MP decides not to quit government

A junior member of the government who was thought to have quit has I now said she is not going to leave - following a conversation with Gordon Brown.
Treasury ministerial aide Angela Smith had told colleagues she was resigning over the abolition of the 10p income tax rate. But Ms Smith later said this was not the case, although she acknowledged she had "concerns" over the policy.

Sounds suspiciously like John Prescott's meeting with Tony Blair over Clause IV, doesn't it?

Elections 2008

Socialism was popular in the 1960’s and 1970’s. It now seems to be taboo. Our ‘all for one, and one for oneself’ society popularised by Margaret Thatcher’s monetarist regime of the 1980’s saw the death knell of community. The end of social cohesion. The beginning of anarchy. In the 19^th century, anarchy was the antichrist of the ruling class. Anarchists were the demons sent to destroy society. Now I argue that 19^th century politicians and thinkers were a damn site more right wing than Thatcher and her followers. Yet she managed, towards the end of the 20^th century to destroy socialism, to instigate the destruction of the engineering power of our country and to see Britain become the lackey of American politics. And our so called Labour party seems intent on continuing this decline of the rights of the British people.

I ask, what has this ‘Labour’ government done for the every day working man? Despite their cries of discontent when VAT was put on gas and electricity by the ‘great’ lady, has this administration removed it? Has this administration redistributed the wealth this country of ours through fairer taxation? Have we seen any attempt at re-establishing the right of a working man to be content, affluent and safe in his own home?

What we have seen is greater tax on fuel, lower taxes for the rich at the expense of the poor and ordinary people in fear of the streets and in some cases in their own homes. Next month is your chance to say you are not happy with the current trend. You can go to the ballot box and make your feeling known. Vote for anybody BUT the main parties. Don’t waste your vote. Show them that you will vote. But on your terms, not theirs.

Cash is evil!

A judge decides businesses are entitled to charge cash paying customers more for the same service.

Does anybody remember the time when such people were welcome, nay, encouraged? I can’t help but think that the financial institutions that profit from debt and credit are behind this. Once they have us in the loop, were there for life. I intend to die owing thousands!

Politics Today

After an 18 month trial, permission for television broadcasts of Commons' proceedings was finally granted in 1990. I was marginally against this. Why? Democrats (in the purely British sense of the word) might well believe it would give the proceedings transparency. I was afraid that the men (and women) in the flash suits would have ‘the edge’. While I do not wish to infer that the voting population of Britain are not capable of making objective judgements, it seemed to me that we are a nation of ‘cap doffers’. With the best will in the world, we, the British have a tendency to trust the man in the suit, the one who is well presented. We do not look beyond the image. The politics of the last 30 years and more should show us that being well dressed does not mean the individual is worthy of our trust. Many of these well dressed men and women have let us down.

I make the point of John Profumo. Well Dressed, gentleman? Turned out to be untrustworthy and a liar.

Michael Foot who, in the 1970’s placed a wreath to the fallen from two World Wars on Armistice Day at the Cenotaph, wearing a ‘donkey jacket’ gave up leadership of the Labour Party because of the outcry, instituted by the right wing press and their Tory overlords. I shan’t quote the obvious- that most of the men who died to protect our freedom would have been similarly garbed. (Yes, I quoted it. I’m a liar, too.) I’ll just say we gave up a man who might have brought about some real changes. A man, who despite the donkey jacket, was a genuine and trustworthy individual. I was a member of the Labour Party back then. He would have made a great Prime Minister. When I say that, I mean in the vein of Benjamin Disraeli, Lloyd George and even, perhaps, Sir Winston Churchill. We really lost an opportunity for Britain to be ‘Great’ again.

I’ll end by saying that was the beginning of the end of the Labour Party in once Great Britain. We saw the beginning of career politicians. When the job became more important than the care of the people. When the expense account became more important than the job. When looking good meant more than being a good politician.

I rest my case.

One State, One Party?

