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
|
Abortion
the new birth control
By
Steve Doughty - Social Affairs Correspondent - Daily Mail, May
27, 2005
The
number of abortions in England and Wales is expected to hit a
record of almost 200,000 this year. Remorselessly rising levels
of abortion mean that more than one in five of all pregnancies
now ends medically. This brought fresh protests from the pro-life
lobby yesterday and warnings that the free availability of abortion
has reached the point where hundreds of thousands of women and
girls treat it as a form of contraception.
The
latest rise follows the pre-election row over abortion which rocked
Tony Blair and left Labour temporarily alarmed that dismay at
the spread of abortion might eat into its vote. The row was started
by Cardinal Cormac Murphy-O'Connor, leader of Roman Catholics
in England and Wales, who said voters should bear abortion in
mind at the election.
The
Daily Mail revealed this month that one in three abortions is
now carried out on women who have had at least one before - a
strong indication that abortion is increasingly used in place
of contraception and for lifestyle reasons. Yesterday's figures
from the Office for National Statistics show that in the first
nine months of 2004, 147,500 abortions were performed, meaning
that the final number for 2004 is likely to exceed a record 193,000.
This
will compare with a 2003 total of 190,700 abortions. In 1997,
there were just under 180,000 abortions a year in England and
Wales. Among girls under 18, more than 45% of pregnancies ended
in abortion. Four out of ten pregnant girls under 20 had abortion,s
and nearly one in three of those between 20 and 24, when many
wish to stop a baby preventing their smooth progress through higher
education and the early stages of a career.
Phyllis
Bowman of the Right to Life group said: "One reason for this
tragic rate of abortion is that many people do use it as a method
of contraception. Women are told that abortion is safe. But a
percentage of girls who have an abortion will never conceive again.
Nearly half of all girls who become pregnant before they are 18
will have abortions, and they are putting at risk their fertility
and their chances of having a family."
The Secret
Abortions
Government
backs the right of doctors to keep pregnant under-16s' parents
in the dark
by
Tim Utton, Science Reporter, Daily Mail, July 31, 2004
Girls
under 16 can have abortions without their parents' knowledge under
new Government guidelines announced last night. The move was condemned
as depriving mothers and fathers of involvement in possibly the
most important decision their daughter ever makes.
For
the first time, the Department of Health is telling doctors and
health professionals that the confidentiality of under-16s must
be respected if they want to terminate a pregnancy. The revised
guidelines follow the case of 14-year-old Melissa Smith, who was
allowed to have a secret abortion last May after speaking to a
community health worker at school.
They
were announced just days after figures showed a shocking rise
in sexually transmitted infections - with 80,000 cases of chlamydia
- fuelled by an increase in casual sex among the young. Britain
has the highest teenage pregnancy rate in Europe and critics last
night claimed the latest move by the Government threatens to increase
the number of unwanted conceptions. One in five abortions now
involves a teenager, with some 3,500 a year under 16.
The
new guidance enshrines for the first time a doctor's right to
proceed with an under-16 abortion without parental consent. Previously,
under guidance issued in 1986, doctors and other health professionals
were advised to deal confidentially with youngsters who came to
them for advice on other matters of sexual health. But there was
no requirement of confidence on abortion - letting doctors to
tell parents if they chose.
Now
doctors are under pressure not to consult parents. The new document
states: "This guidance applies to the provision of advice
and treatment on contraception, sexual and reproductive health,
including abortion."
Under-16s
should have the same right to confidentiality as adults, ministers
said. Tory MP, Ann Widdecombe, warned that the new guidance raises
the prospect of very young girls keeping abortions secret. "What
worries me is the blanket phrase 'under-16s', she said. "What
about ten-year-olds? Surely parents of ten-year-olds need to know
if their children are sexually active, let alone having an abortion."
Tim
Loughton, shadow children's minister, said: "This is another
nail in the coffin of the family, which should be the first port
of call for children who need help at such a difficult and sensitive
time."
Josephine
Quintavalle, chairman of the Committee on Reproductive Ethics,
said: "Far from bypassing the family - in particular the
mother- they should be trying to strengthen the relationship between
parents and children. This is another panicking, knee-jerk effort
to try to address the appalling rise in sexually transmitted infections
and teenage conceptions."
Melissa
Smith, from Mansfield, took the first of two pills as part of
a chemical abortion process without her mother, Maureen, knowing.
She later regretted her decision, by which time it was too late.
Mrs Smith said last night: "I am appalled that the Government
think a child under 16 is mature enough to make a decision to
have a termination alone. My family's experience shows this is
not the case. What happened to families sitting down and talking
through problems together?"
