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

WWW silentmajorityspeaks.com

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.

May 20, 2006 (1106 days since war ended)

Death Toll: 2455 US - 111 UK - >60,000? civilians - 25 media

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

STOP PRESS

Promises, promises ... (public sector pensions) at a soaring cost

by Alex Brummer - City Editor - Daily Mail, May 22, 2006

The bill for Labour's pensions promises to the public sector is soaring, figures show. The cost to the Treasury reached £21.3billion last year; up £5.6billion on 2004/5, after the government adopted a new approach to the calculation. It will rise to an estimated £23billion in 2007/8.

Even more shocking for taxpayers is that the figures take no account of recent settlements between Labour and the public sector unions. Only last week hundreds of thousands of teachers were allowed to keep their early retirement entitlement.

In 2005 the then Trade secretary Alan Johnson bought off industrial action by promising existing government workers that their rights to inflation-proofed final salary pensions and retirement at 60 would be preserved in aspic. The total pensions black hole in government accounts is currently estimated at £530billion, making it a huge burden for future generations of taxpayers. It dwarfs the shortfall in company pension schemes.

New estimates of pensions costs are contained in the just-released Public Expenditure statistical Analysis (PESA). It quantifies in detail the burden to the Exchequer of supporting swelling public sector payrolls and retirement provision. The analysis shows the figure will have doubled between 2000/1 and 2007/8.

Among the facts behind the big jump is the Government's 'Agenda for Reform', which has led to huge pay rises for doctors, nurses, NHS consultants and teachers. A second factor is a change in the way future liabilities are calculated, bringing them more in line with the private sector.

What is really worrying is that the new data still take no account of the generous pension deals ministers have bestowed on public sector and local government workers in an effort to buy off the unions. The surging cost of keeping the public sector in clover represents a serious budgetary challenge for government. It shows the difficulty the Chancellor will have when he unveils his new Comprehensive spending Review in 2007.

Annual bill for public pensions are in fact much lower than the total cost because of the contributions to pension schemes by employees themselves. Nevertheless, the net figure is £5.6billion in the current financial year and will be £5.9billion in the next. This is equivalent to 3p on income tax and comparable to the National Insurance surcharge imposed in 2001 to pay for better health services.

It will not be until next year that the impact of recent public sector pension cave-ins will be properly quantified. This, together with the million people added to the official payroll since Labour came to office, will be an unwelcome legacy for future Chancellors.

Among the worst aspects of government profligacy is that the net cost of funding public sector pensions is broadly the same as the £5billion annual tax raid on private pensions launched by Mr Brown in 1997.

B A C K

If you have suggestions for additional subjects, or material to include in the pages linked to the subjects listed, please contact the webmaster.