I have just been listening to BBC’s news24. I heard a reporter discussing the China/Tibet situation. He described China, correctly, as a ‘one party state’. Well, I’d like somebody to explain to me where in the world today there is any state that is not ‘one party’. Take Britain today. We have a conservative, Labour and Liberal party. We can vote for either one by electing our local candidate. He or she may well attract the most votes from his or her area. But, it is likely that a party of a different political persuasion might well be the governing administration. Is that democracy? It could be argued that it is. I would argue differently. They all believe that giving rich businessmen tax breaks and financial loopholes to the detriment of the poor worker will bring rewards for us all. Well, that’s been happening since the industrial revolution. And our society is still financially and politically biased to the rich land and factory owners. We have a Conservative right wing capitalist party. We have a ‘Labour’ right wing capitalist party. We have a Liberal right wing capitalist party. Where, I ask you, in this ‘democratic’ country is a left wing socialist party that has a real possibility of being elected?

I know there will be those who will say I could start my own. But, to be honest, I haven’t the means, education or possibility in this ‘democracy’ to do so. I am not represented by anybody. The few socialist MP’s I might vote for do not represent my constituency, and so I cannot use my ‘free’ vote to see representatives of my opinion elected. So I have become one of the many who do not vote and are considered unworthy of consideration because we ‘cannot be bothered’. Well, I can be bothered. When there is somebody worthy, in my opinion, of my vote.

I think, as do many, it is time to re-assess our system to allow my vote to be used where I feel it to be most effective. Not limited to my geographical location. For me to be able to vote for a person or party, irrespective of where I live. If I choose to vote for a person I would like to see in Parliament to reflect my views I should be able to do so. A member of this venerable institution should be elected according to the wishes of the majority of the country, not his or her constituency. That would truly reflect the wishes of the majority, which I always understood democracy was all about. (‘What’ says the wealthy capitalist? ‘A real democracy? Where the workers have enforceable rights? Where I have to pay a fair wage? Not while I hold the reigns of power!’)

This leads me to another anomaly in our so-called democratic society. Why do we still have 26 Bishops automatically given seats and the Archbishops of Canterbury and York on retirement automatically givens seats in ‘the other place’? In our and most other modern democracies the state and church are supposed to be separate. Then why do we still allow these people a place in the House of Lords purely on the basis that they are or were high ranking members of the clergy? But we have yet another anomaly. The Parliament Act, which asserts the supremacy of the House of Commons by limiting the legislation-blocking powers of the House of Lords. Under the provisions of the Act, the Lords lost the power

(a) To delay certified money bills for more than one month,

and

(b) To exercise an absolute veto over other public bills.

If a public bill (other than a money bill or a bill extending the maximum duration of a parliament) was passed by the Commons in three successive sessions, with at least two years between the first Commons second reading and the Commons third reading in the third session, it could be presented for Royal Assent by the Commons.

So, the Lords is both undemocratic and a waste of tax payers money since they have no real power. Their ‘veto’ can be overruled by the commons.

So, let’s do away with them once and for all. Replace them, if you must with an elected body. But not with a group of people, failed politicians, churchmen, Lord ‘My-Dad-was-one-so-I-have-a-right’ etc and are there by virtue of their previous position.

Then there is ‘it could be presented for Royal Assent by the Commons. ‘

In other words, no Act of Parliament can become law unless the monarch signs it. So, irrespective of our 18thC revolution, when Charles the 1^st was executed in the name of the people and his son was given leave to return and rule only by the right of the people expressed through parliament, the monarchy still retains the unassailable right to pass laws. Look at the 1974 election, when Harold Wilson won by the rules of the day, but our reverend monarch, Elizabeth the second offered the role of government to Edward Heath. Although Harold Wilson’s Labour our Party were elected, Edward Heath was offered, by the Queen to form Her government. The fact that he could not form a coalition with the then Liberal Party is irrelevant. The Parliament was offered to an unelected body by the sovereign. Had he (Ted Heath) chosen to take the role offered by the monarch, albeit with a minority government, under British law that would have been legal. It may not have worked, but was allowable under our constitution. (Unwritten, so possibly, nay, probably allowable.) And who would have defended this undemocratic situation? The British Army, who vow an oath to the Queen.

