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
Blair
cannot ignore our outrage over Iraq
Tony
Blair's speech after the election appeared contrite. His
admission that he had lacked experience was impressive.
But it turned my blood cold when our Prime Minister said
that in the case of Iraq, it was time to 'move on'.
Can
any phrase so callously and insidiously wipe the slate
clean? 'Moving on' is now part of the lexicon of British
life and I think it's dangerous.
Blair's
contrite speech reminded us that if you want to stand
up against the status quo in this country, you won'tk
be merely disagreed with - a welcome and natural part
of democratic life - you'll be made to fell you're speaking
from some weird place called 'The Past', not the right-on
Labour concoction known as 'The Future'. You haven't 'mlved
on'.
How
can any society that seeks to challenge its Prime Minister
on the legality of a war that killed thousands, sit there
while its leader sweeps it aside, telling it, in that
grubby little phrase, to 'move on'. A large secgion of
British society has embraced the vaacuity oif the words
'moving on' without examining the destructive power of
the message.
Our
lives, in private and public, are littered with examples
of people casually rationalising a my8riad selfish and
destructive actions with the nauseating observation: "Yeah,
it was wrong, but it's time to move on ... "
'Moving
on' is a linguistic short-cut to a guilt-free zone. Guilt
is regarded like cellulite or yellowing teeth, inherently
bad and in need of banishment.
But
guilt has a vital function because it reminds us all that
our actions may be wrong. How does Labour plan to enforce
anti-social behaviour laws and discipline in schools if
the prevailing message is 'I don't want to look at my
guilt. Let's move on'.
This
Government's obsession with ditching the past and pursuing
the future is creating a sordid ideology of relative moralities.
So let's all stop using the horrible little phrase 'moving
on'. Our actions, good and bad, aren't erased by it. In
domestic trivialities, it's cheap. In war, it's obscene.
Fiona
MacDonald Turner - Warninglid, W. Sussex - Daily Mail,
May 11, 2005
|
May
11, 2005 (741 days since war ended)
Death
Toll: 1,610 US - 88 UK - >6,164? Iraqi - >17,300 civilians
- 25 media
Britain
by the back door
An
Italian island is under siege from thousands of Boat People -
illegal immigrants risking all for a new life. This MAIL investigation
reveals an unfolding humanitarian and political crisis - coming
soon to OUR shores . . . .
From
Tom Rawstorne in Lampedusa, Italy - Daily Mail May 13, 2005
Two
hundred miles off the coast of Sicily and the latest chapter in
the history of mass migration is being written. Crammed into a
34 ft open boat, 215 men cling to one another as their vessel
wallows dangerously low in the waters of the Mediterranean. It
is heading, slowly but surely, due north - away from Africa and
towards Europe. This time, the boatload of would-be asylum-seekers
are lucky. The sea is calm and they've been spotted by the Italian
authorities who tow them into the harbour at Lampedusa, a remote,
seven-mile-long island that is Italy's southernmost territory.
Later,
the locals stand on the quayside and watch as the men, all aged
between 20 and 50, are led ashore and given the once over by medics
wearing face masks and latex gloves. Later still, they will be
taken to a detention centre to be fingerprinted.
Of
course, they've seen it all before but this spring the 'clandestini',
as they are known, have been arriving in unprecedented numbers,
more than 2,000 in total, 600 of whom have arrived in the past
24 hours. Given that there are only 5,000 Lampedusans it's easy
to understand why there's a palpable sense of tension in the air
as the bar-owners and restaurateurs prepare for the summer tourist
season. And they're not the only ones who should be concerned.
For these immigrants don't want to stay in Lampedusa or even on
the Italian mainland, where many will be shipped home in the days
to come.
No,
as I hear at every turn, the 'clandestini' plan to continue their
journey north across Europe, heading for Germany, France and,
of course, Britain. 'I've no doubt that the majority of these
people are heading for the UK,' said an impeccably placed British
immigration source. 'We know this is happening because immigrants
picked up in northern France as they attempt to cross the Channel
can be traced back by their fingerprints to Lampedusa, their point
of arrival in Europe.'
For
Lampedusa has become the back door to Europe, a landfall for tens
of thousands of desperate men (and the occasional woman and child)
willing to risk everything for a life in the First World. Although
the last leg of the journey starts on the northern shores of Africa,
they come not just from that troubled continent but also from
India, Pakistan, the Middle East. Everywhere, really.
All
claim they are fleeing persecution and should be granted asylum,
but experience has shown that the genuine refugees make up but
a fraction of their number. The rest are fleeing grinding poverty
and disease, a pattern of movement that some would say is as old
as it is inevitable. But, others argue, sitting back and doing
nothing in the face of this growing tide of humanity is simply
not an option.
