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
|
May 31, 2005 (761 days since war
ended)
Death Toll: 1,657 US - 89 UK - >6,164?
Iraqi - >17,300 civilians - 25 media
June 17, 2005 (779 days since war
ended)
Death Toll: 1,716 US - 89 UK -
>6,164? Iraqi - >17,300? civilians - 25 media
June 26, 2005 (788 days since war
ended)
Death Toll: 1,737 US - 89 UK -
>6,164? Iraqi - >17,300? civilians - 25 media
July 6, 2005 (798 days since war
ended)
Death Toll: 1,751 US - 90 UK -
>6,164? Iraqi - >17,300? civilians - 25 media
August 24, 2005 (847 days since
war ended)
Death Toll: 1,869 US - 93 UK - >>6,164?
Iraqi - >>17,300? civilians - 25 media
September
29, 2005 (883 days since war ended)
Death Toll: 1,928 US - 96 UK - >>6,164?
Iraqi - >>17,300? civilians - 25 media
October
11, 2005 (895 days since war ended)
Death Toll: 1,956 US - 96UK - >>6,164?
Iraqi - >>17,300? civilians - 25 media
October
20, 2005 (904 days since war ended)
Death Toll: 1,986 US - 97UK - >>6,164?
Iraqi - >>17,300? civilians - 25 media
October
25, 2005 (909 days since war ended)
Death Toll: 2,001 US - 97UK - >>6,164?
Iraqi - >>17,300? civilians - 25 media
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.
|
November
17, 2005 (932 days since Iraq war ended)
Death Toll: 2,080 US - 97UK - >>6,164?
Iraqi - >>17,300? civilians - 25 media
After
eight years of promises, Labour kill the pension reforms meant
to solve the crisis that THEY
created Written by Benedict Brogan and Becky Barrow
- Daily Mail, 25/11/05
Landmark
reforms designed to solve the pensions crisis were in disarray
last night before they were published. Gordon Brown was accused
of sabotaging the long-awaited Turner Report by effectively declaring
its proposals unaffordable. His views were made clear in a leaked
letter to the report's author Lord Turner just six days ahead
of publication.
What
chance now of real reform Comment, Daily
Mail, November 25, 2005
Sabotaged
before he has even reported. Filleted like a kipper after
all his crucially important work, Adair Turner of the
Pensions Commission has reason to feel betrayed by the
government that set up his inquiry in the first place.
Indeed,
everyone is let down. Here is an issue, after all, that
affect's the lives of missions who once hoped for a decent,
comfortable old age. Yet the way it is handled by New
Labour owes more to low politics than high principle
Consider.
Pensions are in crisis. Because we are living longer and
fertility-rate has dropped, it is more difficult to support
the growing number of pensioners by taxing a shrinking
working population. Matters are
made worse by stealth taxes that have drained £100billion
out of a once vibrant private pensions industry, blighting
the expectations of millions who thought they were protected
by company final salary schemes. At the same time, New
Labour's bloated army of bureaucrats - up 600,000 since
1997 - adds to the burden, with an £817billion debt
in unfunded, public sector pensions liabilities.
In
this deepening mess, Lord Turners report next week could
have been the springboard for the informed, national debate
we so desperately need. Already, some leaked recommendations
- like retirement at 67 - illustrate the seriousness of
the decisions we face. Yet at every turn, this Government
frustrates his efforts.
Last
week, Ministers cravenly caved in to the unions and agreed
public sector workers could still retire at 60 -subsidised
by private sector employees who may have to soldier on
until 67. At a stroke, it overturned the Turner principle
of equal treatment, blowing a hole in his whole package.
Now Gordon Brown administers the coup de grace.
The
Chancellor's objection to the proposition that pensions
should rise in line with earnings rather than prices may
seem purely technical matter. But the real meaning is
devastating. Mr Brown is signalling that the Turner proposals
are too expensive. And without his support, of course,
prospects of radical reform are dead in the water.
To
be fair the Chancellor has reason to be concerned about
public finances. Growth is way below optimistic 3.5% Treasury
forecasts, which means a serious shortfall in revenue.
At the same time, Rail-track is £17billion in debt
- a deficit that may not appear on the Government's balance-sheet,
but is still a huge public liability. There is a crying
need to rein in the spending juggernaut.
That
is why Mr Brown tries to restrict public sector pay settlements
to 2% (though how ripe, when he has not only presided
over the soaring bureaucracy that worsens the pensions
crisis, but a sharp rise in public sector salaries too).
But
now we return to low politics.
The
Chancellor's bombshell on pensions isn't just abut costs.
The Treasury is resentful at the way Lord Turner's Pensions
Commission is invading its turf and hates the way it is
making the running on an issue of critical financial importance.
