Silent Majority Speaks
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
|
May
20, 2007 (1450 days since war ended)
Death
Toll: 3422 US - 148 UK - >1,000,000? civilians - 25 media
This
site has had 
visitors
Tougher
jail sentences DO deter criminals
By
Ian Drury, Political Reporter - Daily Mail, May 19, 2007
A
Home Office report has concluded that stiffer prison sentences
deter crime - flying in the face of Labour plans to hand out softer
punishments.
Tony
Blair, John Reid and Lord Falconer have claimed that too many
criminals are being jailed. But the study found that convicts
jailed for less than a year are almost 50% more likely to commit
a fresh crime within two years of their release than those locked
up for between one and four years. And they are twice as likely
to break the law as those jailed for at least four years.
'Chronic
lack of prison places'
This
report - slipped out by Whitehall officials - is embarrassing
for the Government. Only this month, Lord Falconer, the newly-created
Justice Secretary, announced that tens of thousands of burglars
and other thieves would receive community punishments instead
of jail sentences under plans to ease chronic prison overcrowding.
Sir,
would Sir like a smoking or a non-smoking prison cell
? - by a Daily Mail reporter - May 19, 2007
Prisoners
sharing a cell are to be invited to choose: Smoking or
nonsmoking? They are being given the hotel-style option
because of the impending ban on lighting up in public
and at work.
Prisoners
will still be able to smoke in their cells when the ban
is introduced in England on July 1,, because it is their
'home'. A cell mate who doesn't want to share with a smoker
will be able to move to a nonsmoking cell, leaving the
governors to juggle prisoners around already overcrowded
jails.
Prison
warders reacted angrily yesterday, saying they will be
forced to leave the building to have a cigarette while
convicted criminals can relax with a smoke in their cells.
Taxpayers'
cash will also be used to ensure that cells are smoke-proof
to protect the health of inmates who don't light up.
The
Home Office defended the decision, but politicians criticised
the move. Martin Callahan, MEP for the North-East who
sits on the European Parliament's environment, public
health and food safety committee, said: "It seems
to me that if they can't even enforce the smoking ban
in a prison, how are they going to enforce it anywhere?
Why should the taxpayer pick up the cost of moving prisoners
and the expense of extraction equipment. It's just ridiculous.
"Prisoners
give up certain rights when they go to jail and smoking
should be one of them. It should be stopped, full stop."
A
Home Office spokesman said: "Prisoners will be able
to smoke in their cell because it is equivalent to their
home. However, all the parts of the prison that are enclosed
public spaces will have the smoking ban in force. Wardens
are not going to be able to smoke anywhere in the prison."
She
added: "Measures will be put in place to make sure
there is no exposure to smoke outside of the cells. It
will be the responsibility of governors at the prison
to make sure smokers and nonsmokers no longer share cells."
|
In
March, the Prime Minister signalled that there should be greater
emphasis on rehabilitating offenders, tougher community sentences
and crime prevention. And in January, Home secretary Mr Reid caused
outrage by urging the courts to use jail sentences only as a last
resort.
It
meant paedophiles, muggers, burglars and heroin dealers walked
free from court. But his own department's research into thousands
of ex-inmates - published two months earlier - concluded 'Custodial
sentences of at least a year are most effective in reducing re-offending.
Figures
showed that 70% of convicts jailed for under 12 months re-offended
within two years, compared with 49% of those sentenced to between
one and four years and 36% of those serving at least four years.
Researchers
found that men and women released from prison within a year had
on average 13 previous convictions - suggesting shorter jail sentences
were failing as a deterrent. Because these offenders were often
hooked on drugs such as heroin and crack cocaine, they repeatedly
resorted to crime to fund their habits.
The
report said prisoners released from longer sentences were less
likely to re-offend because they were older, had time to be rehabilitated
and had been convicted of more serious 'one-off' offences.
The
study, compiled in 2005 and 2006, looked at the re-offending rates
of 45,100 criminals who walked free in 2003 - 15,300 from prison
sentences and 29,800 who were given non custodial sentences. It
found that criminals were more likely to re-offend if instead
of prison they were given a community rehabilitation order or
one of the Government's flagship drug testing and treatment orders,
which meant staying strictly drug-free.
However,
community punishment orders - where an offender is, for instance,
forced to sweep the streets - were more successful than prison
in tackling re-offending. Last night the Conservatives blamed
the 'abysmal' situation on Labour's failure to build enough prison
places.
Home
Affairs spokesman David Davies said: "Prisons can work as
long as there is sufficient capacity to ensure offenders can serve
suitable sentences and where they can settle in one place long
enough to complete their training and drug rehabilitation courses..
Why won't Government act on its own findings? Instead of addressing
the chronic lack of capacity in our prisons they simply seek any
method of keeping offenders out of jail." Building more cells
would 'ensure victims get justice and the public are protected,
as well as giving prisoners a real chance at rehabilitation -
helping to reduce crime in the long term.'
'At
sixes and sevens'
Philip
Davies, the Tory MP who uncovered the report, said: "The
Government are at sixes and sevens. Because the Chancellor consistently
refused to invest in building more prisons, that has resulted
in them being full. The Government now have to pretend that prison
does not work after all, and that it is tougher not to send people
to prison and to give them so-called tough community sentences."
A
Home Office spokesman said the relationship between prison sentences
and re-offending rates was 'quite complex'. He said the report
did not contradict the Government's view that prison should be
reserved for serious, dangerous and violent offenders, But he
added: "Better options for dealing with less serious offenders
exist."
If you have suggestions
for additional subjects, or material to include in the pages linked
to the subjects listed, please contact the webmaster.
|
