Rescuing Democracy in the United Kingdom from our current Elected Dictatorship
|
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
Blair wants to leave his
mark on history - looks more like a stain to me.
Peter Thorndyke, Diss,
Norfolk - Daily Mail, May 23, 2005
I know I'm me - why do I
need an ID card?
"Sorry, officers, I
don't have an ID card. I never applied for one. It seemed a bit steep
at 300 quid. I do have my free passport, my driving licence and my
London freedom travel pass, each with my photograph. I have my NHS
medical card, with its lengthy number, given me at birth, my RAF
service book with my Armed Forces number, and a chit authorising me to
wear a few gongs -including a General Service Medal with Malaya bar,
for fighting communist terrorists on behalf of my country, or so they
told me.
"I've also got various credit
cards and store cards, all with my signature on the back, generally
good for buying the everyday requrements for life as well as the odd
luxury. If you decide to arrest me, I suppose I'll have to be
photographed and given another number, besides my PINs.
"I'm afraid I haven't got a
pension book; it was taken away."
"By thieves, sir?"
"No ... well, not exactly. By the
Government. By the way, may I see your warrant cards please, gentlemen?"
Oh dear, they've disappeared. E.
Harry Gumer, Romford, ESSEX - Daily Mail, June 1, 2005
NO means NO
When does NO mean MAYBE?
When it's not the answer the EU wants. With the courageous French
NON resounding in their ears, shabby, undemocratic self-interested
leaders of Europe propose ignoring the part of their precious
constitution that requires ratification by all members and
continuing without one of the biggest founder members to
prevent derailing the gravy train.
As in Ireland,
they refuse to accept any NO votes, ignoring the will of the people,
and re-stage votes until they can engineer the 'correct' answer. Sadly,
Foreign Secretary Jack Straw dances to their tune like a puppet on a
string. With tactics such as these, how can anyone really believe the
EU has our interests at heart. Letter from Steve Penny, Kingsnorth, Kent - Daily
Mail, June1, 2005
Surely
the French result makes the £1million the EU recently spent on a
treaty signing ceremony seem a trifle premature and extravagant. Letter from Keith Wiseman, Bury, Lancs. - Daily Mail,
June1, 2005
|
Britain has
traditionally been one of the biggest net contributors to the EU
because we do not get as much money back from Brussels in farm and
regional subsidies as our rivals.
According to
Treasury figures, between 1995-2002, Britain's average contribution
taking the rebate into account, was £2.6billion, or £43.55
per head of population.
The French -
the biggest recipient of farm subsidies - contributed £1billion a
year or £16.08 per head of their population.
|
|
Tony
Blair should know that respect comes by example - from the
top. If a country's leader has no respect for the rule of
international law and no respect for the truth, how can
he expect anyone to have respect. Letter
from P.J.Atkinson, Ashford, Kent - Daily Mail, January 12,
2006
The
Chancellor's single greatest act of vandalism in almost
nine years in office has been his wanton destruction of
Britain's private retirement industry. By slapping a massive
tax on pension funds, now worth
£7.3billion a year, he has helped to turn
the best private retirement industry in Europe into a basket-case
in perpetual crisis. Together with the adoption of European
accounting rules - which make it much riskier to operate
a company pension scheme - hundreds of firms have shut their
final salary plans to new employees and slashed benefits
to existing staff. From
Allister Heath: "I've seen the future and its grey"
in THE SPECTATOR - April 15, 2006
Nine
years ago the British people were sold a fantasy of clean
and competent government of principle and honesty. Its shiny
wrappings stripped away, the product now reveals its true
nature: Personal greed, arrogance, incompetence, shamelessness,
rash warmongering and an inability to accept - as is clear
to almost everyone else - that it is time to go. Editorial
- The Mail on Sunday, May 28, 2006
|
October
9, 2006 (1262 days since war ended)
Death
Toll: 2744 US - 119 UK - >650,000? civilians - 25 media
October
28, 2006 (1279 days since war ended)
Death
Toll: 2811 US - 120 UK - >650,000? civilians - 25 media
A
surrender by Blair over probe into the Iraq 'catastrophe'
By
James Chapman - Deputy Political Editor - Daily Mail, November
1, 2006
Tony
Blair was last night forced to cave in to calls for a full inquiry
into the 'monumental catastrophe' of the Iraq war. The Government
survived a potentially fatal rebellion on the demands - but only
after promising there would be an official probe into the conflict
and its aftermath. Des
Defence
Secretary Des Browne completed a day of gradual retreat, declaring
after the crunch Commons vote: "When the time is right, of
course there will be such an inquiry."
Blair
must face his day of reckoning
Comment
- Daily Mail, November 1, 2006
Fearful
and flustered, the Prime Minister goes on the offensive
as Conservatives call for a public inquiry into his gross
mishandling of Iraq. Accusing them of nothing short of
treachery to our servicemen, he asks through his spokesman:
"When troops are serving overseas, in whose interests
is it to make such an announcement?"
Well,
we all know who would stand to lose most from public scrutiny
of the Government's conduct - and we don't mean British
troops, struggling bravely to do the impossible job with
which Mr Blair has saddled them.
