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
11, 2005 (741 days since war ended)
Death
Toll: 1,610 US - 88 UK - >6,164? Iraqi - >17,300 civilians
- 25 media
May
31, 2005 (761 days since war ended)
Death
Toll: 1,657 US - 89 UK - >6,164? Iraqi - >17,300 civilians
- 25 media
June
3 , 2005 (765 days since war ended)
Death
Toll: 1,670 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
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.
|
Blair
poised to say Yes to more nuclear power
JAMES
KIRKUP - POLITICAL CORRESPONDENT - The Scotsman - Jun 28, 2005
Key
points
• Blair indicates increased usage of nuclear power is likely
• UK in danger of missing Kyoto targets for emission reductions
• Scottish Executive has said it will block any stations
planned for Scotland
"If
you look at how much we are going to need to boost renewable energy
by over the next ten to 15 years, it's a lot. I'm not saying we
can't do it, but I am saying it's a huge investment and it's going
to be very tough to do, and there are other countries that are
going to make a different choice on nuclear power." - TONY
BLAIR
Tony
Blair yesterday gave his clearest signal yet that he will authorise
the controversial building of a new generation of nuclear reactors.
To the dismay of environmental campaigners, the Prime Minister
answered a question about new nuclear stations by casting doubt
on whether wind and wave farms or solar power were viable alternatives.
Mr
Blair also tacitly criticised the Scottish Executive's plan to
block any new nuclear power station in Scotland, saying it was
not "responsible" to rule out a new wave of generators
come what may.
The
current generation of nuclear stations is due to be wound down
over the coming years. Hunterston B, in Ayrshire, is scheduled
to close in 2011; Torness, in East Lothian, is due to run until
2023. Such closures mean Mr Blair, who has committed himself to
cutting British emissions, will have to decide over the next year
how to replace their energy output.
Nuclear
plants generate about 23 per cent of the United Kingdom's electricity,
and 40 per cent in Scotland. Renewables account for less than
3 per cent of all UK electricity, and about 11 per cent in Scotland.
The Prime Minister pointedly noted at his monthly Downing Street
news conference yesterday that other countries were embracing
nuclear power for their future energy needs.
"If
you look at how much we are going to need to boost renewable energy
by over the next ten to 15 years, it's a lot," Mr Blair said
of the prospect that such sources could remove the need to build
new reactors. "I'm not saying we can't do it, but I am saying
it's a huge investment and it's going to be very tough to do,
and there are other countries that are going to make a different
choice on nuclear power."
That
appeared to be a reference to the United States, which is moving
towards much greater use of atomic energy. President George Bush
has been pushing the US Congress to authorise the building of
the country's first new nuclear power plants for 30 years. A leaked
draft of a G8 paper obtained by The Scotsman earlier this month
showed that British negotiators were willing to allow the final
Gleneagles declaration next week to include references to "Generation
IV", a US energy department plan to encourage new nuclear
plants worldwide.
While
Scotland's energy policy is reserved to Westminster, planning
controls are devolved and, under pressure from the Liberal Democrats,
Jack McConnell, the First Minister, has agreed the Executive will
block the building of any new nuclear power stations because of
concerns about the disposal of radioactive waste.
Asked
about those reservations yesterday, Mr Blair insisted that he
did not agree with those who wanted to rule out new atomic power
stations at this stage. "Anybody who is responsibly looking
at this can't simply say, 'we are refusing ever to look at the
issue of nuclear power again'," he said.
However,
he accepted that new stations could be built only if there was
public acceptance and the project was affordable. Some experts
have suggested that private industry would be reluctant to pay
for new nuclear stations without massive government aid.
While
ministers including Margaret Beckett, the environment secretary,
are known to be highly sceptical about the case for new nuclear
reactors, Mr Blair is much more sympathetic. In particular, Professor
David King, the Prime Minister's chief scientific adviser, has
been arguing that nuclear power is the only way Britain can hope
to meet its Kyoto targets on emissions.
Figures
published in April showed that Britain's carbon dioxide emissions
rose by 1.5 per cent in 2004 - the second year running that emissions
have increased. That rise has put Britain in danger of missing
its Kyoto targets, an outcome that would severely embarrass Mr
Blair and badly wound his ability to argue for reductions in US
emissions.
While
Mr Blair repeated at his news conference that the government had
made no decisions on future energy plans, the SNP accused him
of a "soft-shoe shuffle towards new nuclear power stations."
Mike
Weir, the party's energy spokesman, said the government should
invest more in research into renewable energy. "There is
enormous potential for generating our electricity from wind, wave,
tidal, biomass and other renewable resources," he said.
That
call was echoed by Duncan McLaren, of Friends of the Earth Scotland.
"Nuclear power is expensive, unsafe and deeply unpopular,"
he said. "Nuclear waste remains dangerous for thousands of
years, and is likely to cost taxpayers billions of pounds to manage.
"We
still don't know what to do with the waste we have already created;
it would be crazy to produce more. The future lies with clean,
green renewable energy, not trying to breathe new life into discredited
nuclear power."
Norman
Baker, the Liberal Democrats' environment spokesman, said: "Nuclear
power is hopelessly uneconomic, and a new generation of power
stations would only be possible with a massive subsidy from the
taxpayer."
Despite
making climate change one of his top priorities for the G8 summit
at Gleneagles next week, Mr Blair sounded distinctly downbeat
yesterday. "I think there is no point in raising, or indeed
dampening, expectations before we get to the end part of the hard
negotiating," he said, drawing a contrast with rising hopes
of a deal on African poverty. "I
think that on Africa there is a real sense of coming together
... climate change is obviously very difficult."
If you have suggestions
for additional subjects, or material to include in the pages linked
to the subjects listed, please contact
the webmaster.