Democracy? I’ve yet to see one.

Tibet and the Chinese Aggression.

As you can probably see from most of my comments, I am a socialist. I verge on Communism, but prefer persuasion to force. I admit to sometimes wishing we could have a violent revolution, as it seems to be the only way we can institute a socialist régime when faced with the Capitalist misinformation that sounds so logical to so many people until it is examined in detail. So my following opinion on the subject of China’s disregard for the people and culture of Tibet stems not from a condemnation of the principles of socialism, but from the aggressive methods China chose to use to try to force their system of government on an independent people. (Capitalist America has done the same- Hawaii for one. Many Hawaiians, previously an independent island do not want Hawaii to be an American state.) A phrase often quoted is ‘the unacceptable face of capitalism’. I believe China has and is showing us the ‘unacceptable face of socialism’ (as did Josef Stalin in communist Russia).

Where is the USA? They are quick enough to send troops to ‘protect’ oil rich countries. This smacks of East Timor. (No, we haven’t all forgotten.) If the USA are, as is claimed, the world’s police (isn’t that the role of the United Nations?) why aren’t they as aggressive and pro-active in this circumstance as they are in the Middle East? Why haven’t they warned China off? Why did the world ignore China’s aggression and invasion of Tibet in October 1950? What’s the matter, George Bush? Hasn’t God spoken to you on this? The world is watching.

Show Your Dissent!

For those who feel that, as I do we have no alternative political party to vote for. For those who believe we have no effective opposition. And for those who don't trust any political candidate. If you have such leanings, but would like to register your non-vote, and have a wish and willingness to vote may I suggest that at each election you go to the polling station and put a question mark against each of the candidates?
This way, no candidate will be credited with your vote. The voting paper will be rejected. If there are millions of such papers, it may, probably will be noticed. (I have been a scrutineer at a count. I believe they would, eventually be noticed.) We may become a non-affiliated political force to be reckoned with.

I end every email I send with ‘WANT TO VOTE BUT HAVE NO ACCEPTABLE CANDIDATE? PUT A '?' IN EACH BOX. SHOW THE ESTABLISHMENT WE EXIST.I also link it to this post. Maybe you could do the same. Maybe we can make a difference.

NO IFS. NO BUTS.

Peter Hain MP for Neath- Work and Pensions Secretary.

Your words. Your policy. Our fault.
I rest my case.

Brown Praises New Deal

PM Gordon Brown has praised the New Deal for unemployed. Maybe he can tell me why, at 50 years old, after raising two children single handed (and I mean just that- no help from social services or any other organisation) employers are turning me down because of my age and time out of full time work. (I have worked part time for most of those years.) Perhaps he can explain why, after coming off income support and on to job seekers allowance, I took the advice of the job-centre and went to Sunrise Training (Learn Direct) to do a refresher course in adult numeracy and literacy (even though I have GCE 'O' levels in these subjects-amongst others) because they said I would be funded by them for a fork-lift drivers course, which would open employment possibilities only to be told on successful completion of these courses that I couldn't be funded because I had passed the Level two exams too easily. You know what he can do with his 'New Deal'.

Bargain Booze and Staff Exploitation

On Friday I heard that the friendly, helpful staff at our local Bargain Booze were sacked. Why? Were they all in some conspiracy to defraud the company? Were they idle? Were they abusive to customers? No. The new manager wants to run it himself, with his family. So, six girls on the dole for no reason other than the God of Profit. Here's the email I sent Bargain Booze. Feel free to copy and modify it and send it to them (info@bargainbooze.co.uk) if you feel, as I do that these girls have been poorly treated by a large national company.