NO.
There is nothing remotely unpatriotic about David Cameron's
demand for a thorough investigation into every aspect
of the war.
True,
he and his party backed the invasion - an houourable position
at the time, although one with which this paper profoundly
disagreed. But there is no inconsistency about voting
for the war then and insisting on an inquiry now, when
Government's handling of it has been so disastrous.
Indeed,
it is a sign of political maturity that Mr Cameron is
seeking to loosen the Tories' attachment to a foreign
policy virtually dictated by the White House.
The truth is that the case for a truly independent inquiry
is unanswerable.
It
must look into the abuse of the democratic process, which
saw parliament and people deceived by a 'sexed-up' dossier
put together by a spin-doctor. It must examine how and
why the Government fell totally under the spell of Washington.
It must investigate what appears to have been a complete
lack of planning for equipping our troops or reconstructing
Iraq.
Above
all, it must find ways to ensure that a catastrophe like
this misbegotten war can never happen again.
Last
night the Commons rejected the call for an immediate inquiry.
But now even Defence Secretary Des Browne is forced to
admit there must be one 'when the time is right'.
Mr
Blair's day of public reckoning is coming.
|
Mr
Blair had insisted that agreeing to a growing chorus of demands
from Opposition parties for a review now would send the 'wrong
signal'. But throughout the day, an apparently panicked Downing
Street and a string of senior ministers dropped ever broader suggestions
that an inquiry would be held once British troops had left Iraq.
Mr
Blair is facing increasing turmoil over Britain's military involvement
in the country - with concern deepened yesterday by the revelation
that the cost of the operation had now passed £4billiion.
Last night, the Government's majority in the Commons was more
than halved in a vote on a call for an inquiry into the build-up
and aftermath of the war by a committee of senior MPs.
Many
in Westminster believed defeat would have been a terminal blow
for an already weakened Prime Minister. After an impassioned three-hour
debate, the Government's majority of 67 was slashed to just 25.
In a significant shift in their position, the Tories joined with
other Opposition parties to vote against the Government. Traditionally,
they have been reluctant to criticise any aspect of Iraq policy,
having supported the initial decision to go to war. Analysis of
the division list later showed that 12 Labour MPs voted against
the Government.
Foreign
Secretary Margaret Beckett came under attack from the Conservatives
after claiming that an inquiry while British troops were engaged
in Iraq would undermine their morale. Her Tory shadow William
Hague pointed out that the Commons had held debates and inquiries
into the Allies failed attempt to seize the Dardanelles during
the first World War and the fiasco of the British campaign in
Norway during the Second World War.
"The
case for a searching inquiry at the right time is sufficiently
strong that the Government should have no problem in acceding
to it and I am astonished that they are not able to do so,"
he said. In a clear attempt to win round rebel Labour MPs and
some Tories, Mrs. Beckett all but conceded that an inquiry would
be held once British troops
leave the country.
She
told MPs: "It is perfectly sensible and legitimate to say
that there will come a time when these issues will be explored
in the round and in full so that we can learn whatever lessons
we can from them."
Earlier,
Mr Blair's official spokesman insisted committing to a fresh inquiry
now would send a 'message of weakness' to insurgents seeking to
plunge Iraq into full-blown civil war. But he said British forces
'continued to learn lessons' in Iraq and he had 'no doubt' that
there would be an opportunity to look back over those lessons
in 'due course'.
Mr
Hague said later: "We clearly did make progress today. This
morning the Government was resisting an inquiry, this evening
they have conceded one."
But
senior MPs from all parties attacked the Government for not granting
a proper debate on Iraq for almost three years, It was an 'extraordinary
disgrace', said former Tory foreign secretary Sir Malcolm Rifkind.
Former
Lib Dem leader Charles Kennedy, making his first Commons speech
since resigning in January, said: "I'm afraid the truth will
out one day. On the political tombstone of this Prime Minister
will be the word IRAQ."
Senior
Tory MP Sir Peter Tapsell said: "As a result of his tragic
misjudgments in the Middle East, our Prime Minister is more deeply
steeped in blood than any Scottish politician since Macbeth."
There
was further concern over Ministry of Defence figures revealing
'peacekeeping' operations in Iraq cost the taxpayer £958million
in the last financial year - up from £910million in 2004/5.
In
2003/4, which included part of the war and its immediate aftermath,
the figure was £1.3billion. With the bill for 2002/3 standing
at £847million, the total cost reached £4.026billion
by the end of March this year.
As
the debate raged in Britain, the violence continued in Iraq. More
than 40 people were missing last night after kidnappers ambushed
minibuses travelling to Baghdad. In the capital, a suicide car
bomber struck a wedding party, killed 11, including four children.
One
in five British soldiers wants to quit the Army 'at the earlier
opportunity' a Ministry of Defence survey has found. Many troops
blame the number and frequency of operational tours for their
desire to leave.
If you have
suggestions for additional subjects, or material to include in the
pages linked to the subjects listed, please contact the webmaster.
