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.
|
December
1, 2005 (946 days since Iraq war ended)
Death Toll: 2,114 US - 98UK - >>6,164?
Iraqi - >>17,300? civilians - 25 media
Couples
are 'better off living apart under Labour'-
By Steve Doughty - Daily Mail, December 3, 2005
Labour's
benefit system is eroding marriage by rewarding couples if they
live apart, according to research. Splitting up is said to be
worth £58 a week more in handouts. Some couples with children
would be better off by ore than £200. The
report blamed Gordon Brown's tax credit system for favouring single
mothers and pushing married and two-parent families into poverty.
Tax credits were introduced by Chancellor Gordon
Brown in 1998 as the Government's main method of reducing child
poverty. But a series of studies show that they favour single
parents and discriminate against two-parent families. Evidence
produced by the Government'#s Office for National Statistics -
never published but leaked - has shown that 1.2million couples
are now 'living apart together', in many cases choosing to live
as a single mother and a boyfriend with different addresses.
Earlier this week the Daily Mail published a
revealing account of life on a tough Nth. Kensington estate by
London Youth worker Shaun Bailey. Mr Bailey said: "People
here understand you are better off as a single parent. It has
reached the point where a lot who are not single parents present
themselves as such because it makes financial sense."
The latest report, carried out for the charity
Care by former Inland Revenue consultant Don Draper, examined
74 couples and compared their incomes and the benefits they receive
with the amounts they could expect if they broke up. It found
that 64 would be worse off together than apart, even taking into
account the cost of running two homes. On average, a couple lost
£58 a week if they stayed together.
Seventeen of the couples would be worse of by
£100 and six would lose £150. One family, with average
earnings of about £25,000 a year, would gain £206
a week if it broke up. Overall, the study found that a couple
who chose to split up costs the Treasury between £6,700
and £7,700 a year in lost tax revenue and extra tax credits
and benefits.
Mr Draper said: "Tax credits need to be
changed so that they are as effective at relieving poverty in
two-parent families as they are in lone parent families and do
not discourage couples from living together. They are not well
designed for dealing with child poverty. While they lift most
lone parents out of poverty where the parent can work 16 hours
a week and earn the minimum wage, they fail children in poor two-parent
families. Many of these children are left in poverty."
Care also accused Labour of removing from mothers
the choice of staying at home to bring up their children. It said
that tax credits, which go ton only one parent and which do not
provide for the second parent in a home, ignore the financial
needs of parents who carry out child care.
The report said: "This implies that, for
the Treasury, running a home and caring for children is not real
work. For many women, looking after their children is a genuine
career option. Mothers who choose this should not find that they
are forced back into paid work because their families are left
in poverty by the tax credit system."
Care estimated that a single parent in a council
or housing association home needs to earn £81 to reach the
Government's poverty threshold of £182. A two-parent family
with a single earner, however, would need to make £304 to
enjoy a similar standard of living.
If you have
suggestions for additional subjects, or material to include in the
pages linked to the subjects listed, please contact the webmaster.
|