I have used Bargain Booze for several years now, partly due to the excellent prices and partly due to the friendly staff. Some weeks ago I was introduced to the new store manager at the Church Street, Tamworth, Staffordshire shop. Last Friday, 10th August I went in to buy some cans and as I left the girls said something along the lines of 'Say goodbye, this is our last week.' When I asked why I was told the new manager had terminated their employment and he was going to run the shop himself with the help of his family. Quite honestly I was appalled. All these girls have worked at the shop for some time, so one assumes that their ability to do the job is not in question. They are always pleasant, polite and helpful. As far as I am aware, they are honest and loyal. To terminate someone's employment without good reason must surely be illegal and if not it should be. It is without doubt immoral. Some time ago I asked the manager how they sold their beers so cheaply. I was told that it was because stock was bought in such large quantities on a national level that Bargain Booze could virtually name their own price. One might reasonably expect such a large company with its obvious financial muscle to be able to insist that existing staff be retained as part of the franchise. Or is this another example of profit before people? If this, as I suspect, is the case then I must consider withdrawing my small contribution to the said profit and take my custom elsewhere.
I look forward to your response.

Regards

Paul Higgins

Fingerprinting Your Kids

Just received an email that linked to this
More here
An excellent piece here:

Googling 'fingerprinting children' will give you a wealth of information. It seems the 'fingerprinters' (as might be expected) are all for it and advocate the benefits. However, the 'fingerprintees' or their guardians are a little more sceptical.
Two of the against arguments, just for those who do not see an issue, are that it 'normalises' biometric use, making it seem trivial for youngsters who know no better. Which could lead to obvious security issues in later life. Also, using passwords means that in the event of identity theft or passwords being hacked or stolen, one has merely to change ones password. In the event of biometrics being stolen, and I believe the criminals will find a way once it becomes popular and financially viable, they haven't stolen your password. They have stolen you!

Tony Benn- my hero

Mr Benn is one of the finest politicians this great country of ours has ever seen or is likely to see in my lifetime. I would say give him the crown, make him King, but he would not accept it. He is the the best politician this country has ever or is likely to see. (Maybe Churchill would be a close second). I don't expect universal agreement. I don't suppose most of you will agree. What I do say is before you condemn him from what you know from the right-wing media, listen to what he has to say. The man is intelligent, knows his subject and quite often you might find, as I have, that he talks sense. Common sense that we all understand. And more power to the man. The world will be a sadder place when he and people of his ilk are gone.

North South Divide

There have been a lot of comments on the ‘North/South’ divide. I live in the Midlands, so which am I? Can’t you realise the so-called divide is nothing to do with ordinary people suffering. It is the fault of government and the media for biased intervention and reporting. Let’s ignore them and be united. WE are the people, and WE shall (can?) overcome.

Bloody Elections

Gordon Brown will probably be our next unopposed prime minister. But given that New Labour has stage managed everything they have done in their term of office, this will be no different. Every Labour politician who has been suggested as a contender has soon afterwards declared they will not oppose Mr. Brown. The silence is deafening. I remember John Prescott being totally opposed to the removal of clause IV from the Labour Party manifesto. . ("To secure for the workers by hand or by brain the full fruits of their industry and the most equitable distribution thereof that may be possible upon the basis of the common ownership of the means of production, distribution, and exchange, and the best obtainable system of popular administration and control of each industry or service."). A few hours with Tony Blair, and he came out in favour of removing clause IV. What was he offered? The deputy leadership, perhaps? That is exactly what he got. And now he is a sidelined nobody. We have been conned by Tony and his cronies for too long. We need to re-establish the labour party as a truly socialist organisation. A life long Labour man, my last vote for this watered down Tory administration was in 1997. I will tell you why. Though opposed to their 'New labour' policies I voted for them. In that terrible year, local politicians, members of the party and Labour councillors advised me, after expressing my doubts, that maybe Tony was trying to get elected on new, popular policies and once in government he would introduce a real socialist agenda I suggested that this was immoral, and as I have always maintained that we (the ‘Real Labour’ party) should be educating the people, and not looking to be elected on popular policies that conflict with our beliefs. Trusting these local politicians, et al, and against my better judgement (who else could I vote for? Another Tory administration?) I voted Labour, to my eternal regret. I have never failed to vote, my small voice is part of the process that may bring us back to a fairer society. This so-called democracy we live in gives me only two choices. Vote for the lesser of several evils or abstain from the right to have an input in this perverse system. I will not tell you how I vote. That is between me and the ballot box. However; I will tell you I now vote for the party and or politician that most closely expresses my beliefs, regardless of their political affiliation.

