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 15, 2006 (1101 days since war ended)

Death Toll: 2443 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

Nuclear power won't need tax cash
JOHN BOWKER DEPUTY CITY EDITOR - The Scotsman Wed 17 May 2006

BRITISH Energy claimed yesterday that it would not need any more taxpayers' money to build a fleet of new nuclear power stations, saying that all that was required from the government was greater certainty over planning consent and the carbon trading market.

Robert Armour, the energy giant's general counsel, promised a cross-party group of MPs that BE was "not looking for subsidies" to help build new stations - a plan widely expected to be given the green light as a result of the current Energy Review.
Advert for The Scotsman Digital Archive

However, it warned that private-sector backing would be needed for the new-build, and therefore the government would have to "create a framework" for outside investors. This would include a reliable long-term price structure for carbon, and a simplification of the planning and pre-licensing processes.

Nuclear power currently accounts for more than a fifth of the UK's electricity, yet all but one of BE's eight plants are set to be decommissioned in the next two decades. Their replacement is at the heart of the Energy Review, which aims to establish how the UK can off-set the decline in North Sea oil and gas reserves.

Last night, the Prime Minister, Tony Blair, all but confirmed that the review would come out pro-nuclear, even though the deadline for responses has only just passed. He told the CBI dinner: "I [have] received the first cut of the [energy] review. The facts are stark. [They] put the replacement of nuclear power stations, a big push on renewables and a step change on energy efficiency back on the agenda with a vengeance."

Livingston-based BE was giving evidence to the trade and industry select committee on the challenges facing new nuclear build. The company had to be bailed out by the government two years ago - but is still expected to play a significant part in any future nuclear programme.

Armour was joined by Peter Spence, BE's head of strategy, and Keith Parker, chief executive of the Nuclear Industry Association.

Parker laid out the body's demands of the government, in an argument later echoed by Armour. "The government has to identify the desirable outcomes of energy policy - understood to be security of supply and a reduction in carbon emissions," he said.

Armour noted that the current European emissions trading scheme - which creates a market for carbon - had proved unreliable in recent weeks and is not set to last beyond 2012. "We need a framework up until 2050 if we are to build nuclear power stations," he said.

A key issue in the debate is who will pay for the clean-up process, but Armour said BE itself would set up a fund. "For each megawatt of electricity generated, we will pay a levy into a fund," he said.

However, it was that liability on its current stations that the government was forced to shoulder in rescuing BE in 2003. In a debt-for-equity deal, it insured the decommissioning fund in return for a 65 per cent stake in the company, which it has since announced it will sell.

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.