First,
this is a human tragedy, one that last year cost the lives of
over 2,000 would-be immigrants who drowned in the Mediterranean
en route to their new lives. There are, of course, the financial
costs inflicted on Britain and the rest of Europe, with billions
of pounds devoted to covering the benefits and healthcare needs
of bogus asylum seekers.
And
then, there are the political implications of uncontrolled immigration,
the real or perceived problems that play into the hands of the
Far Right, which are used as a lever to whip up nationalistic
electoral support. It is already happening across Europe - in
the Netherlands and Germany - and Italy is no exception as the
extraordinary words of Umberto Bossi, leader of the extremist
Northern League party, reveal only too clearly.
'I
want to hear the roar of the cannon,' he said, calling for the
Italian navy to be mobilised against this new generation of boat
people. 'The migrants must be hunted down for better of worse.
At the second or third warning, "boom", fire the cannon
at them. Otherwise this will never stop.
To
the people of Lampedusa, the spring used to be a time of hope
and anticipation. The wild winter, which this year saw raging
seas cut them off from Sicily, 150 miles to the north, for more
than two weeks,, is behind them and a lucrative sun-drenched,
tourist-filled summer lies ahead.
But
in recent years the anticipation of the coming months has been
marred. The fairer weather and calmer seas nowadays heralds the
start of the immigration season. Last year, 10,000 clandestini
landed on the island, a number many fear could well be exceeded
in 2005.
'We
have intelligence that there are 7,000 to 8,000 people massing
on the north coat of Africa ready to set sail,' says Romeo Cavalin,,
who as commander of the Lamedusa branch of the Guardia di Finanzia
(Customs and Excise) is in charge of intercepting them at sea.
'It is bad, really bad. It is worse than other years because it
has started earlier.'
Pointing
to a map, he explains how Libyan port, Zawia, is a favoured departure
point. Immigrants gather there from all over the world, travelling
by land and sea to a country with porous borders, where the authorities
lack cash or inclination to keep tabs on who is or isn't there.
'Once
in Libya, a place on a boat costs about £500,' explains
Commander Cavalin. 'The traffickers fit in as many people as is
physically possible, then off they go. Smugglers do not accompany
them, Instead one of the immigrants will be given a compass and
told to steer due north.'
Those
on board have bought their passage on the understanding that they
are going to the Italian mainland but, unknown to them, the boats
have only enough fuel to reach Lampedusa. Creeping along, in good
weather, the 120-mile journey takes 15 hours. But if the elements
are against them some will never arrive, their overladen, open
wooden boats breaking up or overturning as soon as a significant
swell rises.
The
boats are too low in the water to be picked up by radar, but the
lucky ones will be seen by Italian spotter planes before being
towed to safety by ships manned by Commander Cavalin's men. Once
on dry land, the job begins of trying to process the new arrivals.
Given that all will have long ago destroyed their documents, it
is an impossible task and all the authorities can do is ask them
where they are from. But, as I discovered as I watched a boat
carrying 41 immigrants arrive in Lampedusa, all parrot the same
or similar stories.
'We
come from Kashmir,' one young man told me. 'We come from Palestine,'
said another, both adding they they had boarded the boat in Turkey
and had been at sea for 'four or five days'. Neither is telling
the truth. As one aid worker later explained, the men were almost
certainly from Egypt or Bangladesh, but claiming they are from
troubled regions such as Kashmir or Palestine improves their chances
of claiming asylum'
And,
adds Commander Cavalin, they certainly didn't leave from Turkey,
pointing out that such a journey would have been impossible given
the amount of fuel they had on board. 'They say Turkey because
Italy has no agreement with Turkey', he says. 'In reality they
come from Libya, but they don't say that because they know we
would return them there.'
The
commander is referring to a controversial agreement brokered between
the Italian and Libyan governments late last year. It allows the
Italians to immediately send the boat people back from whence
they set sail. Unsurprisingly, these instant deportations have
attracted strong criticism from human rights organisations, who
claim they are illegal and ride roughshod over their rights to
claim asylum. Seemingly unconcerned, the deportation flights to
Libya continue, the Italian authorities hoping that their uncompromising
stance will dissuade others from following.
But,
as the immigrants and the traffickers know only too well, less
than half of those who land in Lampedusa are dealt with in this
way. 'The trafficking is highly sophisticated,# explained the
British immigration source. 'They are aware that the detention
centre on Lampedusa can hold only 190 people and so they flood
it with more than 1,000 people in 48 hours. It means that the
authorities have to act fast the disperse them. They know some
will be sent back to Libya, but more will be shipped to holding
camps on the mainland. Once there, they are held in detention
camps for 60 days while a decision is made on their claim. If
it is refused then they are given five days to leave the country.
Leave they might, but not to go home. Instead, many try their
luck in another European country - Britain being a particular
favourite because of the widely help belief that when it comes
to asylum seekers it is an easy touch.'