The
Departnebt if Health said the new guidance is simply a clearer
and more specific version of the 1986 guidelines. It said when
a teenager consents to an abortion but cannot be persuaded to
involve a parent, every effort should be made to find another
adult to provide support.
Public
Health Minister, Melanie Johnson, said: "Providing young
people with support and advice about relationships and contraceptions
is essential if we are to reduce the number of teenage pregnancies
and tackle the spread of sexually transmitted infections.
Dr
Vivienne Nathanson, of the British Medical Association, said:
"This guidance helps clarify good practice for health care
professionals and clarifies for competent young people that they
can be secure, when seeking advice and treatment, that it will
be in confidence."
Great
teen pregnancy fiasco
Under-16s
can get morning-after pill from chemists
excepts
from article by Duncan Gardham - Daily Mail, August 5, 2004
The
government is running controversial pilot projects in inner-city
areas where pharmacista and school nurses are sllowed to give
the mornina-after pill without a prescription. In the rest of
the country, girls under 16 have to go to their GP for a prescription.
Senior
Labour MP Howard Stoate,chairman of the all-party pharmacy group,
is calling on the Government to clarify the law. He said last
night: "I am saying it is illogical and I will be asking
Ministers to review the law."
The
new guidace has already dismayed family campaigners who warn making
contraception freely available without parental consent will not
stem the tide of unwanted teenage pregnancies and the spread of
sexual diseases. There is also concern that the powerful dose
of hormones in the pill, which prevents an embryo implanting in
the womb, may have health effects which are not yet known.
Current
and prospective Parliamentary candidates of all Parties running
for election could share a platform at public forums in every
constituency. They would be presented with the results of
polls on this issue expressed by the majority of voters in that
constituency.
The candidates could be asked if their own views and that of their
Party manifesto corresponded with the polls, and if not, how they
intended to represent the will of the majority of local voters.
Local and National Press, Radio and TV coverage would be arranged
and the results published on this web site.
Here
is another powerful strategy for using your vote effectively in
the forthcoming General Election. Send your sitting and prospective
MPs a letter defining your requirements if they want your vote.
This example deals with the proposed
EU Constitutional Treaty.
Your
letters would end: "If you do not answer
this letter, I shall take it that you intend to follow the Government
line. I shall act accordingly in the forthcoming General Election."
Here's
a letter which will force Tony Blair to resign:
|
Dear
Despite
his absolute and unequivocal assurances over the past year
of the serious risk to our security of Saddam Hussein's 'weapons
of mass destruction', Prime Minister Blair has admitted, that
the threat was non-existent. For that critical error of judgement
and for his gross incompetence in handling this very important
issue, I ask you to take immediate steps to ensure that Tony
Blair does the honourable thing and resign without delay..
I
would therefore be much obliged if you would propose and help
mobilise a Parliamentary vote of 'No Confidence' in Mr Blair
which, despite Labour's huge majority, would leave the PM
with no option but to resign.
If
I get no reply to this letter, I shall assume you will continue
to support Mr Blair as our Prime Minister. In such circumstances
I shall not vote for you in the forthcoming General Election.
Signed:
|
Or
why not create a questionnaire that you send to all the candidates
in your constituency, getting them to give yes/no answers to questions
of your choice, and ending it with the same paragraph(above).
Download
a printable example of the questionnaire.
It
is high time for the people of this United Kingdom to stop allowing
themselves to be manipulated by politicians. We need our representatives
in Parliament to genuinely reflect the view of the majority in
their own constituency, even if this means going against their
personal and/or their party's policy. While they may argue their
case, hoping to change the minds of the majority in their constituency,
they should ultimately be obliged to reflect the majority view
of those who elect them.
It
will be argued by politicians of all parties that most voters
don't have the knowledge necessary to express an opinion on important
subjects at issue, and that our vote is a form of delegated democracy.
We should argue that it is their duty to ensure that we voters
do have ready access to such information as is necessary to form
an intelligent opinion. That, after all, is one main purpose of
Opposition Parties in our Parliamentary Democracy.
Most
important of all, such proceedings would rekindle in voters their
latent interest and obligation to cast their vote, knowing that
the candidate of their choice would be more likely to act in accordance
with their wishes. A much higher turnout in elections would be
the result.
Contact
your local Party Chairman. Gain his support for setting up public
forums in your constituency on these, as well as any other relevant
topics, well before the next General Election expected in 2005.
You should then, depending on the integrity of the candidate of
your choice, feel fairly certain that your view on any subject
being debated in Parliament will more accurately be reflected
by your representative in that assembly.
