxpayers in England
in the eight years since Labour's victory. But in 1997, the figure
was only £13million.
In
a statement, the Tories said: "This is money that could otherwise
have been spent on front-line services or keeping soaring council
tax bills down. "
Utterly
useless
Comment,
Daily Mail, April 22, 2005
You
thought it couldn't get worse? Think again. While a clueless
PM can't give Jeremy Paxman single straight answers on
how many illegal migrants are living here - though asked
20 times - his immigration Minister knows even less.
Yesterday,
they wheeled out Des Browne to clear up the mess left
by Blair. And rarely can Radio 4 listeners have heard
such blustering incompetence.
Mr
Browne claims there is no official estimate of the illegals
staying on. That is false. A leaked Whitehall memo, which
his Government tried to suppress, suggests the figure
could be as high as 500,000 (excluding dependents).
He
says he doesn't know how many failed asylum seekers go
home voluntarily. that is asinine. Those who pay people
smugglers and take risks to get here won't tamely take
the next plane out. 'Volunteer' leavers can be only a
handful.
He
says identity cards will allow accurate checks in future.
That is both ignorant and defeatist. ID cards won't be
handed to unsuccessful asylum seekers and won't be compulsory
until 2012.
The
chaos deepens. We now learn that migants no longer have
to reveal details of their prison records - an open invitation
to criminality, in stark contrast to the way other countries
handle this issue.
The
system is an utter, shameful shambles. Under baffled Blair
and useless Browne, is it really any wonder?
|
Local
Government Minister Nick Raynsford responded: "I think it
is deplorable the way they are trying to whip up hostility against
vulnerable groups of people. That strikes me as an indication
of the debased morality of Michael Howard's Tory Party."
When
the Prime Minister addresses the asylum issue today, however,
he is expected to echo Mr Howard's stance that it is not racist
to talk about immigration. It will be Mr Blair's first major speech
on the subject during the election campaign. He is worried that
Mr Howard has made all the running on the most explosive issue
of the campaign, and will highlight Labour's own policies on immigration
and asylum.
The
Government disarray over asylum deepened yesterday as Immigration
Minister Des Browne committed an embarrassing gaffe over ID cards.
Admitting he did not know how many illegal asylum seekers are
in this country, Mr Browne said it would only be when ID cards
are in place - 7 years from now - that it will be possible to
make 'accurate estimates' of the scale of the problem.
Yet
in a Parliamentary answer last month, Mr Browne himself said:
"It is not intended to issue identity cards to failed asylum
seekers."
The
Browne blunder came hard on the heels of Mr Blair's Wednesday
night grilling by the BBC's Jeremy Paxman when he was asked 20
times to say how many failed asylum seekers are in this country
- and each time was unable to do so.
It
triggered Tory charges of 'incompetence, chaos and cover-up' in
Labour's handling of asylum policy. Interviewed on BBC Radio 4's
Today programme, Mr Browne said it was not possible to put an
accurate figure on the number of people here illegally. "Until
we change the system of checking people in and out of the country
by our proposal for e-borders (a high-tech control programme),
until we have ID cards, and until we have visas which have biometrics
with them, then we will not be able to give appropriate and accurate
estimates of the numbers of people who've got permission to come
into this country, or who are not here legally."
The
minister was challenged on research that had been conducted for
Home Office by Professor John Salt, director of the Migration
Research Unit at University College London. Professor Salt is
said to have put the figure of illegal immigrants at about 500,000.
But the figure was removed when the Home Office published its
report.
"Professor
Salt gave us a report in which he put together his view of the
methodology that was being applied in countries which have much
different circumstances to ours. We looked at that," Mr Browne
said.
"He did himself a calculation which he has put in the
public domain (0f 500,000). But he accepts himself that the methodology
which he came up with has a significant degree of speculation
about it. And in my view, it doesn't apply to the circumstances
of the UK. My view ... is that we will not be able to come to
an estimate which we should put out officially until we can put
in place particular ID cards ... and that we can put proper e-border
controls in."
Yet
Mr Browne specifically ruled out issuing ID cards to failed asylum
seekers in a Parliamentary answer on March 17. "It is not
intended to issue identity cards to failed asylum seekers,"
he said then. "However, by reducing the opportunity for failed
asylum seekers to work illegally, ID cards will make it less practical
to remain in the UK as a failed asylum seeker."
Last
night Tory home affairs spokesman David Davis attacked Mr Browne's
comments. "The minister may pretend that ID cards are the
solution but by his own admission ID cards would not apply to
failed asylum seekers," he said. "To pretend ID cards
are the answer to Labour's failure on illegal immigration is deceitful
and shows Labour have no solutions to the asylum and immigration
crisis they have presided over. At the next election people will
face a clear choice: Limited and controlled immigration with the
Conservatives or unlimited immigration under Mr Blair."
|
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.