I sincerely hope that my opinion on these matters is not so far from your own that you might consider them as a viable alternative to the current repressive regime.

Loopy Lotto Update

I contacted Trading Standards about my issue with this organisation swindling me out of my money. They suggested The Gambling Commission. The Gambling Commission have written back to tell me that they do not currently regulate online gambling, but will do so from September 2007. Does this mean that for all these years people have been using the internet, UK citizens have had no protection from fraudulent gamblers?

Loopy Lotto

Buggers have owed me £70 since January and now say I have no prize money. I've contacted the Gambling Commission. The £70 they owe me might close 'em down. I do hope so. Stay away!

Tony Blair on GMTV

I have just watched Tony Blair's interview on GMTV. It was a shambles. I think he has lost it- if he ever had it. He stuttered and stumbled his way through his answers giving the impression he didn't know what he was talking about or that he knew his answers where misleading, but wanted to mislead in a way he could cover up later. You know- the politicians 'no, I didn't actually say that- what I said was...'. But we all know what you meant, Tony.

Olympian Fiasco!

So the Olympics could cost us £9 billion. How much will it eventually be? I think they should call it the 'Olympic Dome'. Don't tell me about the financial benefits. The people who will make money will be the rich and famous and the businessmen. The 'minimum wage' workers, I suppose, should be grateful for the work. £9 billion? Looks like a good start to compensating the hard workers who have had their pensions stolen.

Gun Crime revisited

I see Tony Blair and David Cameron are now crossing verbal swords. Mr Blair seems to think it is a "specific, criminal culture". David Cameron says society is "in deep trouble". Well, they are both wrong. They are also both right. There are specifics of criminal culture that need to be targeted. But we also need to be looking at society as a whole. David Cameron has also said "We now stand for social revival. We used to stand for the individual. Now we stand for the family, for the neighbourhood, in a word, for society." I would ask you to remember the following. The culture we live in today is a direct result of the lack of job security and the unemployment experienced by two generations while there is a culture of the 'old boy' network that encourages wealth for wealths sake, providing you are from the 'accepted' class. When you hear Mr Cameron saying "in a word, for society" remember that this split, class ridden society we endure is a result of Mrs Thatchers moneterist policy. Oh, and don't forget that she said 'there is no such thing as society'. I do not believe the Tory party has changed to the extent David Cameron would have us believe. The root of Britain's problems is the intrusion of American ideology. To the extent that the USA has two capitalist political parties to choose from. We find ourselves in a similar position today. We can vote for Cameron's left of Tory agenda or Blairs right of (real) Labour's agenda. Which really, as the last ten years prove amounts to the same thing. We have no effective opposition.

Sorry

I know my blog isn't read very much. Probably not at all, except by me and perhaps some nefarious, hidden government agencies. But the way this country and the world is going, I am going to try to take half an hour every day to comment on things that make me feel sad, depressed and generally pissed off with Britain and all the crap ordinary people have to put up with. We don't have to put up with it. We have to organise and defy the laws and regulations that are putting us all at risk. We also have to realise that the things that are happening today are the first step to total control. We accept the slow erosion of our rights and privileges. It is called the 'drip drip' effect. It is done bit by bit, so we do not realise what is happening. But one day, it will all come together and it will be too late. Let's not leave it too late.