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 17/2/05
|
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
|
Labour's
ruining my beloved NHS. That's why I won't be voting for them
By
Claire Rayner - Daily Mail, March 9, 2005
I
am passionate about the NHS. And I have the greatest possible
respect and gratitude for every-one who works in it. I was a nursing
cadet before the NHS was born and when Aneurin Bevan, a member
of the Labour Government then in power, launched it.
I
was bowled over with hope for the patients I helped to look after,
and by the wonder promise of health care free at the point of
need for everyone. We would be doctored from the cradle to the
grave, they told us. No wonder I became a Labour supporter and
loyal voter ass soon as I was old enough.
Yet
now, almost 60 years later, our precious NHS is in a parlous state.
Not that the Labour Government, which has presided over this mess,
would admit it. Only yesterday, John Reid, the Health Secretary,
made the staggering assertion that should the Conservatives win
the General Election, it would lead to a return 'not of cancelled
operations but of cancelled lives'.
It
is an egregious claim that will give small comfort to those patients
already lying in filthy wards or those who even now are forced
to wait hours in corridors that stink of sickness. For, despite
a century of medical progress, we are threatened by an epidemic
of hospital-acquired infections. The most virulent, MRSA, kills
5,000 people every year, the National Audit Office tells us.
That
is why we at the Patients Association are having a two-day summit
next month to allow health professionals to exchange ideas on
how to deal with the crisis.
Horror
Every
day, it seems, we are assailed with another horror story. Yesterday,
we were told that up to 32,000 patients die of preventable blood
clots each year - a toll greater than that from breast cancer,
Aids and road accidents combined.
Of
course, a considerable number of these people acquire clots outside
hospitals, but the Commons Health Select Committee was said to
have found 'shocking evidence' that medical staff were not aware
of the extent of deep vein thrombosis among surgical patients.
No
wonder patients in need of care are as frightened to go into hospitals
as they were in the bad old days of the 18th and 19th centuries.
And as one who contracted MRSA myself, after the last of four
knee operations, I know how they feel. Indeed,, so traumatic was
my last visit to hospital, when I almost died after falling into
a coma after problems with an anaesthetic, that my husband Des
and I vowed never to be treated in one again if possible.
I
have since spent more than £30,000 for round-the-clock nursing
at home rather than face the fear of a filthy ward. But not everyone
has 'rainy day' money to spend in this way.
Old
people are getting far too little care when they are ill and can
no longer look after themselves. If they want to stay in their
own homes, and can find someone to take full-time care of them
they are lucky. But if they deteriorate, the District Nurse, who
in early days of the NHS would come to help, clean and wash them,
can't do it today.
This,
according to Government, is 'social care' which must be paid for
by patients, not 'nursing care' which would be covered by the
NHS. When I sat on the Royal Commission on Long-Term Care of the
Elderly, we agreed that all care needed by sick elders should
be provided by the NHS.
We
had estimated the total cost of free care for all old people would
be affordable at just 1% of the total GDP, that is, the country's
total wealth. We worked it out that by 2010, it would have fallen
to 0.9%. Yet this Government ignored our most vital recommendations
and left the rest on a dusty shelf somewhere. We may be the fourth
richest nation in the world, yet we make old people suffer the
humiliation of a means test when deciding what they are entitled
to get from the NHS. Doesn't it make you ashamed of your country?
When
it comes to Alzheimer's disease and the other multi-caused dementias,
there is even more to suffer now. The National Institute for Clinical
Excellence (NICE) has decided that a drug, Aricept, that costs
just £2.50 a day per patient, is bad value for money, when
the Alzheimer's Society's own research proves that it helps many
sufferers live an immeasurably better life.
It
also makes it cheaper to care for them. Bur they can't have it.
That's cruelty, not care, surely. Not that this Government's indifference
to the sick is restricted to the elderly. Take Great Ormond Street,
a world-famous and relatively rich hospital for sick children,
whose appeals have raised somewhere in the region of £40
million but is now turning sick babies away
WHY?
Because it is £11.7million in deficit and can't take any
more patients after the Government says it treated too many last
year.
Profits
What's
more, they are not allowed to use the money they raised for the
care of sick children, because Government rules forbid the use
of such money for patient care. Behind all these developments
is the problem of 'outsourcing' - taking work the hospitals should
be doing but sending it out to be done by someone else.
The
results are there for all to see - and suffer from. In the past,
when hospitals employed their own cleaners, the work was done
much better because the cleaner took pride in the work. But the
powers-that-be in Whitehall and Westminster decided to sack all
the hospital's own cleaners and get outside firms to do the job.
I
suspect that many of these contract companies are interested only
in making profits by taking on people willing to accept the lowest
possible wages, giving them no training, and very little supervision.
To be fair to the Government, it has said it will do away with
the contract system. Eventually. The new Matrons who have been
appointed will, it seems, have the power to sack bad cleaners,
but we will have to see whether they will genuinely have true
powers.
But
there is another form of 'outsourcing'. When yo have an X-ray
or a scan, who do you think is the expert who studies the results
and gives them to your specialist? Or when you have a biopsy or
a blood test, who do you think reports on them?
It
should be the hospital's own specialist radiologist or pathologist.
But, in fact, tissue or blood could be sent abroad where the specialists
may not have as good a grasp of English and send back inadequate
answers.
Targets
The
British Medical Association is deeply worried about it and as
a patient, so am I.
Lastly,
but most importantly, the Government has bedevilled the NHS with
impossible targets, as if patients were cars on a production line
and doctors and nurses no more than lazy workers who need constant
prodding. Patients are people, and their illnesses need different
forms of care which take different amounts of time.
What
medical staff want to do is care for the sickest patients first,
and leave less important cases to later. But targets force them
to do their vital work the other way round, dealing with the less
important - which, of course, are quicker - cases first and leaving
the sickest patients who take longer to later.
And
that's not to mention the hours doctors are now obliged to waste
in meetings talking about these wretched targets. Crazy, I call
it, and so does every doctor and nurse I know.
So
that is why New Labour will go without my vote this time and I
would say to anyone who cares about the health and welfare of
her or himself and their families to join me. Find out which party
will trust experts who actually work in hospitals and let them
get on with the job and give them your vote.
|
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
|
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.