'The
people arriving in Lampedusa are Egyptians, Iraqis, Tunisians,
Moroccans, Palestinians and Liberians. There are also a lot of
them who have historic, colonial links with the UK - from Pakistan,
India and Sri Lanka,' the source continued. 'Once in Italy they
will call a pre-arranged telephone number and their trafficking
contact will arrange for them to be placed in lorries or given
grain tickets so the can continue their journey north across Europe.
Trains are increasingly popular because there are few if any passport
checks between European countries now.'
Incontrovertible
proof of the journey from Lampedusa to Britain is to be found
in the Italian island's detention centre fingerprint records.
But still more evidence comes from the Italian Interior Ministry
which has traced phone calls between criminal gangs in Italy and
immigrants arriving in the UK. The calls, it transpired, were
made to arrange how and when the immigrants would repay outstanding
debts relating to their passage. Not, it is safe to say, without
recourse to a job in the black market.
Back
in Lampedusa and it's left to Dr Sebastiano Siragusa, the island's
mayor, to ponder a way out of this awful mess. He cant understand
why countries like Britain aren't more concerned, 'Lampedusa may
be the front line against "clandestini", but Britain
should be worried, too,' he says. 'OK, if you head north from
Africa then the first place you hit is Lampedusa, but the place
after that can be Britain, Everyone has to wake up and see we
have a big problem here. We need a commission to deal with this,
to pull together resources, to combat this threat of illegal immigration.'
Dr
Siragusa suggests that one solution would be to group immigrants
together in holding centres spread across the whole of Europe
and they could then be dispersed as and when seasonal work arose.
'But what do I know?' he says. 'It's an idea, a start.'
Indeed,
at least it's a concrete suggestion, more some will say than can
be said of Tony Blair who has ambitiously pinned his hopes of
stemming the flow of immigrants from Africa by tackling its root
causes - Aids, famine and poverty. 'We must now accept the utter
futility of trying to shut our borders to problems abroad,' he
said before Christmas. 'Famine in Africa will affect our country
because it will be a trigger for mass immigration. Conflict, too,
drives millions to flee their homes.'
True
enough, but should Europe just give up then, and trust in Mr Blair's
ability to 'cure' Africa? Sir Andrew Green, who runs the independent
thinktank MigrationWatch UK thinks not. 'We certainly need to
provide more effective help to Africa. But it's extraordinary
to suggest we shouldn't tighten up our border controls'
Another
suggestions the creation of detention camps in North Africa itself.
In this way it would be possible to identify genuine asylum claims
without the need for them to fall foul of traffickers or having
to risk their lives with perilous sea crossings. It was an idea
championed by former Home Secretary David Blunkett and found strong
support from Germans and Italians. But last October the idea was
blocked by the French (on humanitarian grounds) As far as new
proposals go, that is pretty much that. Amid such a vacuum, it's
only to expected that more extreme suggestions will be raised.
So,
for the moment in Italy at least, it is the fervently Right-wing
Northern League which has seized the initiative. Back on Lampedusa
and the party's local secretary, Angela Maraventano, recently
organised a public march against illegal immigrants. Poster displayed
around the town proclaimed: "Lampedusa is exploding! Thanks
Europe. We don't want detention centres on our island. Stop illegal
immigration!!!"
Miss
Maraventano, an attractive 38-year-old mother of two, believes
the Italian navy should now be called out. Not to shoot the migrants,
but to pluck them from the sea and keep them on board until they
can either be returned home or sent to centres on the mainland.
And, she warns, if nothing is done then the island's economy will
suffer. 'Lampedusans are now rebelling against the situation,'
she says. 'I can really see this tourist season going down the
drain. For example, last week I had six guests from Milan and
after two days they left - they were scared at seeing hundreds
of immigrants arriving at the port. God has given this island
the sea, the sun, the beaches - everything. But the problem that
overrides everything is immigration. It is shameful, an embarrassing
scandal
And,
politics aside, she's right. A tiny boat, fighting to keep afloat
in the middle of the Mediterranean with 218 desperate people on
board is a terrible scandal for all concerned.
|
Tory
abstinence
Hardly
a day goes by without some failed Tory politician or media
commentator talking of the Conservatives 'having to reach
out beyond their core vote'. What rubbish. They
haven't even got their core vote any more - which is why
they've lost three elections on the trot. The 'core vote'
of genuine Conservatives went to the Referendum Party,
then to UKIP, or (the majority) to that largest party
of all - 'abstainers' - and they still haven't come back.
Digging
in dustbins for Liberal Democrat policies, trying to attract
those who aren't Conservatives at all is a recipe for
disaster. All the party needs is to go back to the principles
that produced 18 years of successful government - cut
the parasite state, lower taxes, bring back freedom, enterprise,
the family and democratic nationhood.
- Letter to the Daily Mail from Rodney Atkinson, Gateshead
- May 11, 2005
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.