Meanwhile,
Mr Blair himself speaks with forked tongue. Publicly,
he supports turner, but the truth is he has cold feet
over a Commission that proposed potentially unpopular
policies, such as retirement at 67. Doesn't that explain
all the spinning against it?
So
it is that base politics undermines Lord Adair Turner's
three years of work. What a travesty of good governance.
Pensions policy joins welfare, health and education as
another area where much needed reforms are ducked and
opportunities missed.
But
heck, it's only the British public that suffers, isn't
it?
|
The
result was a day of confusion - and the overriding impression
that the government was no closer to tackling the £60billion
pensions black hole than it was when it came to power 8 years
ago. The Chancellor left Westminster in no doubt that he is unhappy
with the way Lord Turner has drafted his findings. Senior sources
confirmed the report would 'inform' a lengthy debate on the future
of pensions - but its recommendations were likely to be ignored.
They criticised Lord Turner for exceeding his brief, making detailed
suggestions rather than offering a broad-brush blueprint for reform.
Mr
Brown let it be known that one key element of Lord Turner's plans
- linking increases in the state pension to earnings rather than
inflation - would cost too much. He was backed by Tony Blair,
who declared than any reforms must be 'affordable'. What emerged
was a picture of a government shying away from difficult solutions.
Experts predict there is a shortfall of at least £60billion
in the pensions system, largely because of the growing number
of pensioners and the shrinking workforce.
But
with the Government's finances looking increasingly delicate,
the Chancellor is uneasy about any solution that might require
higher taxes. He has made clear a decision on pensions will not
be taken until the next Parliament, in what could be his first
term as Prime Minister. Mr Brown reinforced the message in a speech
to the Institute of Directors last night, when he said he would
only spend 'what we can afford' on pensions.
Lord
Turner, a former head of the CBI, is due to publish his report
on Wednesday (Nov.30, 2005). Recommendations are expected to include
raising the retirement age to 67, increasing the basic state pension
from £80 to £109 a week and linking it to earnings,
and setting up a new national savings plan for all workers.
The
leak of the Treasury letter and apparently aggressive briefings
from Mr Brown's key allies, brought accusations that the Chancellor
was attempting to intimidate Lord Turner into watering down his
conclusions. Lord Turner himself is understood to be deeply angry
at the way his findings have been 'spun' in advance by the Government.
The
intervention also appeared to be timed to pull the rug from under
John Hutton, new Blairite Work and Pensions Secretary, who was
making his first speech on retirement policy. In his first major
speech in the job, Mr Hutton echoed the call for any change to
be affordable.
"As
the country ages, governments will face pressure to spend more
on pensions," he said. "We have an obligation to continue
to manage public expenditure prudently and responsibly. There
will be no relaxation of our fiscal discipline."
Downing
Street insisted Mr Blair had no intention of shelving the report.
A spokesman said the three principles that would inform pension
reform were that changes must be 'fair, affordable and that they
do something to encourage people to save more."
But
opposition politicians were scathing abut the day's events. Shadow
Chancellor George Osborne said: "To sabotage the Turner report
in this way is disgraceful. Why has the government promised a
serious 'grown-up' debate on the future of pension provision,
only for the Chancellor to throw his toys out of the pram in this
way? It is extraordinarily arrogant of Gordon Brown to try to
shut down the much needed public debate on a crisis of his own
making before it has begun. I would be very interested to know
what Tony Blair thinks of Gordon Brown pulling the rug from under
a report the Prime Minister commissioned."
Shadow
Work and Pensions Secretary Sir Malcolm Rifkind, added: "Gordon
Brown has form on this. It was he who helped
create a pensions crisis with his £5billion raid on pension
funds, now he's trying to scupper the proposed reforms which the
Government itself commissioned. Turner Commission is a
vital piece of work which will contribute to the debate on how
we tackle the pensions crisis, something the government should
consider properly. At this key moment in the pensions debate,
we need openness, flexibility and joined-up thinking, not this
high-handed attitude from the Chancellor. If Gordon Brown is intent
on rubbishing the Turner report out of hand, perhaps he will tell
us what his proposed alternative is."
Gordon
Lishman, director general, Age Concern England, said: "Labour's
pensions policy has stalled for three years. Pensions reform is
one of the biggest challenges facing the government and a prompt
and bold response to the Turner Report is needed. We already have
widespread agreement on the need for a radical, long-lasting pensions
settlement which lifts today's and tomorrow's pensioners out of
poverty and gives women a fair deal. The Pensions Commission will
pass the baton on to the Government next week - we urge it to
respond quickly with a clear timetable for action."
If you have
suggestions for additional subjects, or material to include in the
pages linked to the subjects listed, please contact the webmaster.
|
